1. Forum
  2. Usenet
  3. REC.PHOTO.DIGITAL

  • Photoshopped ?

    From geoff@21:1/5 to All on Tue Feb 8 13:08:24 2022
    I
    couldn't give a toss (so to speak) about Andrew, but I'm amazed that
    there hasn't been prominent conjecture that this image was photo-shopped
    to include all 'interested parties'.

    The outlines and shadows around each person and feature just don't look
    normal to me. Granted, it's only a low-res copy several generations from
    the original ...

    https://www.dropbox.com/s/fbzpdfd6ssrsmht/4_21386594-0-image-a-56_1574548719828.jpg?dl=0

    geoff

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From RJH@21:1/5 to geoff on Tue Feb 8 10:42:46 2022
    On 8 Feb 2022 at 00:08:24 GMT, "geoff" <geoff@nospamgeoffwood.org> wrote:




    I
    couldn't give a toss (so to speak) about Andrew, but I'm amazed that
    there hasn't been prominent conjecture that this image was photo-shopped
    to include all 'interested parties'.

    The outlines and shadows around each person and feature just don't look normal to me. Granted, it's only a low-res copy several generations from
    the original ...

    https://www.dropbox.com/s/fbzpdfd6ssrsmht/4_21386594-0-image-a-56_1574548719828.jpg?dl=0

    geoff

    That was my initial thought, but I'd assume any editing to that extent has
    been ruled out by now.
    --
    Cheers, Rob

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Paul Carmichael@21:1/5 to All on Tue Feb 8 10:31:14 2022
    El Tue, 08 Feb 2022 13:08:24 +1300, geoff escribió:

    I
    couldn't give a toss (so to speak) about Andrew, but I'm amazed that
    there hasn't been prominent conjecture that this image was photo-shopped
    to include all 'interested parties'.

    The outlines and shadows around each person and feature just don't look normal to me. Granted, it's only a low-res copy several generations from
    the original ...

    https://www.dropbox.com/s/fbzpdfd6ssrsmht/4_21386594-0-image-
    a-56_1574548719828.jpg?dl=0


    The girl on the right was the only subject not pasted in.

    --
    Paul.

    https://paulc.es/elpatio

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Whisky-dave@21:1/5 to Whisky-dave on Tue Feb 8 05:31:59 2022
    On Tuesday, 8 February 2022 at 13:30:59 UTC, Whisky-dave wrote:
    On Tuesday, 8 February 2022 at 00:08:58 UTC, geoff wrote:
    I
    couldn't give a toss (so to speak) about Andrew, but I'm amazed that
    there hasn't been prominent conjecture that this image was photo-shopped
    to include all 'interested parties'.

    The outlines and shadows around each person and feature just don't look normal to me. Granted, it's only a low-res copy several generations from the original ...

    https://www.dropbox.com/s/fbzpdfd6ssrsmht/4_21386594-0-image-a-56_1574548719828.jpg?dl=0

    geoff
    Either of the pictures shown could have been edited or both to prove a point although

    yeah forgot to add the link. https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/prince-andrews-ex-questions-infamous-26121633

    I don;t know what point. But he has sex with a 17 year-old so what.
    Wonder why in the country that seems to think it is the free'est in the world a 17 year old can't decide who to have sex with,
    but can buy a gun.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Whisky-dave@21:1/5 to geoff on Tue Feb 8 05:30:50 2022
    On Tuesday, 8 February 2022 at 00:08:58 UTC, geoff wrote:
    I
    couldn't give a toss (so to speak) about Andrew, but I'm amazed that
    there hasn't been prominent conjecture that this image was photo-shopped
    to include all 'interested parties'.

    The outlines and shadows around each person and feature just don't look normal to me. Granted, it's only a low-res copy several generations from
    the original ...

    https://www.dropbox.com/s/fbzpdfd6ssrsmht/4_21386594-0-image-a-56_1574548719828.jpg?dl=0

    geoff

    Either of the pictures shown could have been edited or both to prove a point although
    I don;t know what point. But he has sex with a 17 year-old so what.
    Wonder why in the country that seems to think it is the free'est in the world a 17 year old can't decide who to have sex with,
    but can buy a gun.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Bill W@21:1/5 to Paul Carmichael on Tue Feb 8 10:19:28 2022
    On Feb 8, 2022, Paul Carmichael wrote
    (in article<pan$1cfd6$3312ed8a$1ac61078$432b0bc2@gmail.com>):

    El Tue, 08 Feb 2022 13:08:24 +1300, geoff escribió:

    I
    couldn't give a toss (so to speak) about Andrew, but I'm amazed that
    there hasn't been prominent conjecture that this image was photo-shopped
    to include all 'interested parties'.

    The outlines and shadows around each person and feature just don't look normal to me. Granted, it's only a low-res copy several generations from the original ...

    https://www.dropbox.com/s/fbzpdfd6ssrsmht/4_21386594-0-image-
    a-56_1574548719828.jpg?dl=0

    The girl on the right was the only subject not pasted in.

    Maybe, but she is also the only one in that room, so different lighting.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From newshound@21:1/5 to Whisky-dave on Tue Feb 8 17:20:19 2022
    On 08/02/2022 13:31, Whisky-dave wrote:


    I don;t know what point. But he has sex with a 17 year-old so what.
    Wonder why in the country that seems to think it is the free'est in the world a 17 year old can't decide who to have sex with,
    but can buy a gun.

    Actually, no.

    https://www.atf.gov/firearms/qa/does-customer-have-be-certain-age-buy-firearms-or-ammunition-licensee

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Peter Jason@21:1/5 to All on Wed Feb 9 07:06:52 2022
    On Tue, 8 Feb 2022 13:08:24 +1300, geoff <geoff@nospamgeoffwood.org>
    wrote:

    I
    couldn't give a toss (so to speak) about Andrew, but I'm amazed that
    there hasn't been prominent conjecture that this image was photo-shopped
    to include all 'interested parties'.

    The outlines and shadows around each person and feature just don't look >normal to me. Granted, it's only a low-res copy several generations from
    the original ...

    https://www.dropbox.com/s/fbzpdfd6ssrsmht/4_21386594-0-image-a-56_1574548719828.jpg?dl=0

    geoff

    Randy Andy does not have that much hair.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From geoff@21:1/5 to RJH on Wed Feb 9 09:43:46 2022
    On 8/02/2022 11:42 pm, RJH wrote:
    On 8 Feb 2022 at 00:08:24 GMT, "geoff" <geoff@nospamgeoffwood.org> wrote:




    I
    couldn't give a toss (so to speak) about Andrew, but I'm amazed that
    there hasn't been prominent conjecture that this image was photo-shopped
    to include all 'interested parties'.

    The outlines and shadows around each person and feature just don't look
    normal to me. Granted, it's only a low-res copy several generations from
    the original ...

    https://www.dropbox.com/s/fbzpdfd6ssrsmht/4_21386594-0-image-a-56_1574548719828.jpg?dl=0

    geoff

    That was my initial thought, but I'd assume any editing to that extent has been ruled out by now.

    You'd think. But just looks 'wrong' to me. The different colour
    balances bewteen 'subjects', the edges and shadowsaround the outlines,
    etc.

    What look like anomolies possibly an artefact of flash-lighting ?

    If it's faked, then it's a pretty poor job at that !

    geoff

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)