Obama's NEW Birth Certificate proven to be fake hours after release

Originally posted by Connector

You do realize that the hospital uses OCR scanning

Doh.

Yes, your post is correct. Almost all countys now use OCR..typically the big boys products (FYI, Filenet, etc).
all paperwork is scanned into a jukebox and stored there forever...the products used (I will site MassScan as that was my product I supported at Identitiech) do passes and do scan in a pdf format.

I will try to get my hands on a file for comparison, but I do think that mixed with the adobe pdf issue will resolve this...

we are talking about something I haven't supported in about 12 years now, so the memory is a bit foggy as to the tech specs...thanks for stating the hidden obvious though. heh

I think what people are seeing is an original document scanned directly to PDF format. In most low-end scanning programs, the software itself will try and isolate fields of what it thinks is text and enhance that to make it more readable. When people open this up in Illustrator, that program is picking those fields that the scanning software made. It gives the illusion that this was layered together, when it's not really. You can see the curve of the book the certificate is in on the left side. The whole book/binder of certificates was probably placed directly on the scanning bed and scanned. I do not think this is forged from what I've seen in this file and from my job experience.

My qualifications, I do graphic design and prepress work for a small print company. Have 15+ years of daily experience in the major publishing software titles, Quark, Photoshop, Illustrator, InDesign, and a host of others.

Originally posted by Bonified Ween

Originally posted by Jazzyguy
reply to post by Bonified Ween

 

Unfortunately I don't have an illustrator right now. Nevertheless, will the original scan result of any birth certificate be in pdf file? What do you think?

Get InkScape for free - just google it.

I could be wrong but Inkscape found only one layer.
Well, but you should check Saturn's post, and my original question.

It is only human nature to believe in something so strongly that no evidence, regardless of how compelling, will dissuade someone. Not shocking at all that once the birth cert. has been released there are still people that will not believe it. I weep for the future of this country /smh

Originally posted by SaturnFX
From the source several weeks ago:

On behalf of Adobe Systems Incorporated ...



Adobe Illustrator is not, repeat not, and repeat yet once again not a general purpose PDF file editor. Opening any arbitrary PDF file in Adobe Illustrator other than PDF files saved in that version of later of Adobe Illustrator with the editability option (which saves the Illustrator document editing data as private data within the PDF file) may result in content loss or corruption.

___

PDF layers are part of an overall feature known as optional content in PDF and are conceptually very different than Illustrator layers. Since PDF optional content features in general are very much a superset of Illustrator layers (PDFMaker for PowerPoint uses optional content to handle certain slide build features, for example), there would be no easy way for Illustrator to readily pick and choose what optional content features to support and translate. As such, don't expect this to be "rectified" in any way in future Illustrator releases.



(To make things even more interesting, both PDF and Illustrator layers are very different than Photoshop layers which allow for defined interactions between layers such as masking!)

Dov Isaacs

From the adobe forums.
Basically, scanning in PDF = immediate wonkification and pseudo-layers if opened in illustrator if I am grasping what this is saying.

Which means the whole open in illustrator or use illustrator in general at any step of the process = wonkyness abound.

Take it for what you will.

add: Source of that clip

edit on 27-4-2011 by SaturnFX because: (no reason given)

This is it in it's entirety...

Thanks Saturn

reply to post by crudos


I think this may be right.. which is why some letters were missed in the "enhancement layer"... Would these scanning programs also remove the background (maybe as an option) so that the green layer would show through?

Jesus Christ. Everyone is complaining the country is not focusing on our more important issues yet every chance they get they are bringing up stupid birth certificates and other BS.

How do you expect the man to do a job when people like Trump are trying to start # and stir a pot of stank soup?

I wish Trump would shut up and go buy a new hair piece. I don't care much for Obama niether, but I tell you what HELL would have to freeze over before I would even consider a vote for Trump.

I wouldn't even vote for him to wash the toliets in Washington.

Hi,
I am a professional graphic designer with over 10 years experience, this document has been modified using layers. This could have been done a number of ways -
most likely - PhotoShop - layering sections of different docs, importing layered psd into acrobat pro.

Illustrator - layering using masks and clipping, perhaps feathering layers to blend in. Then export as pdf.

InDesign - similar to above, place images into the document, export as pdf.


Scanners, in my experience, always send flattened pdf images, unless you use OCR text recognition and even then it only recognises fonts and does not layer.

