Obama skeet-shooting photo has a BIG problem…

page: 6
11
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 08:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by Agit8dChop

Originally posted by SBMcG

Originally posted by Agit8dChop
reply to post by SBMcG
 


Its so sad some of you will look for absolutely any reason possible (even if there isnt one there) to slam this president, when there are so many real reasons to slam the government!



I understand that Obama supporters are going to respond this way.


sometimes a voice of reason is needed.
Its a photo of him shooting clay pigeons, look at the BS you've managed to produce?


I have simply voiced my concerns over a photo, detailed my reasons, and respectfully considered the input of my fellow ATS'ers on the subject.




posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 08:56 PM
link   
far out i was actually being sarcastic!

you mob actually believe this has been Photoshopped so it looks like he's shooting skeet?

question, why wouldn't he just do a staged 'skeet' shoot, and use that photo? instead of Photoshop something else which leaves proof?

you know, the white house media room probably uses MAC and Photoshop as the norm. you want them to use MS Paint for photos?

some of you are unfrikkenbelievable!
edit on 3-2-2013 by Agit8dChop because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 08:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Chadwickus
reply to post by SBMcG
 




Angle of shotgun


As has been pointed out, he's an amateur, but that's beside the point. You weren't there. you don't know where the skeet was or anything like that. This too is beside the point...What does it matter what the angle is? Did they photoshop it to be at the wrong angle? Why?
Wouldn't it make more sense, if they were photoshopping things like that, to make the angle higher so it looks like he knows what he's doing?



lack of recoil


And again, a single shot won't show recoil. especially at the shutter speed it was taken at.



stance


Refer to the first point...Wouldn't it make more sense, if they were photoshopping things like that, to make his stance better so it looks like he knows what he's doing?



and that's not even taking into account any technical issues (Photoshop) of the photo itself.


Well why not point out the specific flaws in the high resolution image for us then?

Saying "blah blah is wrong" doesn't help anyone...

edit on 3/2/13 by Chadwickus because: (no reason given)


When excuses have to be made for an otherwise inexplicable circumstance, that makes me even more suspicious.



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 08:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Agit8dChop
far out i was actually being sarcastic!

you mob actually believe this has been Photoshopped so it looks like he's shooting skeet?

question, why wouldn't he just do a staged 'skeet' shoot, and use that photo? instead of Photoshop something else which leaves proof?

you know, the white house media room probably uses MAC and Photoshop as the norm. you want them to use MS Paint for photos?

some of you are unfrikkenbelievable!
edit on 3-2-2013 by Agit8dChop because: (no reason given)


Actually, I for one would LOVE for them to use MS Paint for their photo editing from here on out, hehehehe.



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 09:01 PM
link   
reply to post by SBMcG
 


please answer my question


question, why wouldn't he just do a staged 'skeet' shoot, and use that photo? instead of Photoshop something else which leaves proof?



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 09:03 PM
link   
reply to post by anton74
 


explain to me how porting works with smoke only coming out of one side?



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 09:03 PM
link   
reply to post by SBMcG
 


What excuses?

You're the one making things up.

According to you this isn't Obama skeet shooting because the angle is wrong, his stance is wrong and there's no recoil.

And in fact, after looking at the original, full sized image. there is actually a small amount of motion blur, suggesting recoil.

So even with the fast shutter speed, recoil is present.

My bad for saying there wasn't any.



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 09:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by okiecowboy
reply to post by anton74
 


explain to me how porting works with smoke only coming out of one side?


If you look closely you can see the smoke covering up the ventilated rib. If you only see the image from one side how can you say that it only comes out from one side?



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 09:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by Agit8dChop
reply to post by SBMcG
 


please answer my question


question, why wouldn't he just do a staged 'skeet' shoot, and use that photo? instead of Photoshop something else which leaves proof?


My friend, I cannot answer that question anymore than you can answer mine.

