Spot the FAKE (not just ufo's)

Hi ALL

This research will help us spot fake composite pictures not just UFO's but any subject cant wait!!!

www.albany.edu...

It looks at the noise patterns of different elements of a picture if the noise pattern is different then there is a good chance the picture is fake.

Let the fun begin!!!

I'm sorry to say this is probably the wrong forum to post this
But Thanks for the share

Originally posted by exdog5
I'm sorry to say this is probably the wrong forum to post this

But Thanks for the share

edit on 9-7-2012 by exdog5 because: lettery stuff

Plenty of debates on this forum about what is real or not in a picture I would say its the best forum to place it in.

Regardless, contrary to, and in spite of any and all evidence that points to fake of hoaxed photos or videos, especially of UFOs and Aliens, the people that choose to BELIEVE FIRST, and ask questions later, if ever at all, will still continue to wave their little 'it's realz fosho' flags, as well as calling anyone that even attempts to prove otherwise names like 'disinfo agents' or other derogatory labels.

Originally posted by Druscilla

Regardless, contrary to, and in spite of any and all evidence that points to fake of hoaxed photos or videos, especially of UFOs and Aliens, the people that choose to BELIEVE FIRST, and ask questions later, if ever at all, will still continue to wave their little 'it's realz fosho' flags, as well as calling anyone that even attempts to prove otherwise names like 'disinfo agents' or other derogatory labels.

Making it doubly important to ignore them and continue to glean possible evidence from garbage. Those who do not question are not searching for truth, but instead for validation and truth be damned.

Originally posted by wmd_2008

Originally posted by exdog5
I'm sorry to say this is probably the wrong forum to post this

But Thanks for the share

edit on 9-7-2012 by exdog5 because: lettery stuff

Plenty of debates on this forum about what is real or not in a picture I would say its the best forum to place it in.

True, and it will hopefully get some more attention here. I just hope your well intended thread does not get hi-jacked as often happens these days...
I hope I did not cause offense.
(don't be fooled by my membership date, I was highly active under the same name many many moons ago. I left sometime in 2004 give or take)

I would like to see this technology used on every political video image, and every video of the 911 footage! It may lay to rest a lot of debates!

Why does this guy not open source.......I would use the crap out of this program. Take my money!

I would also like to see an audio program that does this! Someone get to working on it!

The only problems that I can see coming from this program is that once people are using it, some one will develop a program to mask, what this guys program can find.

Look I just gave all you program developers, 2 new and exciting programs that you could sell to the CIA!

Originally posted by theclutch
I would also like to see an audio program that does this! Someone get to working on it!

The only problems that I can see coming from this program is that once people are using it, some one will develop a program to mask, what this guys program can find.

Look I just gave all you program developers, 2 new and exciting programs that you could sell to the CIA!

Audio "evidence" is similar to photographic "evidence" all the software in the world can not replace an experienced user. Not to burst your bubble at all, in fact a few free audio editing programs can help you get the feel for analysis...check out Audacity
You can see visual representations of audio files (like the EVP folks you see on TV)
The higher end audio programs DO have plug-in capable of detecting "edits"
ears and eyes first...

and you're correct, the better detection gets, the better the fakes become.

Originally posted by theclutch
I would also like to see an audio program that does this! Someone get to working on it!

The only problems that I can see coming from this program is that once people are using it, some one will develop a program to mask, what this guys program can find.

Look I just gave all you program developers, 2 new and exciting programs that you could sell to the CIA!

That would be difficult as even 2 cameras from the same manufacturer may not always give the same results.

If the object added in is from a different source (camera) the noise pattern will different from the rest of the picture.

Look at any site on the net that does camera reviews here is a good example .

In the link below you will see a studio shot under controlled lighting, there is a small dotted box in the studio picture which you can move around the screen, move it around and look at the subtle differences in colours from the cameras compared, if you change the iso rating for the picture to a higher level you will also see the difference in the noise!

Thats what this software looks for.

www.dpreview.com...

Does anyone know of free online software that can check if a photo has been photoshopped ?

Someone on this forum mentioned it before, but didn't provide a link.



Peace

Rock Ape

Originally posted by Rock Ape
Does anyone know of free online software that can check if a photo has been photoshopped ?

Someone on this forum mentioned it before, but didn't provide a link.

