Boston -staged pictures theory- busted.

reply to post by roguedesigner

Please tell us why the person who "photoshopped" that took the time and effort to lift the text from the background and then place it on a new layer OVER THE TOP of the person he had spent some considerable time comping into the image. It just winds me right up when people who clearly have no idea of the processes involved in comping an image in photoshop come out from beneath their tinfoil hats screaming "faaaaaaaake!!!".

I don't have to tell you anything, I can just establish that this is physically impossible.

It can't be artifacts, since the text is visible in front of the leg, it should;ve never been on the pic if it was real, since it would've been obscured by the mans leg.

So explain to me, how does compression magically create a fitting piece of text when that visual never should've existed in the pic in the first place? What about the cut of shoe?

No matter how you look at it, something has to be wrong with the pic itself.

reply to post by boncho


Thanks for the link.

The "cut off" shoe is a hat, so I was wrong there, but we can also still clearly see the impossible "text in leg", which simply can't be an artifact.

Ok, I am ashamed of myself now, very very ashamed.

I apologize for pushing that stupid pic, it wasn't even his leg............

Originally posted by DaveStinger
Ok, I am ashamed of myself now, very very ashamed.

I apologize for pushing that stupid pic, it wasn't even his leg............

Happens to us all from time to time.
Props.

Originally posted by DaveStinger
reply to post by boncho

 

Thanks for the link.

The "cut off" shoe is a hat, so I was wrong there, but we can also still clearly see the impossible "text in leg", which simply can't be an artifact.

Again, you are confused. You seem to always assume the impossible when you don't have the answer to something.

So indeed, the text is not "in leg", his left foot is in front of him not on the ground. He is not kneeling, he has his right foot and leg on the ground and his left leg is in front of him, knee up, and the left shoe (which you cannot see) would be planted flat on the ground.

Originally posted by DaveStinger
reply to post by roguedesigner

 

Please tell us why the person who "photoshopped" that took the time and effort to lift the text from the background and then place it on a new layer OVER THE TOP of the person he had spent some considerable time comping into the image. It just winds me right up when people who clearly have no idea of the processes involved in comping an image in photoshop come out from beneath their tinfoil hats screaming "faaaaaaaake!!!".

I don't have to tell you anything, I can just establish that this is physically impossible.

It can't be artifacts, since the text is visible in front of the leg, it should;ve never been on the pic if it was real, since it would've been obscured by the mans leg.

So explain to me, how does compression magically create a fitting piece of text when that visual never should've existed in the pic in the first place? What about the cut of shoe?

No matter how you look at it, something has to be wrong with the pic itself.

There is nothing wrong with the picture. The text is not in the leg. What is the count in this thread where you claim "This is impossible!" regarding these pictures? 5,6, maybe 7?

Do you feel embarrassed or do you have no accountability responsibility for anything that comes out of your mouth? (Typed out your fingers...)

For reference, the following is similar to how the man's position is:



You will notice only one shoe is visible, the other is in front of him and blocked out by the perspective.

Originally posted by OutonaLimb
I said it once before www.cluesforum.info

you just got to put in the time to understand.

its just sad to see stupidity, poor education and mental illness mixed together like this......

n'other line......

reply to post by boncho

There is nothing wrong with the picture. The text is not in the leg. What is the count in this thread where you claim "This is impossible!" regarding these pictures? 5,6, maybe 7?

You must´ve missed my post........

Boncho, me thinks you initially didn´t realize it wasn´t his leg either, since you were going on about compression artifacts.

You sure didn´t point out it wasn´t his leg, from the start, even though it was clear that that was what I thought.

So no need to get all high and mighty.

From my perspective, thinking it was his leg, the pic was impossible.

I apologized for my mistake.

Originally posted by DaveStinger
reply to post by boncho

 

There is nothing wrong with the picture. The text is not in the leg. What is the count in this thread where you claim "This is impossible!" regarding these pictures? 5,6, maybe 7?

You must´ve missed my post........

Boncho, me thinks you initially didn´t realize it wasn´t his leg either, since you were going on about compression artifacts.

You sure didn´t point out it wasn´t his leg, from the start, even though it was clear that that was what I thought.

So no need to get all high and mighty.

From my perspective, thinking it was his leg, the pic was impossible.

I apologized for my mistake.

If you apologized my bad for pushing the issue on you. If someone genuinely doesn't know and admits their mistake after I have nothing against that.

I am just getting exhausted with some of the Boston stuff. A lot of it is common sense or easily explained and many of us have to put a stupid amount of effort just to silence the BS coming out of it.

