Another look at the Last photo

Doug D wrote:Thetruth.
 
‘……. take photos of a model (probably a teddy bear) wearing reflective sunglasses in full sun with horizontal and then vertical markers behind the photographer.’
 
I think people expect a horizontal reflection on the basis he is looking across the pool to the other side. He is not. He is sitting slightly sideways, looking towards the nearby edge of a curved pool and I am pretty sure with that angle you can get the vertical reflection as shown.
 
Somebody must have carried out this experiment at the Ocean Club over the last seven years, but I have never seen any results published. Probably need to send PeterMac back for a re-visit before the water gets too cold!

bobbin wrote:

Doug D wrote:Thetruth.
 
‘……. take photos of a model (probably a teddy bear) wearing reflective sunglasses in full sun with horizontal and then vertical markers behind the photographer.’
 
I think people expect a horizontal reflection on the basis he is looking across the pool to the other side. He is not. He is sitting slightly sideways, looking towards the nearby edge of a curved pool and I am pretty sure with that angle you can get the vertical reflection as shown.
 
Somebody must have carried out this experiment at the Ocean Club over the last seven years, but I have never seen any results published. Probably need to send PeterMac back for a re-visit before the water gets too cold!

 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rBY_4vQIJbU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EJVKTYsqUDY

Two videos. First one, photo-shopping reflections onto sunglasses.
Video two, placing sunglasses onto a face.
Many videos of photo-shopping available on youtube.
I am a bit surprised that a slight sitting angle near a curved pool can give a straight line vertical effect. More likely a rushed job by a 'not so competent', taking some sunglasses off one photo and placing them on the eyes in another photo. It looks like a 'ham' job.
Who knows why. Perhaps someone had been crying at the frustration of having his wife and kids busting in on his 'boy time golf holiday' and was too vain to let the world see his tear stained anger. What did his wife? sister? call him, tiny tears. IMO

bobbin wrote:
As for professor plum, he is a poster. Some posters are serious, others maybe not so, but he is no professor.

Dee Coy wrote:

bobbin wrote:
As for professor plum, he is a poster. Some posters are serious, others maybe not so, but he is no professor.

Well, I'm sure he isn't a Professor, any more than I'm a wooden duck .

But he is a very credible poster who, I've no reason to doubt for a second, posted that picture in good faith.

How do you explain it? The hoizontal deck is reflected vertically in the guitar:



I know a little about refraction and polarisation, and I'd guess if the conditions were right, it's a possible and furthermore,, probably a fairly common effect.

aiyoyo wrote:

juliet wrote:What a bossy madam aiyoyo is! She needs to be reminded that many of us believe the Last Photo is photoshopped from here to next week. She also needs to be reminded that many of us are not of Pat Brown's simplistic belief that it was a simple but unfortunate holiday accident, nothing else to see, move along you sad fools.

Do people also need to be reminded we have a loony here suggesting Gerry photoshopped his passport photo, turning this forum into laughing stock?

The last photo has been the discussion of photoshop and other manipulation.  I accept that photoshop may be a possibility but so far this has caused divide from posters who professed to be experts and from posters who are amateurs with keen well in-depth studied interest to amateurs who just shoot off their gob recklessly just to jump on the gravy train because they are skeptical of the Mccanns, so it is a truly open and debatable topic this last photo thing, fair enough.

As for Gerry's fake passport photo, well ........?  Who's the fool here ?

juliet wrote:Does aiyoyo always getso frantic over other people's posts? Perhaps she can explain, without having hysterics,  why McCann has cavernous upturned nostrils and big teeth on his passport photo when his normal features are completely different.

HelenMeg wrote:this link is interesting - trying to prove why the last photo is photoshopped.

http://frommybigdesk.blogspot.co.uk/2014/06/madeleine-mccann-is-this-proof-that.html

Ive just listened to this video from a photographer who says he has 40 years of experience with photography and he says why it is a fraudulent photo.
Please take the 10 minutes to watch - please please! Watch until the end. Very good. It has convinced me totally that iot has been photoshopped.

HelenMeg wrote:

HelenMeg wrote:this link is interesting - trying to prove why the last photo is photoshopped.

http://frommybigdesk.blogspot.co.uk/2014/06/madeleine-mccann-is-this-proof-that.html

Ive just listened to this video from a photographer who says he has 40 years of experience with photography and he says why it is a fraudulent photo.
Please take the 10 minutes to watch - please please! Watch until the end. Very good. It has convinced me totally that iot has been photoshopped.

Sorry to quote my own post - but just very keen for those with an interest in whether it has been photoshopped to watch this person 'prove' that it has been photoshopped.
Please watch  - only takes approx 10 minutes.

Carrry On Doctor wrote:If the last photo can be proved as false, the party is over.
IMO of course.

rustyjames wrote:Thanks PeterMac for a great write up.

I'm trying not to get drawn too heavily into this topic again as it's one everyone seems to have a strong opinion on and the arguments go around in circles.   I've spent far too much time on this photo since the 3A's days and as an "amateur" my view is consistent with the pros PM has quoted.

All the elements in the photo whether it be shadows or anything else seem to me to be consistent and I can't see signs of photoshopping.  I'm not sure why in that video a poorly photoshopped and relatively low resolution image is being compared with the original that is at the full resolution of the camera.  You can even see what appears to be droplets of water kicked up by Amelie when zoomed in - that would be some attention to detail.

The one thing I admit is harder to explain is the sunglasses reflection, but I suspect this is because it is being thought of as rotated through 90 degress.  I think the fact the right hand curve of the pool, (from the photographer's point of view), is being reflected in the left side of the right hand lens, is straightening the way it looks through a fish-eye effect.  In the bottom of the lens there is a tiny bit of what is probably Amelie's hat.

The fish-eye effect here ...



and here



Reflections in concave and convex surfaces do some funny things - just take a look at the upside down or stretched image of yourself in the front/back of a spoon.  I need to have a play with a pair of sunglasses.

That then leaves the Exif data - if that has been deliberately manipulated to change the date and/or time then any other questions about the integrity of the photo pales into insignificance.

All of this IMO.

Another look at the Last photo

bobbin wrote:
To replicate the effect seen in Gerry's sunglasses, you would have to twist your photographer in the left lens of the upper photo through 90 degrees to get the same effect.