Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Obama skeet-shooting photo has a BIG problem…

page: 9
11
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 11:10 PM
link   
reply to post by SBMcG
 


I am sorry to say but do you know your right from your left? The retaining wall is a feature on the left side of Kennedy. The shot of Obama is taken from the left of the President so the features behind him are to Kennedy's right from his photographers angle not the same as the ones seen from the Obama shot. The shots are 180 degrees out off set basically. You do not see the same scene because the angles are opposite.




posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 11:10 PM
link   
reply to post by endats01
 


Mmmm, not necessarily. I have an Ithaca double barrel, and just to make sure I was 100% correct after 35 years of shooting shotguns I blasted off a couple dozen shells this afternoon. Very little if any smoke.

If I were to be complete honest, almost none observable.

The fact is, in my life I have never seen the amount of smoke come out of any gun as what is depicted in that Obama skeet shooting photo.



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 11:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by endats01
reply to post by SBMcG
 


I am sorry to say but do you know your right from your left? The retaining wall is a feature on the left side of Kennedy. The shot of Obama is taken from the left of the President so the features behind him are to Kennedy's right from his photographers angle not the same as the ones seen from the Obama shot. The shots are 180 degrees out off set basically. You do not see the same scene because the angles are opposite.


And you know (and can prove) that how?



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 11:21 PM
link   
reply to post by SBMcG
 




The retaining wall can be seen in this image from google Earth. It shows the retaining wall as seen in the Kennedy image. Obama is shown at an angle that shows the woods just past the retaining wall to the right of the President.

It is the same range in both images I assure you.



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 11:24 PM
link   
reply to post by SBMcG
 




This thread's funny.

Do you guys not realize, all professional photos go through photoshop? They have to be re-sized and minor color corrections etc.

Please educate yourself before making a thread.
edit on 3-2-2013 by WaterBottle because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 11:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by endats01
reply to post by SBMcG
 




The retaining wall can be seen in this image from google Earth. It shows the retaining wall as seen in the Kennedy image. Obama is shown at an angle that shows the woods just past the retaining wall to the right of the President.

It is the same range in both images I assure you.


Thank you for "assuring" me. After careful inspection, I see absolutely no relationship between the location of the Kennedy video and the Obama photo.

Sorry.



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 11:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by WaterBottle
reply to post by SBMcG
 




This thread's funny.

Do you guys not realize, all professional photos go through photoshop? They have to be re-sized and minor color corrections etc.

Please educate yourself before making a thread.
edit on 3-2-2013 by WaterBottle because: (no reason given)


I'm not discounting that possibility. What I'm questioning is the content and intent of the photo coupled with the likely alteration in one form or another via Photoshop, with a certain political expediency.

To me this has a Fast-and-Furious, Benghazi, stink to it...



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 11:36 PM
link   
edit on 3-2-2013 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 11:37 PM
link   
reply to post by anton74
 

Actually browning ceo says it may be a 625..

the CEO of Browning, Travis Hall, as saying of the shotgun pictured in the Camp David photo: ”I am fairly sure it is a Browning Citori.” The Times writes: “As the president is left handed, it could be the 12 gauge Citori 625 Sporting Golden Clays, adjustable comb, left hand. It features a gold engraving of a game bird transforming into a clay target on the receiver and retails for $4,799.

Source


So since it's a browning o/u.....and you say this type of smoke is normal coming out of vents/ports on one side lile a smokestack...please show me another photo like this one??? Should be easy...

You do understand the gasses coming out of any ports would be equal right?



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 11:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by SBMcG

Originally posted by WaterBottle
reply to post by SBMcG
 




This thread's funny.

Do you guys not realize, all professional photos go through photoshop? They have to be re-sized and minor color corrections etc.

Please educate yourself before making a thread.
edit on 3-2-2013 by WaterBottle because: (no reason given)


I'm not discounting that possibility. What I'm questioning is the content and intent of the photo coupled with the likely alteration in one form or another via Photoshop, with a certain political expediency.

To me this has a Fast-and-Furious, Benghazi, stink to it...


Alteration of what? What would bet the point?


This is the dumbest conspiracy I've ever read on ATS



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 11:45 PM
link   
All of these photo releases of gun-toting politicians is hysterical and transparent. "Yeah, I enjoy guns. See this photo of me exercising my 2nd amendment rights, proving I'm a supporter of firearms...Look everybody!" even though I voted for increasingly stupid and meaningless "feel-good" anti-gun legislation that will neither be effective or thoughtful. Do they really expect anyone to believe anything that spews from their lips? They don't give us enough credit, I guess. Its reminiscent of politicians shaking hands with and putting their arms around Blacks or Latinos, while saying, "Sure, Blacks are cool. I have friends that are Black...Look!" all the while being the most biggoted and racist old white dudes within fifty counties!



