Re: Textusa releases new statement (6 Nov 2015) on 'The Last Photo' - says it is a photoshopped composite of THREE different photographs, two of which were taken on Friday 18 May 2007

by skyrocket 09.11.15 7:57

I'm almost reluctant to post this (empathising with certain harassed posters on here) but on the grounds of establishing facts I will.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

The above links to a series of photos on Pamalam's site which have been taken over a series of years in and around PDL by one EUNIQUE1234. If you scroll down there are several taken specifically on 14 April 2007, which seems to have been a glorious day. This would have been the Saturday at the end Easter week, which remember in the UK saw record temperatures (Mc's were in Ireland). Once you get passed the 'rock photos' there is a one of a large bougainvillea in full bloom and it looks like a similar colour to one of the ones at the Ocean Club (I think there are 2 colours there - deep pink and red). I lived in Antequera in Spain for several years and even up there, the bougainvillea was always out before May. [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] - still happy to be proven wrong if there are other photos in the Ocean Club from that week.

by Guest 09.11.15 8:06

skyrocket wrote:The above links to a series of photos on Pamalam's site which have been taken over a series of years in and around PDL by one EUNIQUE1234. If you scroll down there are several taken specifically on 14 April 2007, which seems to have been a glorious day. This would have been the Saturday at the end Easter week, which remember in the UK saw record temperatures (Mc's were in Ireland). Once you get passed the 'rock photos' there is a one of a large bougainvillea in full bloom and it looks like a similar colour to one of the ones at the Ocean Club (I think there are 2 colours there - deep pink and red). I lived in Antequera in Spain for several years and even up there, the bougainvillea was always out before May. [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] - still happy to be proven wrong if there are other photos in the Ocean Club from that week.

Yes indeed.

But we have been reliably informed by various posters over the last few years that this is impossible because they KNOW when Portuguese bougainvillea bloom so the poolside photo is a fake.

Yes indeed.

Can't find the Boyd family playground pictures anywhere although the family appear to be in one if the McCann pictures (Gerry with the kids).

by HelenMeg 09.11.15 10:29

skyrocket wrote:I'm almost reluctant to post this (empathising with certain harassed posters on here) but on the grounds of establishing facts I will.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

The above links to a series of photos on Pamalam's site which have been taken over a series of years in and around PDL by one EUNIQUE1234. If you scroll down there are several taken specifically on 14 April 2007, which seems to have been a glorious day. This would have been the Saturday at the end Easter week, which remember in the UK saw record temperatures (Mc's were in Ireland). Once you get passed the 'rock photos' there is a one of a large bougainvillea in full bloom and it looks like a similar colour to one of the ones at the Ocean Club (I think there are 2 colours there - deep pink and red). I lived in Antequera in Spain for several years and even up there, the bougainvillea was always out before May. [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] - still happy to be proven wrong if there are other photos in the Ocean Club from that week.

Hi

I cant and am not trying to prove anything. I believe the photo is a fake and it is my decision to choose to believe that based on discussion I have read. But, i do think the point about the bougainvillea is interesting, and the photos I saw online did show the wall without any blooms. It was discussed a lot either here or in another forum. The reflection in the sunglasses is also a point of discussion -I have read convincing argument that the reflection is not valid. Unfortunately, like everyone here I cant prove anything I can only read widely and come to my own belief. I beg to differ with other opinions expressed here. Can anyone here actually prove the photo is genuine or fake?

by joyce1938 09.11.15 10:59

I'm just asking, could it be a difference if a bush is on certain facing wall and the heat can build up and force flowers to come a tiny bit earlier? It does happen here in Dorset, if protected. Or even if a newish bush and doesn't have so many flowers yet? A mature plant could seem to be a bit ahead of rest. I obviously don't know for sure. joyce1938

by Verdi 09.11.15 12:49

Mark Willis wrote:A long long time ago, on a forum far away, ok, it was 3As, the original massive snap was posted on there.
I spent 2 days scanning that pic and found no alteration of it whatsoever.
No pixel aberrations, nothing.
Not that I needed to.
It's not photoshopped. The only anomaly is the "when" of when it was taken.
Probably several days before the 3rd May, which day I am not sure, but that's about it.
Its purpose was to endorse the idea that M was still around on "the last day", is all.

