Photoshop is a curse to UFOLOGY.

page: 1
4
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on May, 8 2007 @ 03:11 PM
link   
You know, I was listening to C2C last night, and they were ranting and raving about some photo of an alleged UFO picture. Now, some were saying that the picture was "photo shopped" and others were saying it was authentic. A thought came to my mind listening to all of this.

The thought was:

Photoshop is the worst thing that could have ever happened to UFOLOGY. All it does is give skeptics an excuse to disregard all photos of UFOS. Skeptics invariably cry the word "photoshop" anytime any photo of a UFO is presented. Nine times out of ten, the person who took the picture of the UFO doesn't even know what photoshop is. Yet, according to skeptics, it was "photo shopped."




posted on May, 8 2007 @ 03:17 PM
link   
I would say out of those 9 people who take the pictures who claim to have no knowledge are photoshop, around 8 of them are lying.

Come on people. It's 2007. If you have a camera, a computer, and are uploading images to discussion boards, you at least have a passing knowledge that a program called Photoshop exists and is used to manipulate images.

It's common sense anymore.



posted on May, 8 2007 @ 03:18 PM
link   
I agree S.O.T.Its now become the debunkers best weapon unfortunatly.And many do this for kicks.



posted on May, 8 2007 @ 03:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by Xfile
I agree S.O.T.Its now become the debunkers best weapon unfortunatly.And many do this for kicks.


I think that as well.



posted on May, 8 2007 @ 03:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by SpeakerofTruth
Nine times out of ten, the person who took the picture of the UFO doesn't even know what photoshop is.


But that can be also used against the cause. Like nyk said a person could just act like they don't know what it is to seem more credible.

Either way I agree, photoshopping images is giving people good reasons to believe the pictures they are shown are fake.



posted on May, 8 2007 @ 03:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by nyk537

Come on people. It's 2007. If you have a camera, a computer, and are uploading images to discussion boards, you at least have a passing knowledge that a program called Photoshop exists and is used to manipulate images.



I seriously doubt that most people who take these pictures necessarily discuss anything on discussion boards. Let me also remind you that 30-40 percent of the population still do not have access to the internet and such and 25% do not even have a computer. So, your conception is not explicitly true.

[edit on 8-5-2007 by SpeakerofTruth]



posted on May, 8 2007 @ 03:37 PM
link   
Let me ask you something, why do you want proof from a picture? Do you base your belief only on a picture? Can you show me one picture before photoshop that is absolute proof of a UFO?



posted on May, 8 2007 @ 03:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cygnific
Let me ask you something, why do you want proof from a picture? Do you base your belief only on a picture? Can you show me one picture before photoshop that is absolute proof of a UFO?



Well, you see, that's really at the heart of the whole issue. For most skeptics, a saucer could land in their own back yard and they still, in their words "rationality," wouldn't be convinced.

There is nothing that I could show you nor any other skeptic to convince you. You'd still find some reason to say it was a "figment" of your mind or a hoax. Anything that shakes a skeptics' world view is lashed out at in defiance.



[edit on 8-5-2007 by SpeakerofTruth]



posted on May, 8 2007 @ 03:45 PM
link   
I only cry photoshop when the image has gone through photoshop. If I take a photo of a UFO I would not make the pic questionable by processing it through photoshop. Everyone knows that photoshop can be used to alter pics, so why use a program that would make you pics questionable, there are other programss to get photos from your camera to the net.

Photoshop is only a curse in that it is used so frequently to forge photos



posted on May, 8 2007 @ 03:52 PM
link   
I agree, photoshop is the curse you say it is, never see any posts from anyone debunking photoshop!
Nice to see there are others out there who feel the same way as me.
I sometimes wonder if there are people out there who believe/think that photoshop is actually available on cameras, dread the thought....



posted on May, 8 2007 @ 03:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mukiwa

I sometimes wonder if there are people out there who believe/think that photoshop is actually available on cameras, dread the thought....


I wouldn't be surprised. I also wouldn't be surprised to see it actually develop. Really, although such a camera would be tremendously expensive and only the elite few would be able to afford it, I wouldn't be surprised to see a camera developed where you can actually "enhance" your photo on your camera.



posted on May, 8 2007 @ 03:58 PM
link   
All UFO videos are either :

- photoshop
- cgi
- models (boomerangs,balloons, saucers etc)
- dots of light in a dark sky !

Prove me otherwise !



posted on May, 8 2007 @ 03:59 PM
link   
Darkside, you know what. I am not even going to address your statement because it is a matter of your OPINION, not FACT. By the way, it will do you no good to try and say that my assertion that photoshop is a detriment to Ufology is nothing more than an opinion because the skeptics will prove you wrong on that account. That is the first thing that pops out of their mouths, "Photoshop."