Some would say we're feeding trolls but I figure it's better to properly debunk something so if someone tries to push it you can simply link them to the explanation. I honestly didn't see the other issues in the picture as being worthwhile, but you did, and I should have addressed them in the first post.

Originally posted by ROBthaBANK

Originally posted by OutonaLimb
I said it once before www.cluesforum.info

you just got to put in the time to understand.

its just sad to see stupidity, poor education and mental illness mixed together like this......

n'other line......

another on the paylist, eh?

Originally posted by boncho

Originally posted by OutonaLimb

Originally posted by roguedesigner
reply to post by OutonaLimb

 

Let me help by drawing in the directions of the shadows for you.

Notice anything?

And you're welcome.

edit on 7-5-2013 by roguedesigner because: (no reason given)

yes, i notice quite a few anomalies with this snapshot, and they have been dealt
with before and elsewhere.

Let me help by drawing in the actual directions of the shadows for you.

i think this is a case of let the viewer decide, as me and bonche are getting nowhere.
(and as a rule: if i am wrong, and i know i am wrong, i will apologise.)

The picture you posted is a false shadow direction. The other poster posted the correct shadow position. I took the light from the day in question in a rendering program, and showed how body angle, can change the way the shadow appears.

You simply draw a line on a shadow, that does not mean that's where the shadow is going. I posted an image from a rendering program, that has the same light overhead as the date and time in Boston during the events. You see how I changed on person and the shadow appear to get west to east?

If you notice the female officer she is not standing straight upwards. She is bent forward, and the other poster's arrow shows exactly where her shadow is from. If you take her body and cut it in something like MS Paint, as you lower it you will see how it matches up with the shadow.

The above shows what I mean. If you bring the woman's body down you see it match up with the shadow. Many of us can do this without aide.

i don't believe you bonche.

all you had to do (instead of this excessive response) is find
me one photo showing similar a arrangement of people in direct sunlight with similar
shadow direction anomalies. just one (provably or demonstrably genuine photograph).

take a look through family albums or holiday snaps with friends, and see do you see it.
even once will do, and you will here no more from me.

reply to post by OutonaLimb

i don't believe you bonche.

all you had to do (instead of this excessive response) is find
me one photo showing similar a arrangement of people in direct sunlight with similar
shadow direction anomalies. just one (provably or demonstrably genuine photograph).

take a look through family albums or holiday snaps with friends, and see do you see it.
even once will do, and you will here no more from me.

I have provided enough for any rational person to see what is happening. I used a rendering program with the exact light that was on Boston (As it was geographically programmed to where the marathon was held) same time, everything. I took that program, and showed that the direction of a shadow can appear different by simply changing the shape or posture of the person creating the shadow. I made mine look as though it was going east-west when others were north-south.

I don't care what you think. What you believe. What you claim to believe. My posts, are not for you, they are for people seeing any false arguments, and clears it up so the likelihood of them being lied to about this is lower. Any observer that is being told the images in the OP are fake because of the shadows, should be able to see otherwise with the evidence in this thread, and this post specifically.

Below again is the rendered image. This is done with the exact settings that would have been seen in Boston. You can see that in the shadow settings window.



That is enough (should be enough for anyone.) Yet, I know there are some people that visit the forums who would like more, so I will post real life examples of shadows appearing not to be uniform. Either from sun angles or object positioning:



The next picture, look to the left, looks as there are no shadows at all:



Merging shadows.













What direction are these shadows even going in?



Now, here is the most telling, notice the fellow bent over and how the head of his shadow is pointing in a different direction:



That should suffice.

reply to post by otherpotato

Why hire actors, photoshop photos, yadda yadda yadda when you could just detonate an actual bomb? To what end does STAGING a bombing yield better results???

I'm not claiming staged here...but to answer your question, one would be that such an environment you can control. If you have actors, you can control it. If you photoshop pics, you can control what goes out in public. Now if you did arrange a real explosion and real people...there would be numerous things that can go wrong. I'm just saying...that would be probably the reason for staging anything...control.

reply to post by OutonaLimb


That shadow thing is getting rediculus....I must admit...I first fell for it when I first heard about it.

All shadows converge, the angle of convergence depends on the distance between the objects in question. If the objects are near one another, than the convergence is soft...barely visible...object's shadows appear almost parallel to each other...but they aren't in reality. If you were to take measurements...you would find a small angle between them. If they are further apart, the shadows would converge with a more visible angle.

Originally posted by MarioOnTheFly
reply to post by otherpotato

 

Why hire actors, photoshop photos, yadda yadda yadda when you could just detonate an actual bomb? To what end does STAGING a bombing yield better results???