I simply find this photo rather odd at this point in time given the fact that it was altered in some way in Photoshop (yes, that could be in data only), and shows a rather strange posture and physical relationship between Obama and the shotgun, including the smoke coming from that shotgun presumably after the fact.



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 09:11 PM
link   
Aren't images like this public domain when they are released?
I was always under the impression that things like Nasa Photos and the like belonged to the public, technically, we paid the damned photographer. If it's public domain, it's open game.



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 09:12 PM
link   
reply to post by SBMcG
 


Sorry, which question was that ?

Could it be your clutching at straws? using your hatred for President Obama to muddy your understanding?

1. He's an amateur shooter, so his stance is probably going to be what ever felt right
2. The angel of the gun means nothing, perhaps its a low target? maybe he missed, by a long way? maybe he's shooting at a target not something flying up? maybe its a Long long long way away and the angle justifies the low angel of the barrel?
3. Maybe he's shooting at nothing and just shooting a practice shot into the empty bush?

so many maybe's and yet so many of you are so sure its Photoshopped for some vicious reason!



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 09:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by Chadwickus
reply to post by SBMcG
 


What excuses?

You're the one making things up.

According to you this isn't Obama skeet shooting because the angle is wrong, his stance is wrong and there's no recoil.

And in fact, after looking at the original, full sized image. there is actually a small amount of motion blur, suggesting recoil.

So even with the fast shutter speed, recoil is present.

My bad for saying there wasn't any.





My friend, the excuse was that Obama was an inexperienced skeet shooter.

Again, you could be right.



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 09:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by twitchy
Aren't images like this public domain when they are released?
I was always under the impression that things like Nasa Photos and the like belonged to the public, technically, we paid the damned photographer. If it's public domain, it's open game.


That was always my understanding.



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 09:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Agit8dChop
reply to post by SBMcG
 


Sorry, which question was that ?

Could it be your clutching at straws? using your hatred for President Obama to muddy your understanding?

1. He's an amateur shooter, so his stance is probably going to be what ever felt right
2. The angel of the gun means nothing, perhaps its a low target? maybe he missed, by a long way? maybe he's shooting at a target not something flying up? maybe its a Long long long way away and the angle justifies the low angel of the barrel?
3. Maybe he's shooting at nothing and just shooting a practice shot into the empty bush?

so many maybe's and yet so many of you are so sure its Photoshopped for some vicious reason!


I don't "hate" Obama. Hate is a useless emotion.

I do not agree with much of Obama's political agenda, but that's a philosophical difference, not a personal one.

My suspicions on the origins, methods, and reasoning behind this particular photo have nothing to do with hate.

Let me guess -- in your world people who disagree with Obama are also "racists"...?



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 09:26 PM
link   
hmmm. well i have to admit that, under close examination, i can see one or two slight anomalies...





(just a bit of fun, please don't take offence
)



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 09:27 PM
link   
First thing I thought when I saw the photo was 'Putin Wannabe'.



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 09:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by Agit8dChop
far out i was actually being sarcastic!

you mob actually believe this has been Photoshopped so it looks like he's shooting skeet?

question, why wouldn't he just do a staged 'skeet' shoot, and use that photo? instead of Photoshop something else which leaves proof?

you know, the white house media room probably uses MAC and Photoshop as the norm. you want them to use MS Paint for photos?

some of you are unfrikkenbelievable!
edit on 3-2-2013 by Agit8dChop because: (no reason given)



(sigh) I hate it when I agree with you........tho its rare.......lol

But Im with you on this one,it would be much easier to say "FFS just come do some skeet shoot pics to shut them up"

star for you bud



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 09:28 PM
link   
reply to post by RoScoLaz
 


Hehehehe! Well, you have clearly ignored the White House's plea not to alter the original photo.



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 09:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by SBMcG
reply to post by RoScoLaz
 


Hehehehe! Well, you have clearly ignored the White House's plea not to alter the original photo.



oops!



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 09:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by twitchy
First thing I thought when I saw the photo was 'Putin Wannabe'.


Putin is smarter, imho...





top topics
 
11
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join