It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Legs missing in picture

page: 4
0
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 3 2004 @ 06:15 PM
link   


Yeah...I only use photoshop to play around with on occasion, but even then I can do some things similar to what could have been done in that picture...but I know what you mean - it's a good practice to question somethings validity but sometimes, when there is no explination, or when that particular subject of photography is overly saturated with photo skeptics, it just becomes a bit too monotonous for the human brain to handle...

I think this picture does bring a little bit of a different light on the subject - who knows what could have happened - earlier I went out on a limb so far as to suggest that maybe a quadrant of pixels from another photo on that memory card got mismatched, but that would have to be one cheap memry card - lol

Who knows, and not to sound rude to dk1's post, but who cares...what good or rational will analyzing this photo's falabilty bring us? Maybe if we knew the location of the photo - where it was taken approx....we could see if there is heavy UFO sightings or supernatural events that occur there...

BTW Bandit - I loved Aruba when I visited a few years back on a cruise- can't wait to return and fill that beautiful breeze




posted on Jul, 3 2004 @ 07:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheBandit795
I tried that before with the thread I posted above, but not much people were interested. Especially the photoshop fans who hunt every picture posted on the board and look for "photoshop objects" in the picture that sometimes don't exist. If I see a ufo or a ghost and take a picture of it, then post it on the board, someone will invent some new feature of photoshop and swear they see it in the picture.
[rant off]


I kinda agree..A lot of people say "photoshoped" just because it's not something they seen before, or it looks very remotely like something else they've seen that WAS Photoshoped. The thing is though, it's just so easy to fake stuff these days, or at least easy to fake something that most people would say looks real.

If someone can see something they know is suspicious they're going to say something. Maybe you just need to challenge these people to say exactly HOW it was photoshoped, and maybe get them to knock up an example to back up their claim.

I'm still up for figuring this out if anyone else is... maybe we should start by ruling out what it isn't, and go with what's left?






[edit on 3-7-2004 by muppet]



posted on Jul, 4 2004 @ 12:56 AM
link   
well when i saw this i immediately thought photoshop mostly because of the suspicious bottom part of the shirt...it looks very cropped if i must say...but yes, i havent done much with photoshop but i know its possible

although...if it wasnt photoshop...that would be extremely weird. i wish things like these could be examined by researchers and stuff..


d1k

posted on Jul, 4 2004 @ 10:35 PM
link   
Anyone know of any websites and/or services that can actually prove if picture is faked or not? I would like to prove this is not a hoax so the converstion could move on to how this could happen.



posted on Jul, 5 2004 @ 01:47 AM
link   
Waoo ! I What an ugly face. That's evident this pic is a fake, no human being can be so ugly...



posted on Jul, 5 2004 @ 07:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by d1k
Anyone know of any websites and/or services that can actually prove if picture is faked or not? I would like to prove this is not a hoax so the converstion could move on to how this could happen.


YES. ME!!


All I need is full size copies of the images I asked you for in my u2u. Possibly a few more as well( any that show lots of ground)

If the pattern of dirt, pebbles, sticks etc is 100 % consistent between the different images, then it is real. If they aren't, it is fake.

One thing I did notice is that one other the other image shows the photographers finger appearing at the bottom on the image, covering a different guy's legs. At first glance, in thumbnail mode, it might have appeared they weren't there. It's not impossible that someone saw this image and had the idea to create something similar, but more convincing.

EDIT : SORRY D1K... I have just found you already sent me the images... they had been spam filtered into my junk box.. I will look at them this evening!!!




[edit on 5-7-2004 by muppet]



posted on Jul, 5 2004 @ 06:11 PM
link   
I've had a look at the full size images to compare ground features.. unfortunately there isn't enough "common ground" (pun intended) between the images to be definite one way or the other, though what ground we CAN see does seem to be consistent. i.e. appears to be real.

There is one feature though that usually indicates digital work, and that is the "crooked" line of the edge of the leg, as it passes in front of the border between the black t-shirt and the apparent ground.

things like this aren't done with the cloning brush. Rather they are done by compositing two images together. One would be the original image, the other would be a "clean-plate" of the floor with nobody standing there. They are combined using a monochrome alpha (matte/mask) image. in the case of comping a light image (i.e. the floor), over a dark image (i.e. the guys trousers possibly), using the natural soft edge of her leg as one of the borders, it would be necessary to "eat into" her leg a little (behave!) so as not to have the dark remnants of the trousers showing through at the edge..



verdict? well as far as I can see the edge issue is the ONLY potential fault that indicates digital work, and even then, there is a possibility this is naturally occurring..i.e the the leg being bright against the black and "standing out" more..


So.. verdict?

It all depends on your friend. If it WAS digitally manipulated, it was done by someone very highly skilled enough to leave just one, not entirely conclusive clue. I'm talking high-end pro level here, or someone who should be.

If you're absolutely sure there's no way the camera, or the memory card, or the files on it could been been in the hands of someone like this, then you have a very genuine mystery on you hands.

[EDIT : If you want a second opinion, you could join up at "www.highend2d.com" and post it there. There's a lot of other pros use those boards and listservers. ]



[edit on 5-7-2004 by muppet]



posted on Jul, 5 2004 @ 06:14 PM
link   
Ummm
we could always try asking your friend.



posted on Jul, 6 2004 @ 12:50 AM
link   
wow..did he get the number of the girl in the orange?



posted on Jul, 6 2004 @ 12:57 AM
link   
That does look like there has been some funny business going on with that photo. Great job breaking it down so we all can see and make up our own minds well done


XL5

posted on Jul, 6 2004 @ 01:40 AM
link   
He looks like hes saying "WASSSSSUP" and I would just try that same pose with 2 other ppl and wear a loose/baggy shirt and try and hide my legs. That way I could ask the 2 outer ppl if they felt weighted down or unstable.