It matters not how many times this particular photograph is analysed by experts and/or professionals from the real world, the cyber experts will always find something wrong - like a stray leaf or cheap market sunglasses or dodgy arm or missing jug of sangria. The definitive crashing bore!

I think it's all a case of 'in the eye of the beholder'.. sarcastic

Best left to them that know!

by HelenMeg 09.11.15 13:08

Interesting more than anything is the release of the Last Photo. One would have expected it be released immediately and that the image of Madeleine would have been
the one in all of the 'Missing' posters. After all, it was the photo which would have been expected to be the best one for anyone to recognise her from! Instead we
get the one of a much younger Madeleine which would not have really helped anyone to recognise her as the missing child. I am sure this must be the only case of a 'missing child'
where a photo was issued on posters that was taken much earlier in her life. That was just downright odd and unreasonable and a massive red flag.

I'd like to know of any parent whose child went missing not issuing the 'last photo' of that child to help find him / her.

However, that doesn't help[ on any discussion as to whether the Last Photo is genuine or not. I think we all agree it is not genuine - whether for date or composition detail. Thankfully any case wont rest
on the last photo - it is just another indicator of a cover up.IMO.

by jeanmonroe 09.11.15 14:35

"WHICH" 'last photo' are we talking about?????? winkwink

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

ANY digital 'photograph' CAN be 'photoshopped'.............i think!

by Verdi 09.11.15 15:00

HelenMeg wrote:Interesting more than anything is the release of the Last Photo. One would have expected it be released immediately and that the image of Madeleine would have been
the one in all of the 'Missing' posters. After all, it was the photo which would have been expected to be the best one for anyone to recognise her from! Instead we
get the one of a much younger Madeleine which would not have really helped anyone to recognise her as the missing child. I am sure this must be the only case of a 'missing child'
where a photo was issued on posters that was taken much earlier in her life. That was just downright odd and unreasonable and a massive red flag.

I'd like to know of any parent whose child went missing not issuing the 'last photo' of that child to help find him / her.

However, that doesn't help[ on any discussion as to whether the Last Photo is genuine or not. I think we all agree it is not genuine - whether for date or composition detail. Thankfully any case wont rest
on the last photo - it is just another indicator of a cover up.IMO.

My sentiments exactly. thumbsup

by Verdi 09.11.15 15:05

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote: "WHICH" 'last photo' are we talking about?????? [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

This is my favourite, complete with doggy doing his business, bougainvillia, towels, pararsoles, shadows - and oh look, even Tannerman makes a guest appearance not dressed like a tourist..

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

by HelenMeg 09.11.15 15:21

by whatsupdoc 09.11.15 15:30

I agree with HelenMeg. The last photo should have been available straight away and the one used for posters. Just another in the long line of things done and said by the McCanns which I have thought unusual.
I just said about the number of versions which must be around and up pops jeanmonroe with some and then Verdi with a cracker that made me laugh...thanks guys. laugh

I think the horse has long bolted on the subject of the last photo and do we need any more versions (except the funny ones which go into my collection) and experts who may or may not know what they are talking about.

by jeanmonroe 09.11.15 15:34

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:

"I'd like to know of any parent whose child went missing not issuing the 'last photo' of that child to help find him / her".
--------------------------------------

I'd like to know of ANY 'parent' whose child went missing, NOT 'co-operating' with a police investigation!

I'd like to know of ANY 'parent' whose child went missing, saying 'we were glad when the police investigation was closed'

I'd like to know of ANY 'parent' whose child went missing, saying 'whether that involves re-opening the investigation, into my child's disappearance. or not, it dosen't matter' (to me)

I'd like to know of ANY parent whose child went missing, who would lie, to relatives, in the UK, about a, blatantly false, 'jemmied and smashed' shutter.

I'd like to know of ANY parents whose child went missing, who would say, publicly, 'there's no evidence to implicate 'us' in her death'

I'd like to know WHY both of Madeleine's Grandmothers were put on the 'Granny Express', back to the UK, within hours of their arrival in Portugal, after 'saying/asking' er, 'something' to a missing child's, their grandaughter, father.

Etc, etc.,

by jeanmonroe 09.11.15 15:55

whatsupdoc wrote:

I think the horse has long bolted...........
-----------------------------

OMG!