They should have scanned the doc in as a full colour hi res TIFF or jpeg, then edit it in PhotoShop and flatten all layers, then print out and rescan black and white/lower res so to remove all metadata/image modifications history.

This is so ridiculously amateur I'd say they've done this on purpose and are laughing at you all! Either that or they employed the same tard who tried to PhotoShop the BP oil spill photo taken from a supposedly flying helicopter!

Nate

Originally posted by rogerstigers
reply to post by crudos

 

I think this may be right.. which is why some letters were missed in the "enhancement layer"... Would these scanning programs also remove the background (maybe as an option) so that the green layer would show through?

I think some programs will remove background as an option. The white around the type is just the program sharpening the letters to make them more readable and to isolate them from the background.

From the Adobe forums, linked above (for whatever it is worth)

Re: Layered pdf opened in illustrator

PDF layers are part of an overall feature known as optional content in PDF and are conceptually very different than Illustrator layers. Since PDF optional content features in general are very much a superset of Illustrator layers (PDFMaker for PowerPoint uses optional content to handle certain slide build features, for example), there would be no easy way for Illustrator to readily pick and choose what optional content features to support and translate. As such, don't expect this to be "rectified" in any way in future Illustrator releases.



(To make things even more interesting, both PDF and Illustrator layers are very different than Photoshop layers which allow for defined interactions between layers such as masking!)
forums.adobe.com...

reply to post by SaturnFX



No this references that illustrator layers and Acrobat layers are handled differently, and that any slide layers that are created within acrobat may not work correctly. These layers are both different to Photoshop layers also.

It is not saying that transferring a Illustrator graphic to PDF will create new or additional layers

layers still need to be manually created whether in Acrobat or Illustrator (Or any other imaging/editing software)

You can try for yourself if you have both products, scan an image, and then send to Acrobat PDF it wont create layers for you

Amazing what kind of conspiracies arise when you have a deep-seeded political hatred for any person. No evidence will convince these people otherwise. They claim to be after the TRUTH (but only the truths that validate their own opinions... anything else is immediately dismissed, of course), but as I said... how can you be looking for truth if your mind is already made up??

reply to post by SaturnFX


Good find!

Our info will be passed over by some though........as usual

Originally posted by SaturnFX
From the adobe forums.
Basically, scanning in PDF = immediate wonkification and pseudo-layers if opened in illustrator if I am grasping what this is saying.

Which means the whole open in illustrator or use illustrator in general at any step of the process = wonkyness abound.

Take it for what you will.

I've had this experience. One of my graphic jobs was recreating documents to add/remove new/old information.

Even when you open an Adobe document in Adobe - - - if you don't have the exact version of the scanned document - - you can run into trouble.

I always requested a hard copy in addition to any online form - - cuz it was often easier to just recreate it. Fortunately - most form text I encountered was Times New Roman - - so I didn't have to go in search of some funky obscure text. That's always annoying

reply to post by greeneyedleo


I've opened scanned pdfs from Xerox, Canon, Brother and HP printers in InDesign and illustrator and I've never encountered layers, artifacts or bounding boxes

reply to post by naycalvert



Please read my post on the bottom of page 7. They HAVE to scan the plain white original and CREATE a new currently legal BC which requires multiple layers.

Originally posted by Jazzyguy

Originally posted by Bonified Ween

Originally posted by Jazzyguy
reply to post by Bonified Ween

 

Unfortunately I don't have an illustrator right now. Nevertheless, will the original scan result of any birth certificate be in pdf file? What do you think?

Get InkScape for free - just google it.

I could be wrong but Inkscape found only one layer.
Well, but you should check Saturn's post, and my original question.

Your not using it right

I feel something is being confused here. When you open the original PDF in Illustrator, there are NO layers present. When you do a select all and release the clipping path, then you see the artifacts left over from the scanning program. There are still no layers present. This was not and is not a layered file, nor was it ever. I am quite confident of that.

Lmao at the jagonwagons in this thread TOTALLY AND COMPLETELY ignoring the fact that HUNDREDS of photoshop experts across the internet have PROVEN this to be photoshopped. Maybe the posters on this forum are so old they don't even know what photoshop is? Or maybe this forum really is infested with cointelpro like Cass Sustein called for?

Originally posted by NuclearPaul
... trust me, this is really really sloppy.

Too sloppy.

Whoever released this knew full well this was going to be discovered.

I couldn't agree more!

Nate