Help Analyze a Photograpic Anomaly

OK, so I think this link should bring you to the zipped folder:

www.4shared.com...

So you download the images from ATS back to your comp and zip them up... omg. Upload the files that are straight from the camera. Not from ATS. Not from any place else.

reply to post by OrganicAnagram33


Damn, no efix data still.
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/24daef28037c.jpg[/atsimg]

reply to post by PsykoOps


No, I don't have the camera, or the memory card. If you read my post you should know that.

The files were sent to me via e-mail by a person I know, who's mother's friend took the picture. She lives in Ontario and I live in New Brunswick. I am sorry if all the info isn't there.

Originally posted by TKDRL
reply to post by OrganicAnagram33

 

Damn, no efix data still.

Sure there is, just run it thru Jeffries exif data viewer online

File Comment: LEAD Technologies Inc. V1.01
File: 600 × 450 JPEG
40,864 bytes (0.039 megabytes) Image compression: 95%
File — basic information derived from the file.
File Type JPEG
MIME Type image/jpeg
Comment LEAD Technologies Inc. V1.01
Encoding Process Baseline DCT, Huffman coding
Bits Per Sample 8
Color Components 3
File Size 40 kB
Image Size 450 × 600
Y Cb Cr Sub Sampling YCbCr4:4:4 (1 1)


[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/5a0d66e29630.gif[/atsimg] [atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/5a0d66e29630.gif[/atsimg]
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/5a0d66e29630.gif[/atsimg]

reply to post by OrganicAnagram33


Several readers have asked the question "Is the second photograph built from the first image"? IMO, ABSOLUTELY NOT!

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/bb892d9fa320.jpg[/atsimg]

The left hand image was cropped from the photograph with the white figure and the right hand image was cropped from the reference image (otherwise images are unchanged). Note that the shadows are indistinguishable but the clouds have changed. These are two distinct photographs!

Best regards,
Z

Hotmail must not have taken the data when it was sent. I'll have to ask her to make an account on a file sharing site and hope all the info is still there. She said they were the originals, and the file name was still there, so it hopefully will have the info. It might be a few days before this happens, it may be less, stay tuned.

reply to post by OrganicAnagram33



Almost all digital cameras store extra information, called metadata, with your pictures. The extra information captured by your camera is called EXIF data, which stands for Exchangeable Image File Format. While most current photo manipulation software supports the reading of this information, there are many specialized tools for reading, editing, extracting and converting EXIF information.

With the original pictures its possible to see if they have been altered in any way.

reply to post by makeitso


Sweet! Thanks a bunch! That saves me from bothering that person again.

reply to post by OrganicAnagram33


No it doesn't.

It has the bare minimum that it was stripped to.

The original photo will have the camera type, and much more information.

You still need the original to be examined, or there is no way anyone can get that original information.

reply to post by makeitso


Womp womp haha. Alright, I'll bother her again I guess.

Thanks for the thread and pics..I have to say i love this neat old house id love to own it..Now the pics i have no idea if its fake or not sure looks like a person standing there or at least the outline and your showing us the originals so thats a plus..But to me it looks like a light anomaly ..I'm sure you are a sincere poster and im just a person looking at the pics and i cant make an analysis or give an second opinion it just wouldn't be fair on my part but thanks for haveing the courage to post them on ATS and stick to your guns if you feel there the real thing Peace sugarcookie1

Here is an example of what you should see in exif data from a Sony Camera with Jefferies exif data.

This particular one is from an image taken at Fukushima Japan Nuclear Reactor.

Don't forget to scroll all the way down.

I believe you. Seems like almost everyone on ATS nowadays have lost the respect to give someone they don't know the benefit of the doubt. Maybe if we would trust people more with what they say, It might be a more positive world. Cool Pic!!!

reply to post by makeitso


*Impressed whistling sound* That's a lot of data!

I sent her an e-mail asking her to upload a folder of the originals onto a sharing site. You have to understand that I first asked her to send the photos, then asked her to give me the background story, and now I'm asking her to do this as well, so hopefully it's not too much of a bother for her and she can do it. In any case, I'll update you guys as soon as I hear back.

reply to post by makeitso


Hmmm, it seems that exif viewer is better than the one I use. Thanks.

That is a very old house .. I have one to show you that I used to pass by and it's known to be watched around halloween time for strange sightings in side the house and neighbors have seen at other times..

There is anouther house that's closer by an i'm saying these houses have to be over 100 years old .. the one you have looks like its altered .. IMO but im not an expert it's just a bit to all white .. or it could be when it was enlarged it just turned out that bright .. still tho as it looks to me now id say no anomaly



files.abovetopsecret.com...

creepy, looks like a ghostly image of a man and woman with their arms around eachother posing for a pic.

error level analysis with no anomaly:
errorlevelanalysis.com...

error level analysis with anomaly:
errorlevelanalysis.com...

If you read what that website has to say about error level analysis, and maybe do a little extra research on your own, you will better be able to understand the results. Because according to this error level analysis, the image does not show obvious signs of manipulation. The color and pattern of the compression artifacts are pretty much the same.

here is an edited image with error level analysis:
errorlevelanalysis.com...

See how it's super bright for different parts of the image which were obviously edited in? That means it's definitely edited. Neither of the two images the OP posted show this inconsistency [edit: to my eyes].

reply to post by sickofitall2012


EXCELLENT; WELL SAID!!

How terrible that on ATS, of all places, a new thread is greeted with accusations of fraud without ANY scientific analysis of the data they presented. "Its manipulated because I think so", is hardly an impartial and scientific analysis of the data. Just because we don't understand something does not mean it must be fraudulent. And what possible motivation could this individual have for perpetrating a hoax? None! FYI: very few, if any, hoaxers provide reference photographs.

Instead of bashing posters who stick their necks out to share with us genuinely controversial data, we should sincerely thank them for opening our minds to possibilities we would otherwise never consider.

Best regards,
Z