I'm not claiming staged here...but to answer your question, one would be that such an environment you can control. If you have actors, you can control it. If you photoshop pics, you can control what goes out in public. Now if you did arrange a real explosion and real people...there would be numerous things that can go wrong. I'm just saying...that would be probably the reason for staging anything...control.

Would it not be hard to stage the photo in question, given that there is video of the exact same timeline which has been uploaded publicly to the internet. Not to mention, there are photosets on flickr, again, uploaded publicly, that show all the same events.

It is not possible to even stage something like this, being that it was all uploaded so soon after the event. And, lets say they prestaged it, it is completely impossible that they could plan and execute it perfectly. There must be some people crossing the finish line who aren't "in on it" right?

Please use this for comparison sake:
It has been fairly well established that the shadow being cast by the officer with the drawn weapon- on the left - in this image is incorrect.

Supporting that argument please take note of the shadow being cast by the 'yellow jacket' man on the far left, and see how that shadow is being cast in the proper direction as opposed to the improper direction of the shadow pointed out in the image above.


And in comparing these images you will also readily see that the perspective in the 'iconic' shot is difficult to believe - but cameras (and their lenses) do tell strange stories.

Originally posted by boncho
reply to post by OutonaLimb

i don't believe you bonche.

all you had to do (instead of this excessive response) is find
me one photo showing similar a arrangement of people in direct sunlight with similar
shadow direction anomalies. just one (provably or demonstrably genuine photograph).

take a look through family albums or holiday snaps with friends, and see do you see it.
even once will do, and you will here no more from me.

 

I have provided enough for any rational person to see what is happening. I used a rendering program with the exact light that was on Boston (As it was geographically programmed to where the marathon was held) same time, everything. I took that program, and showed that the direction of a shadow can appear different by simply changing the shape or posture of the person creating the shadow. I made mine look as though it was going east-west when others were north-south.

I don't care what you think. What you believe. What you claim to believe. My posts, are not for you, they are for people seeing any false arguments, and clears it up so the likelihood of them being lied to about this is lower. Any observer that is being told the images in the OP are fake because of the shadows, should be able to see otherwise with the evidence in this thread, and this post specifically.

Below again is the rendered image. This is done with the exact settings that would have been seen in Boston. You can see that in the shadow settings window.

That is enough (should be enough for anyone.) Yet, I know there are some people that visit the forums who would like more, so I will post real life examples of shadows appearing not to be uniform. Either from sun angles or object positioning:

The next picture, look to the left, looks as there are no shadows at all:

Merging shadows.

What direction are these shadows even going in?

Now, here is the most telling, notice the fellow bent over and how the head of his shadow is pointing in a different direction:

That should suffice.

edit on 9-5-2013 by boncho because: (no reason given)

i am sorry boncho but it does not suffice for me. i can appreciate the shadow directions
in every one of the real-life photos you posted. but still not those in the photo in question.

reply to post by OutonaLimb

Must you really quote such a long boring post such as that in its entirety? I think it interferes with the continuity of the thread.........Please just give us a LINK to the post - Thank you

Originally posted by boncho

Originally posted by MarioOnTheFly
reply to post by otherpotato

 

Why hire actors, photoshop photos, yadda yadda yadda when you could just detonate an actual bomb? To what end does STAGING a bombing yield better results???

I'm not claiming staged here...but to answer your question, one would be that such an environment you can control. If you have actors, you can control it. If you photoshop pics, you can control what goes out in public. Now if you did arrange a real explosion and real people...there would be numerous things that can go wrong. I'm just saying...that would be probably the reason for staging anything...control.

Would it not be hard to stage the photo in question, given that there is video of the exact same timeline which has been uploaded publicly to the internet. Not to mention, there are photosets on flickr, again, uploaded publicly, that show all the same events.

It is not possible to even stage something like this, being that it was all uploaded so soon after the event. And, lets say they prestaged it, it is completely impossible that they could plan and execute it perfectly. There must be some people crossing the finish line who aren't "in on it" right?

Agreed Boncho...as I said...I don't subscribe to Boston being staged...I'm just saying...why would one possibly want to stage an event...to be in control of the aftermath.

reply to post by POXUSA

Please use this for comparison sake: It has been fairly well established that the shadow being cast by the officer with the drawn weapon- on the left - in this image are incorrect.

Don't see it....actually his posture perfectly explains the shadow. Almost the same case as in Boncho's footballer bending. Simply changing posture can appear to cast an unexplainable shadow...to a zelous CT