I didn't even know there was a horse in PDL on May 3rd 2007!

I know there was 'a big red tractor' in PDL, as the burglator's 'getaway vehicle'

But a HORSE?

If the McS knew of this 'horse' earlier, they could have followed the 'horse s*it' er, 'trail', to the hellish 'lair', nr PDL!

Whlist we, poor us, have only a 'bull s*it' um, y'know, 'trail' to follow! fan

Oh,

Jean!

by Mark Willis 09.11.15 16:34

Verdi wrote:
Mark Willis wrote:A long long time ago, on a forum far away, ok, it was 3As, the original massive snap was posted on there.
I spent 2 days scanning that pic and found no alteration of it whatsoever.
No pixel aberrations, nothing.
Not that I needed to.
It's not photoshopped. The only anomaly is the "when" of when it was taken.
Probably several days before the 3rd May, which day I am not sure, but that's about it.
Its purpose was to endorse the idea that M was still around on "the last day", is all.
It matters not how many times this particular photograph is analysed by experts and/or professionals from the real world, the cyber experts will always find something wrong - like a stray leaf or cheap market sunglasses or dodgy arm or missing jug of sangria. The definitive crashing bore!

I think it's all a case of 'in the eye of the beholder'.. Best left to them that know!

Have to say the conspiracies regards the missing elbow in the "shrine" pic are as specious as Metodo3 at Christmas.
Yes, we should leave the swimming pool for Birch to dig up... drama

by Mark Willis 09.11.15 16:38

jeanmonroe wrote:whatsupdoc wrote:

I think the horse has long bolted...........
-----------------------------

OMG!

I didn't even know there was a horse in PDL on May 3rd 2007!

Yep. Shergar. Owned by Lord Lucan, ridden by Crecheman (as far as he can remember), trained by Soinia Poulton to hide any untold stories for as long as an Exton e-Fit..

by Verdi 09.11.15 20:34

whatsupdoc wrote:I agree with HelenMeg. The last photo should have been available straight away and the one used for posters. Just another in the long line of things done and said by the McCanns which I have thought unusual.
I just said about the number of versions which must be around and up pops jeanmonroe with some and then Verdi with a cracker that made me laugh...thanks guys.

I think the horse has long bolted on the subject of the last photo and do we need any more versions (except the funny ones which go into my collection) and experts who may or may not know what they are talking about.

The last photograph is more diluted than a carafe of house red down the local Argee Bhajee or a pint of lager down the Pig and Whistle.

by rustyjames 09.11.15 21:50

Get'emGonçalo wrote:
Peter said the second expert is Professor Hany Farid and this is his website so anyone can contact him and make their own equiries: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Just catching up on this thread, but great to put a name to one of the experts. This is an impressive set of citations for Hany Farid - [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

The Reddit IAMA is quite interesting too and provided evidence in this Scottish paedophile ring investigation.

by **Tony Bennett** 09.11.15 22:00

rustyjames wrote:
Get'emGonçalo wrote:
Peter said the second expert is Professor Hany Farid and this is his website so anyone can contact him and make their own equiries: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Just catching up on this thread, but great to put a name to one of the experts. This is an impressive set of citations for Hany Farid - [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

The Reddit IAMA is quite interesting too.

I'm glad PeterMac felt able to release the name.

It is surely a brave or foolish person who continues to insist that the 'Last Photo' is photoshopped against the professional opinion of such an expert.

And let us also all pause to thank PeterMac for the time and energy he expended in seeklng out Professor Farid - real, valuable and original research on the disappearance of Madeleine McCann - and all the other valuable and original research he's made available here and elsewhere - and sent to Operation Grange at the Met (just in case there should ever be a misconduct investigation into why two top Senior Investigating Officers - DCI Andy Redwood and DCI Nicola Wall - deliberately refused to follow obvious lines of enquiry suggested by PeterMac's research)

yes

by whatsupdoc 10.11.15 0:13

Tony, we can't say what photo the experts had to analyse, or can we?

What we had was what was on the internet which could have been several generations away from the original and have been altered on the way.

Many of us did our best with the material we had.

I don't know the experts Peter knows or their history without checking but I have found it wise not to automatically trust anyone who purports to be an expert even ones who write books.

by **Tony Bennett** 10.11.15 0:30

whatsupdoc wrote:Tony, we can't say what photo the experts had to analyse, or can we? What we had was what was on the internet which could have been several generations away from the original and have been altered on the way.