However I don't think he was trying to hid his legs....its just that the rest of him followed if you know what I mean (his shirt has to follow gravity duh).



posted on Jul, 6 2004 @ 01:51 AM
link   
there are some issues with his shirt bottom,,, bad grafix affects . does not blend in with surrounding environment


d1k

posted on Jul, 6 2004 @ 02:17 AM
link   
Again, no one touched these pictures other then myself taking them off the cam and putting them on my hdd. I did not photoshop anything. The picture is real. No offence to anyone but I doubt anyone here that posted it being a hoax has any professional experience or education with photoshop or pictures/photography in general. You don't see any lines, bad mixes, blends, air brushes etc etc because there is none. That is the picture that was taken, unaltered.

I'm 25 years old, I do nothing but work, party and read cool info on ATS. I do not have time nor the will to fake a picture and post it fishing for attention.

I sent the original files to Muppet for some meta data or somethin (you didn't include any info on what you said you wanted them for, Muppet) and i'll send them to anyone else. Plus, how many fake pics do you see that come that large and that high quality, none that I ever saw.

So ya, this will be my last post on the hoax subject. I'll be glad to talk about anything else about it.



posted on Jul, 6 2004 @ 02:33 AM
link   
Ah man, this is giving me a stomach ache! At first, I said "This is so obviously just his shirt hanging that way. A tricky camera angle probably on accident". Then I looked closer, and realized that gravity exists, and the way that the shirt is hanging in relation to how it would have to be if he were standing off to the side is off.



posted on Jul, 6 2004 @ 02:58 AM
link   
Wow, thats one hell of a lucky shot to get an optical illusion like that...

but im afraid thats all it is... a lucky shot...

by the angle that he is leaning(the hot girl on the left is carrying alot of his weight, hence she is slightly stumbling back) and how his obviously baggy t-shirt is hanging forward, his legs are probably behind the hot girl on the right....

so anyway... back to the hot girls.... names? numbers?



posted on Jul, 6 2004 @ 07:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by d1k
Again, no one touched these pictures other then myself taking them off the cam and putting them on my hdd. I did not photoshop anything. The picture is real. No offence to anyone but I doubt anyone here that posted it being a hoax has any professional experience or education with photoshop or pictures/photography in general. You don't see any lines, bad mixes, blends, air brushes etc etc because there is none. That is the picture that was taken, unaltered.


You never just know what sort of people use this board!


Someone said they saw a funny edge along the bottom of his shirt.. I noticed this, but on close examination I think it's a compression artifact. You normally get a pixelated "ghost" edge around sharp light/dark borders. and the strange edge seems to travel further up the side of his shirt than would be necessary.


I sent the original files to Muppet for some meta data or somethin (you didn't include any info on what you said you wanted them for, Muppet) and i'll send them to anyone else. Plus, how many fake pics do you see that come that large and that high quality, none that I ever saw.

I wanted to check things like file creation dates and file format versions. I've not looked yet though, since I don't have a hex viewer on my laptop. I'm trying to avoid the office as much as possible right now since it's summer. I'd be getting more sun I've I hadn't just recently discovered ATS though!


Fair enough. The evidence to say it's manipulated is not 100% conclusive, and if you're 100% sure it WASN'T manipulated...then. I guess it wasn't!!

In which case, for the record, I'm stumped. [EDIT: pun NOT intended
]

You mentioned right at the start of this thread.. there was something unusual or sinister about this guy. Could you expand on that a little?



[edit on 6-7-2004 by muppet]



posted on Jul, 6 2004 @ 08:55 AM
link   
I have been trying to stay out of this discussion as all the boys seem to appreciate the pervy shots of the girl - I am always concerned about guys who take pictures just of a friends boobs or just her bikini bottom. Time to buy Playboy and not violate a friendship. Other than that it is pretty obvious that the guy may be legless with alcohol, but not legless in any other way. I am sure everybody has noticed that his torso is leaning backwards away from the camera. In fact his head is way too big for the torso and he is probably resting his legs on some object behind the girl in Budweiser swimsuit. He is definitely laying back resting a substantial amount of weight on the girl on the left and furthermore his legs would be behind Budweiser girl. I feel that as you took the picture you should be aware of it and are therefore hoaxing us. Not good form really.



posted on Jul, 6 2004 @ 08:58 AM
link   
He didnt take the picture...

But I re-iterate my point, cant we just ask the person who did take the picture



posted on Jul, 6 2004 @ 09:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by d1k
Again, no one touched these pictures other then myself taking them off the cam and putting them on my hdd.


I then refer you to HIS photo page on Yahoo.
ca.f2.pg.photos.yahoo.com.../d415&.ph&store=&prodid=&.done=http%3a//ca.f2.pg.photos.yahoo.com/superhurtin

and then to his profile attached to this picture -

profiles.yahoo.com...
that tells us he is 25 and lives in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada, named Daryl, occupation "Pimp"

Once again from his earlier posting on this page "I'm 25 years old, I do nothing but work, party and read cool info on ATS. I do not have time nor the will to fake a picture and post it fishing for attention."

I think the evidence is quite clear that since he is the only person who never appears on any of the pictures that he is the one who took them?

So if he were playing with a full deck he would have fessed up to these facts a long time ago.



posted on Jul, 6 2004 @ 09:12 AM
link   
I doubt this is relevent, but the very next picture in the photo album (Pict.26) is...



lmao@photoshop.




top topics



 
0
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join