Photoshop is a curse to UFOLOGY.

No photoshop is needed to hoax a sighting.
Photoshop wasn't a "debunking" tool in project blue book either.

You are right. There are so many hoaxers. Its a pity. When a real photo pops up its probably going to take eons just to prove its real, and even then there will be disbelief. I think at this point in the game it will take a landing in front of hundreds to prove existence of ET's. Photos are no longer viable evidence with the proliferation of so many programs for manipulation.

That is why I stay away from threads that claim its a real photo of a ufo... That is why I stay out of the UFO & Aliens forum. Too much bs, too little time.

If it looks promising then I'll have a look... then laugh until my head falls off. Because someone debunked it.

I agree with Mechanic 32.
The problem is not Photoshop, it's the people - the hoxers.

Don't blame Photoshop for hoaxes and faked pictures. If the hoaxers weren't using Photoshop they would be using something else.

And like someone else pointed out, there were people hoaxing and faking pictures long before Photoshop was even developed.

Originally posted by nyk537
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.

Not really true, mate.

I have never used or even seen Photoshop working. Sure, I have a crappy digicam. I can upload pics and I can resize and crop them using Paint. That's as hightech as I get.

You can't assume that the general population knows everything about image software programs just because they own a digicam and a PC.

Originally posted by tezzajw
I have never used or even seen Photoshop working. Sure, I have a crappy digicam. I can upload pics and I can resize and crop them using Paint. That's as hightech as I get.

You can't assume that the general population knows everything about image software programs just because they own a digicam and a PC.

But I am sure that you have heard of it, and know that you can alter photos with it. That would be passing knowledge

Wow a bit self centered don't you think? Probably 95% of people who use photoshop would never waste their time faking UFO photos trying to trick people over the internet. I bet the number is probably far less, because the only people who are fool enough to know how to use photoshop in that level and not wanna make money doing it, would be geeky teenagers trying to create the next 15 internet legend.

Hating a program because it supposedly hinders your cause is a selfish, and laughable complaint. Maybe it's not the programs problem..maybe it's yours for holding such a strong faith in something that people don't take seriously.

You can't blame people for crying "photoshop" all the time, it's because there are so damn many fakes out there. It's not the debunkers faults that 95% of UFO pictures are just hoaxes, I think debunkers do a good job of filtering out the c***.

It's a bit narrow minded to say that debunkers cry "photoshop" all the time though. They only do it if they picture actually is photoshopped, and I usually trust them to be right (there are some very skilled photo-editors here).

There are plenty of pictures and footage that people have agreed isn't fake so concentrate on that and let the debunkers filter out the fakes

And technology marches on.....


silverlight.net...

Watch Microsoft Silverlight in action! It's awesome!

Check out the video on the above link and see what you can now do with your video's you have saved on your hard drive.

Only bringing this up because this thread is talking about Photoshop but things are getting so easy now, anyone with no experience at all in graphic editors will soon have more and more tools available to edit and create even edited live streaming media that's so easy to produce, even a caveman can do it!

I agree, but for a different, slightly simpler reason:

With photoshop, its just so much easier to hoax...I mean yeah its a good tool but I ponder whether it would be better off for the UFO/Cryptid/Ghost community if it and image editors like it had never existed.

Probably so but my guess is most people don't use Photoshop because programs like Paint Shop Pro have more built in features already installed in it plus it's set up more intuitively with a lower learning curve for people who don't have the time to hassle with some of the idiosyncratic less intuitive operations in Photoshop. Macromedia Fireworks is also easier to operate than Photoshop too in this regard.
Photoshop is best for working at 300 dpi for work that's going to go in brochures, magazines, etc.... Or artwork that will be converted into a large print or poster. But for work that's only going to be shown on the internet, Paint Shop and Fireworks are the way to go.



[edit on 8-5-2007 by Palasheea]

Originally posted by SpeakerofTruth
Photoshop is the worst thing that could have ever happened to UFOLOGY.

Just like youtube is

It is a well known fact that most people are honest and have good intentions, but on these forums and some of the people who haunt them, it seems they figure all posters and people who have a genuine query about a photo they have for all to see, are branded as liers, with incredable graphics knowledge that they use on their "photoshop" type programs.
I for one have a variety of graphics type programs resident in my collection of software, Paintshop pro 7.0 being one of them, Ulead 5.0 as well as a few lesser programs I have aquired over the years. The cost of most really good graphics programs are so frightening, the average Joe with a simple camera snapping away at anything wouldnt be able to afford. As an owner of some of the programs mentioned above, does not mean I am proficient at using them, which I am not.