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 11:47 PM
link   
reply to post by SBMcG
 




There are no buildings in this line up for a left handed shooter. The line of sight of the weapon is right for the angle I show here. The fact that the image of the range shows trees at this angle confirms this is the likely positioning of the shot.



posted on Feb, 4 2013 @ 12:06 AM
link   
reply to post by endats01
 


Go to google earth and expand the view get the bigger picture Buildings are clearly in the LOS downrange.

Think birdshot/ only travels a few feet?

Hardly.

The pavement is to his right.
edit on 4-2-2013 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 4 2013 @ 12:13 AM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 


check your elevation data of the 2 locations. I do not see a problem. There is a ravine between those buildings and the angle from the left handed shooter side of the range. The left handed shooters shoot from the right side center of the semicircular range wall to the rear which is down in this image. Connect the dots to the clay pidgin to the President and project it forward and look at the topography. Nothing down range is in danger. Why would they design the range to endanger anyone. That makes no sense.
edit on 4-2-2013 by endats01 because: one glaring error



posted on Feb, 4 2013 @ 12:19 AM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 


Past 35 yards it is like a piece of gravel thrown from a truck tire.

2nd



posted on Feb, 4 2013 @ 12:25 AM
link   
reply to post by SBMcG
 


Umm.. When you upload a photo to adjust the brightness levels and make it publishable (ie make sure levels and lighting is correct, cropping it to capture the target better) typically it is done through photoshop or some kind of video editing software. Otherwise in this digital age I'd be very upset with a photographer still using the old style development (unless of course he's doing it as a study)



posted on Feb, 4 2013 @ 12:29 AM
link   
Just a couple things to add after catching up on the pages....

First.. It wouldn't have Photoshop on it from downloading images out of the Camera. If using Adobe software to pull images, it would almost certainly be going through Adobe Bridge. Photoshop would literally be loading (who knows how many) raw images directly into the editor. Errr... Even a Cray Supercomputer would crash eventually that way and Photoshop is a real BEAST for resources.

Second..I took a moment to double check and confirm what the photographer was using. That is a $3,500-$4,000 camera. That isn't with a lens, mind you. JUST the Camera body runs out to that price. The lens is extra. If a Canon 5D Mark III blurs movement on THAT kind of picture? Either they need a new camera or a new photographer. One of the two, but something had to go.

Finally... One simply doesn't take important pictures in JPG mode. EVER. lol.... That would be similar to whipping out an old Polaroid as a wedding photographer and telling everyone you're all set to cover their wedding. Errr..... Raw is the description of the file format used by the cameras. A Jpg you can easily work with online or send out for press release STARTS as an ungodly size file with enough detail from that camera to probably count individual leaves in the trees across the distance if one wanted to zoom in and start counting. That price buys that quality and it's not the family picture taker.

^^^ That means something has to reduce the size down so it's not a bear to handle on even good broadband. If the photographer is trained on Photoshop (Again..find another if he isn't) then that would be a natural to turn to in reducing size and ratio without getting junk into it by using a cheap program. I'm guessing "freeware" isn't a term they know the meaning of at a place like the White House. So.....even if NOTHING were changed and even the exposure was perfect? That's not a Raw file. It started that way though. So there is the min. requirement needed with Photoshop, IMO.

Hope that perspective helps a bit?



posted on Feb, 4 2013 @ 12:50 AM
link   
What time of day does that photo look to be? ..exif data shows 19:19 ....isn't that getting a bit late in the day to go shooting?



posted on Feb, 4 2013 @ 12:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by opethPA
So? Its the President, I would have been more surprised if that picture was not touched up in someway.


On top of that there was a thread of something along the lines of "Best Obama Pic" and most of them posted photo-shopped pictures of that image. haha



posted on Feb, 4 2013 @ 01:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
I created a thread on the subject that the W.H. didn't want the photo to be manipulated (and encouraged people to do so
), but mods came in, removed the photoshops and promptly closed the thread down and it has yet to be reopened. Apparently they are a little paranoid around here and it as to be ascertained as to whether the W.H. actually has any recourse.

I, personally believe (and believe that it is true) that any photos put forth by the W.H. are in the public domain, and even regardless to that fact it isn't illegal to manipulate the photo and display it if there is no profit to be made. It's really a shame because I was hoping to inspire higher quality out of ATS members and have them open up P.S. and create some original content. ATS born.

My (hopefully temporarily) comatose thread : here


Since taxpayers paid for them, yes, it should be like national parks, owned bt every American.





new topics

top topics



 
11
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join