PhotoShop Syria

Originally posted by TinfoilTP
The head of the lady still shows detail has been removed. Her entire head has been altered. Which proves the photo was manipulated.

Actually it doesn't prove anything. It only proves you have no idea what photoshop is able to do. Stop pretending you're an expert, when you clearly don't know anything about this.

Unbelievable... but sadly all too believable

reply to post by TinfoilTP


Anyone who recognises my name will know I don't subscirbe to the MSM lies all the time nonsense. I do subscribe to the view that journalists love a scoop and will bend the truth to get "their scoop". The truth is found by cross referencing articles and not blindly picking on one story sooooo:

This thread is correct in that the photo has been manipulated. You can see both the original undoctored photos. The background of demolished buildings was taken by Reuters where you can clearly see it is impossible for the couples feet to touch the ground hence why they are clipped.

So , Tinfoil, you are wrong the picture has been doctored,
However, to all the anti MSM brigade, this is not proof of the MSM always lies nonsense after all the doctored pictures have been highlighted in other media outlets DUH!!!!!!!!! (an idiotic journalist caught out by other honest journalists)

reply to post by TinfoilTP


Are you trolling or do you really believe the things you write here?

Here is the original source for the buildings.
i.imgur.com...
www.bbc.co.uk...

And here is the source for the people (EPA). The picture was posted 26.07.2012. The Kronenzeitung with the forged picture was published 28.07.2012.
www.epa.eu...

The Kronen Zeitung edior in chief Christoph Dichand has made a meek excuse for this manipulation.

VIENNA. The "Kronen Zeitung" regrets "failures" surrounding the controversial publication of a distorted image of the Syrian civil war. The photo montage, which was published in the Saturday edition had previously cared for criticism.

The "crown" had assembled a picture of a family fleeing from destroyed homes from Syria. "While we are the copyrights of the two photographs, accurately, missing, unfortunately, the evidence that it is just around the journalistic style means a photomontage is. We apologize for this oversight," said "crown" editor in chief Christopher Dichand in Tuesday's edition. (google translate used)

www.nachrichten.at...

Instead of admitting the blatant manipulation Dichand claimed, that it was just an oversight. An oversight to correctly label a normal journalistic stylistic device.

Blatant manipulation of Syria and it's people. Makes me wonder if anything that happened in Libya was even real. We need to learn T.V. & MSM are the enemy. WE base all of what we think based on news outlets worldwide. It's more than obvious the "news" we see & hear is contrived and well written entertainment.

It's really sad what we are doing to these people.

They're hell bent on starting a war with Syria and Iran. Pretty sad. These people pushing for this war are the ultimate terrorists and criminals.

Originally posted by TheLegend
We live in dangerous times. "Picts or it didn't happen" really means nothing now.

edit on 31-7-2012 by TheLegend because: (no reason given)

Not sure what you are implying exactly but these are two different images of Assad. I am not saying that their "not" PSed in mind you but if they are stock images with a clipping mask then they are two different ones. Look at the color above his suite. Top image shows a shorter distance between top of shirt collar and start of suit collar compared to the bottom one.

Originally posted by bl4ke360

Originally posted by TinfoilTP
The head of the lady still shows detail has been removed. Her entire head has been altered. Which proves the photo was manipulated.

Actually it doesn't prove anything. It only proves you have no idea what photoshop is able to do. Stop pretending you're an expert, when you clearly don't know anything about this.

Actually I do know what PS is capable of and you can fake a lot of things, and this is one of them. Forget brightness/contrast , hue/saturation, or even adjusting the curves. Look at the shadows they are wrong. When manipulating photo you have to make sure the light source is at least coming from the same direction or a close a possible. Look at the piece of building/stone that looks like a stone pillar next to the people to the right of the picture it is in shadow when the it should be in light if you compare it to the people walking.

Austrian reporting in. this stuff is sad, but the Kronen Zeitung is known to be a terrible newspaper in our country.

A few months ago, George Michael came to Vienna to do a concert, but got really ill (i don't remember exactly, but he fell into a coma I believe) and had to be hospitalized before the concert would've happened. Well, the Kronen Zeitung still had an article about how great the concert was written by one of their journalists who "was there" the next day. The concert was organized by Kronen Zeitung. What I'm saying is they had prepared the article already and just printed it into the actual newspaper like nothing happened. There's a lot more stories to be told not only of their stupidity but also of blatant political manipulation. There are certain political parties the Kronen Zeitung likes more than others, if you know what I mean.

Originally posted by Drunkenshrew
reply to post by TinfoilTP

 

Are you trolling or do you really believe the things you write here?

Here is the original source for the buildings.
i.imgur.com...
www.bbc.co.uk...

And here is the source for the people (EPA). The picture was posted 26.07.2012. The Kronenzeitung with the forged picture was published 28.07.2012.
www.epa.eu...

There is data missing in the bottom photo, the ladies face.
Therefore it is impossible to get from the bottom photo to the top photo by slicing and dicing.
The Bottom photo is obviously tampered with, the ladies face is entirely blacked out.

Publishing dates mean nothing, actual dates when the photo was made is what counts.