As a matter of fact, I'd venture to say that most skeptics don't even have an argument, just "photoshop" to use as a crutch to support their disbelief.





[edit on 8-5-2007 by SpeakerofTruth]



posted on May, 8 2007 @ 04:06 PM
link   
Image manipulation has been around since the first double exposure was taken.


Photos will always be criticized no matter the subject. Ghosts, aliens, bigfoot.... there will always be someone out there ready to cry fake.


And photo manipulation isn't going away any time soon.



posted on May, 8 2007 @ 04:11 PM
link   
And I should add that photo evidence now pretty much needs multiple picture takers from multiple angles.

If "UFO's" are to be proven, it will be through photos / video taken by multiple witnesses.



posted on May, 8 2007 @ 04:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by Dulcimer


If "UFO's" are to be proven, it will be through photos / video taken by multiple witnesses.



I think that the only way,really, for UFOs to ever be proven is for the U.S government to state that they are indeed fact. I don't think that is very apt to happening.

A skeptic is not likely to ever believe anything other than an "official" report from their partners.

However, my main point here is that the whole "photoshop" thing hasn't done ufology any favors.



[edit on 8-5-2007 by SpeakerofTruth]



posted on May, 8 2007 @ 04:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by SpeakerofTruth
Well, you see, that's really at the heart of the whole issue. For most skeptics, a saucer could land in their own back yard and they still, in their words "rationality," wouldn't be convinced.

there is nothing that I could show you nor any other skeptic to convince you. You'd still find some reason to say it was a "figment" of your mind or a hoax. Anything that shakes a skeptics world view is lashed out at in defiance.


Let's assume a saucer lands in your garden, does it proof that it is extra terrestrial? Don't you want more information to see if it is really an alien spaceship? The ultimate question is, what do you 'want' to believe? Does a skeptic makes you think otherwise? Ifso, the rational thinker in you starts to act up and that will lead to being skeptic yourself



posted on May, 8 2007 @ 04:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by DarkSide
All UFO videos are either :

- photoshop
- cgi
- models (boomerangs,balloons, saucers etc)
- dots of light in a dark sky !



Don't forget the ever undisputable Weather Balloon. lol

On a more serious note, there have been many many cases of alledged ufo's that have been proven to be nothing more than fanciful artwork, and not truly anything unidentified, or flying for that matter.

But Photoshop is also a very good tool to have when analyzing alledged ufo pictures.

On another note, long before Photoshop ever came into existence, would be hoaxers would alter the negatives used to make the pictures.

So the advent of hoaxed pictures is nothing new, only the wide availability to do so is more prominent (due to programs like Photoshop) than the days when it would take a skilled artist to airbrush artificial artifacts onto a film negative.



my three cents

edit to add:

Photoshop is not a curse to ufology, hoaxers are!

Just because the tools are there, does not mean that they have to be used for deceptive purposes.


[edit on 5/8/2007 by Mechanic 32]



posted on May, 8 2007 @ 04:40 PM
link   
It seems no one and I mean no one with purported video or photos wants to produce the unedited footage or imagery for professional analysis.

Disclosure starts with the people. Sorry to say but the very same people who believe in government cover ups conveniently offer exclusions and protection to those who make claims with unverifiable content. This really should stop. Demand that people disclose their evidence completely. These are the people destroying the UFO/Alien legitimacy.



posted on May, 8 2007 @ 04:43 PM
link   
Looks like the OP never owned a decent camera or PC


All cameras come bundled with one or other kind of photo manipulation software, and if they are video cams, they come with video and sound editing s/w. You can find them on the CD inside the box.

All PCs have some kind of photo manipulation s/w installed. Most kids these days have cracked copied of Adobe photoshop/after effects.

I've NEVER EVER seen someone from youtube handover the original footage even after being requested many times. The same dudes are able to upload tons of porn or movies on the net all the time or use p2p, torrents.

As someone said, the photo manipulation started as soon as photography started, there cannot be any doubt about it. Some search on google will show the tricks used by ancient photographers to crate ghost pics or special effects.

As another poster says, the photo is NOT an evidence. Especially the UFO photo. If it is taken by only ONE guy who remains faceless, nameless.....well you know.
Multiple photos by multiple men from multiple angles in high resolution, better if its from journalists, police or normal honest people with real names.....well....its a dream. But I still hope.

A single sentence by a pilot holds more weight than a series of extraordinary pics by an unknown guy. Take all photos lightly and wait for ACTUAL evidence to emerge.

Regards
RSB





new topics

top topics



 
4
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join