[edit on 8/5/2007 by Mukiwa]

Photoshop is a curse to UFOLOGY.
_______________

I agree and without going through the responses yet. I'd suggest thank goodness we have one or two professional analysts here to render their opinions.
Certainly I don't know. The fakes are looking pretty-good and getting better the last few years. However, the above is one of the reasons I pay more attention to the past, such as Billy's stuff. Thanks for posting something that really needs talking about that has not thus far, that I'm aware of.

Dallas

I wholeheartedly disagree. Had it not been for this terrific program, would anyone have ever found out about the contents of the Roswell Memo, that smoking gun to end all smoking guns?

This is an odd premise? Don't you want to know if a picture is a fake or not? I do. You would accuse me of being a "Debunker" but I'm not. I'm positive there is intelligent life throughout the Universe. There must be more advanced civilizations than ours.

I'm also sure people have seen some strange things in the sky that may be visitors from elsewhere. I'm positive, after years of searching, that nearly every photo or film I've seen on the Internet is a hoax or a case of mistaken identity. It's the handful that can not be easily dismissed that interest me.

As to Photoshop? Most people who own it would not have a clue what to look for to indicate a faked photo or film. Some of the reasons given on threads here at ATS are so much hype. Because of the TOC myself and others with legitimate expertize to judge can not say anything without getting flamed or warned. Some of the methods I've noticed being used to debunk are themselves bunk. Mostly just playing with filters. It takes years to learn Photoshop properly. Most people just learn what they need to know for their work or hobby. To many it is just a toy they have because they can afford it.

You will really be upset with Photoshop CS3 Extended. I've been on it for a week and the selection tools are much better. The smart objects and 3D support are awesome. I can pull anything out of one photo, alter the lighting and stick it in another in minutes. It also has video support that allows me to go through video's frame by frame or, I can add smart objects to every frame with ease.

Photoshop is a small part of identifying hoaxed photos. I have forensics software few people would have. As far as adding a convincing object to a photo; it is not easy. First you need to match the lighting. To do that the object has to be raytraced in some very expensive software with Global or HDR Lighting. The reflection maps have to match the environment of the photo it is being added to. The detail needed requires high polygon counts you are not going to do on cheap software and lots of modeling skills. Then texture mapping is a profession all to itself. The texture has to be photo-realistic which is not that easy to do. The real drawback for a prankster is the cost. Photoshop CS3 Extended is $999 for the full version. Add many more dollars to that if you get everything else you would need. I have about $12,000.00 worth of software just on my laptop. I can't even estimate the value of whats on my work station. To run the modeling and rendering software means expensive computers. They wont even run on an average off the shelf machine.

Don't kill the messenger. It is the hoaxer's who are selling you the books and the tapes you should be pissed off at. If someone qualified tells you a photo or video is altered or faked you should say thank you. Unless you don't really want to know the truth???????

Either way, better get used to it because the genie never goes back in the bottle.

Originally posted by nyk537
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.

No sorry it isnt!

If you gave me a photo and photoshop, youd get a photo and photo shop in the end, I couldn't photo shop a turkey sandwitch!

Originally posted by Mr Mxyztplk
But I am sure that you have heard of it, and know that you can alter photos with it. That would be passing knowledge

Seriously, mate. Until I started reading threads here on ATS, I never knew of Photoshop. I've never seen it work and I have never loaded it and I don't own it on my PC. As I stated, I only ever loaded and cropped pictures using MSPaint. That's it. I had no passing knowledge of Photoshop and other than knowing the name, I still have no real knowledge of it.

Sometimes it's easy to give the general person more credibility than what they deserve. What we might think is 'common' knowledge, can sometimes turn out to be not-so-common afterall.

A person can be very smart, but people in general can be very ignorant to what's available in terms of PC software.

Guaranteed that 90% or more of the individuals producing clips and images aren't spending their good earned money on the applications they use.

I just spent about 3.5 k on software in the last 6 months and I see 15 - 22 year olds posting superb work on CG sites I frequent. They list the applications they use and there is no doubt these kids are using cracked (illicit) copies of software. There is no way they paid $600-6500 for all the software they are proficient at.

Like it or not, many are Sci-Fi fans and love the UFO/Alien subject matter. So given their aptitude to get software / learn software and produce reasonable to well executed video/images should not be of a surprise to anyone who has worked in this industry for at least 6 years.

Nothing will make it go away and it is on the increase. The only difference is that some choose to openly disclose their work is for fun while others want to fool others. They feed of the attention which only encourages them too try harder and make more hoaxs.

If people posting videos and images refuse to turn over unedited copies then you can bet its a fraud and they have something to hide. Its all about Disclosure. It really is time for people to be much more objective and critical.
Being soft on the issue only supports fraudulent posts.