So either the top photo is original or a third photo of the couple is missing that is original.
The bottom photo is photoshopped.

reply to post by stanguilles7


Excellent find. Star and flag.

It makes me happy when some of the twisted illusions are exposed for what they are. We all know (well, I thought at least here on ATS most of us anyway) that nothing is anything like what they make most things appear to be, and what all the raging wars in FREE COUNTRIES are really about. It is exactly because they are still FREE from the WORLD BANK. Excuse the exageration by using capitals, I could not resist.

When ever did the USA start a war out of true concern and compassion for the people of a country? Well, if they are so truly compassionate, please someone, for the love of god, explain to me why they left the Zimbabweans suffer under the rule of Robert Mugabe for so long? How does that work? Or is it perhaps because Zimbabwe is already deeply indebted to the world bank and therefore there was no need to go and save the people from starvation in that country in 2009 when their shops had only emptry shelves, with not even bread available to buy. I kid you not. You cannot comprehend how terrible it was.





Looking at the pictures in the OP, how about looking past the photoshopping debate for a moment. Does this mother, father and child look like they are walking around a devistated area or does their body language look more like they are on a stroll back from the store? For me, it is most definately the latter.

I, for one, will not be brainwashed by the MSM. I detest them. My gut feelings are way more accurate and my gut screams that the USA are lying about all these 'poor suffering' countries.

We should keep a thread open of these "oversights" and document them for all to see.

Is anyone aware of any more?

Originally posted by TinfoilTP
The top photo has more detail
The bottom photo has blacked out sections omitting detail, in particular the lady, her midsection above handbag and entire face shroud area.
The dates mean nothing. This was an as yet unused file photo. Someone photoshopped it before it was picked up and used by a journalist, thus creating the illusion the newer photoshopped pic is more originally dated than the actual original file photo later on used by some journalist somewhere.

To put it nicely, you've all been fooled in a rush to get an I gotcha moment against the MSM.

edit on 31-7-2012 by TinfoilTP because: (no reason given)

Actually you are wrong and the OP is wrong they are both Fake

That is Michael Jackson under there!

Still, if one photo is more dark than the other doesn't necessarily mean that the darker photo is the fake. As said earlier, you can take an original darker photo and increase the contrast level and you would obtain a photo with less black spots, and you can after that add any tint you want to it.

Excellent find. Star and flag.

It makes me happy when some of the twisted illusions are exposed for what they are

Originally posted by TinfoilTP
The top photo has more detail
The bottom photo has blacked out sections omitting detail, in particular the lady, her midsection above handbag and entire face shroud area.
The dates mean nothing. This was an as yet unused file photo. Someone photoshopped it before it was picked up and used by a journalist, thus creating the illusion the newer photoshopped pic is more originally dated than the actual original file photo later on used by some journalist somewhere.

To put it nicely, you've all been fooled in a rush to get an I gotcha moment against the MSM.

edit on 31-7-2012 by TinfoilTP because: (no reason given)

Wow, fail some more ever used PS? Doubt it. Ever studied photography? Doubt it. Ever studied lighting? Doubt it. I can say yes to all three and there is no doubt in the world the top pic is the shop.

But go ahead, deny everything except for ignorance, it'll get you really far I'm sure.

Gtfo, go watch some MSM, I'm sure they've already solved the case too with similar ridiculous logic that gullible people like yourself will swallow without a problem

Originally posted by ThisIsNotReality

Originally posted by TinfoilTP
The top photo has more detail
The bottom photo has blacked out sections omitting detail, in particular the lady, her midsection above handbag and entire face shroud area.
The dates mean nothing. This was an as yet unused file photo. Someone photoshopped it before it was picked up and used by a journalist, thus creating the illusion the newer photoshopped pic is more originally dated than the actual original file photo later on used by some journalist somewhere.

To put it nicely, you've all been fooled in a rush to get an I gotcha moment against the MSM.

edit on 31-7-2012 by TinfoilTP because: (no reason given)

Wow, fail some more

ever used PS? Doubt it. Ever studied photography? Doubt it. Ever studied lighting? Doubt it. I can say yes to all three and there is no doubt in the world the top pic is the shop.

But go ahead, deny everything except for ignorance, it'll get you really far I'm sure.

Gtfo, go watch some MSM, I'm sure they've already solved the case too with similar ridiculous logic that gullible people like yourself will swallow without a problem

Waving fake internet credentials will get you nowhere. Shouting anonymous experience is only internet comedy.

Someone tried to demonstrate increasing the contrast, it just proved beyond a doubt that the lady's face was blackened out, therefore impossible to be used to make the bombed out building version, which has the full details of the lady's shrouded face.

reply to post by TinfoilTP



What face?

Cleaned it up a bit

Originally posted by TKDRL
reply to post by TinfoilTP

 

What face?

Cleaned it up a bit

edit on Tue, 31 Jul 2012 15:01:42 -0500 by TKDRL because: (no reason given)

You are halfway there, now compare that shrouded face, with all the details it has of exactly how that shroud looks covering that face to the black smudged out face in the other photo.