There are a myriad of ways to check if an image is photoshopped including error level analysis (the most common of which is often subtraction) and automated applications like jpegsnoop can give clues that are online. Often the ELA ones are just basic subtraction scripts with a little bit of work to make it easier on the human eyes to view. Most of these applications can only process certain types of compression since the processes are based around those compression methods and an understanding of the tools will be needed.

If it's something you're very interested in, you should likely chase up the more manual and mathematical approaches ... Then you will come back to ATS and realise you're not on a signal processing forum and realise you're wasting your time unless a mining company hires you to process their under ground topography imagery.

Noise/grain comparison has been around for quite a while in both automated and manual forms. Normally the automated forms are just the manual forms with a few sliders to control the various steps that would normally be performed by the operator. You can then compare noise signals using histogram widths etc ...

I suppose I don't really get too excited about this type of application for a number of reasons ...

- Often they're not difficult to trick or get around and in the hands of a lay person produce inconclusive answers ...

Take the commonly called 'error level analysis' process of subtracting a compressed image from itself (after recompressing) ... This process is completely ineffective against heavily degraded imagery. In much the same way, a common technique to hide poor or sloppy grain matching is to make the whole image noisy.

This process makes it incredibly difficult to discern the source of all parts of the noise, and adds difficulty in measuring variation of isolated noise via histogram. The other big one is false positives such as this type of thing: previous post. It's not the applications that bother me, it's the humans pushing the buttons that worry me.

You just know this app will get used on some third generation scan of a 20 year old photo.

- They make us all become lazy ...

Take a common mistake of many UFO hoaxers. Often a UFO hoaxer will use blur tools for motion and similar effects. A good work flow might remove grain or noise from the image, add the motion blur, and then reintroduce that noise for example. (Just one example of a workflow). Your average 2012 comp kiddie will simply add blur to the object.

Instead of us just learning to look for this type of thing, we're relying on automated apps to do it for us without much understanding of what they're doing in most cases. It's adding another layer onto something where most people who take investigating seriously should just go 'oh, that's what is happening!'

- Chances are they didn't reinvent the wheel ...

I made Previous Thread where I was having a nice big complain but ...

To summarise ... It's just like companies that pretend they've invented the point spread function to remove focus problems from a shot.

Also given this work is being done for the New York State Center for Information Forensics and Assurance, you will likely find that the application isn't the special super hidden science that we would like to think either. These applications are made to allow lesser skilled operators to produce imagery they can present in court quickly and effectively in many cases.

- People sometimes believe software is magical ...

This is one that drives me a bit nuts.

Rather than looking at the wideness of a histogram to calculate a noise peak a user pushes a magic button, stuff glows and then an argument starts. It wouldn't stand up in court, we shouldn't let it stand up on our forums. So we will be back to square one or so ... Either type a 3000 word essay explaining the nuts and bolts of image processing to demonstrate why the UFO in the photo is fake ... or ... know that people aren't going to read it and take a nap.

I do sometimes wish this was a signal / image processing forum, but it isn't!

Originally posted by theclutch
I would also like to see an audio program that does this! Someone get to working on it!

The only problems that I can see coming from this program is that once people are using it, some one will develop a program to mask, what this guys program can find.

Look I just gave all you program developers, 2 new and exciting programs that you could sell to the CIA!

There are many apps like matlab etc and many more basic signal processing apps etc ... The mathematics of imagery processing is actually the same as audio processing for the most part. IE ... look up a high pass filter, you can do it to both audio and images.

As stated above, most 'forensics' apps are packaging well known methods within some limits to prevent the operator doing anything too crazy that wouldn't be accepted in court. (IE Richard Hoagland style)

Originally posted by Rock Ape
Does anyone know of free online software that can check if a photo has been photoshopped ?

Someone on this forum mentioned it before, but didn't provide a link.



Peace

Rock Ape

If you have a version of Photoshop , then one of the easiest ways to tell if an image has been edited is to open the image . Next click on Adjustments and then click on LEVELS.
Now, if an image has been edited , you will notice what looks like saw cuts along the wave pattern . The deeper and more frequent the "saw cuts " , the more the image has been edited .

This will not point to the authenticity of the image but it will definitely point to the amount of editing or manipulation.

DP