NO.

The two experts were able to precisely determine that this was NOT 'several generations' away from the original, that in fact it was NO 'generations' away from the original, and indeed was an ORIGINAL, GENUINE, UNPHOTOSHOPPED photo.

If you want to disagree with both Professor Farid and the other expert on this, with the greatest of respect you are going to have to come up with a much, much better response than that.

by Grande Finale 10.11.15 1:44

I've actually gone full circle on this, (Changed my mind) The last photograph has quite clearly
been manipulated with software. The reflection in the sunglasses is of a vertical pool, now I was
quite willing to accept that 90 deg change in reflection may be due to the proximity of water and
maybe windows which could cause this effect.

So I searched for images on google "Reflections in sunglasses" and out of a hundred sunglasses near
Water or glass or both, 100% had a horizontal reflection, I now know that it is impossible to get a vertical
reflection in sunglasses (Unless you are laid on your side).

So the Photograph has definitely been manipulated, This leads me to question if the Exif data should have
changed for that Image as well and changed the date to when it was altered. Because it still reads May 3rd 2007.

It ABSOLUTELY must have been created as a new image well after the 3rd ???

Long story short the reflection must have been altered to hide the reflection of the actual photographer, also the
fact that the Bougainvillea WASN'T blooming that week in May means that section of the photograph was taken
later. Taking all this into account I can now also see a way of photoshopping Maddie onto the background without the
hair being an issue, which leaves open the possibility that there was a pool photo of Maddie on her own from earlier
that week ???

So In conclusion yes I was wrong, I retract my vote for no alteration and await TextUSA's further analysis.

PS it is apparently very common to change sunglasses reflections in a very complex manner nowadays (See Youtube) [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

by skyrocket 10.11.15 8:28

@ Grande Finale

I still 'feel' this photo is wrong but I've seen nothing (yet) to prove it. I was the opposite to you, I started a doubter and then changed sides. The image I've been using is 98% quality and is freely available online - I'm sure PeterMacs guys have been using similar or better.

I don't see the logic of taking a photo of MBM alone by the pool earlier in the week with no complications such as bougainvillea or GM's sunglasses reflection in it and then adding complications by photoshopping GM and Amelie into the shot and further photoshopping GM's sunglasses lenses. If, a rotated reflected image is impossible (and presumably an experienced photoshopper would know this), why after going to all the trouble would the photoshopper insert an impossible scenario into the scene, knowing that it would be questioned? Why not just insert a horizontal reflection? And, if the image contained all 3 of them in the first place but the sunglasses reflection was the issue - again why not insert a new horizontal reflection?

If there was an original of only MBM from earlier in the week, why not release that with just the date/time alterations. The 'happy' family shot wasn't essential.

As I understand it from the 'last photo' thread, the vertical reflection could be the natural side of the pool which curves round sharply to MBM's left, creating what appears to be a rotated reflection of a horizontal but which is actually a true reflection of the apparent almost right angle.

Despite my reticence with this photo I am convinced other images have been manipulated.

by **Tony Bennett** 10.11.15 9:04

Grande Finale wrote:I've actually gone full circle on this, (Changed my mind) The last photograph has quite clearly
been manipulated with software. The reflection in the sunglasses is of a vertical pool, now I was
quite willing to accept that 90 deg change in reflection may be due to the proximity of water and
maybe windows which could cause this effect.

So I searched for images on google "Reflections in sunglasses" and out of a hundred sunglasses near
Water or glass or both, 100% had a horizontal reflection, I now know that it is impossible to get a vertical
reflection in sunglasses (Unless you are laid on your side).

@ Grande Finale

Have you seen this video on YouTube, made by a member of this forum, which demolishes the argument that the images on Gerry's sunglasses have been photoshopped?

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

If you have, what is your opinion on his arguments please?

by HelenMeg 10.11.15 9:58

Grande Finale wrote:I've actually gone full circle on this, (Changed my mind) The last photograph has quite clearly
been manipulated with software. The reflection in the sunglasses is of a vertical pool, now I was
quite willing to accept that 90 deg change in reflection may be due to the proximity of water and
maybe windows which could cause this effect.

So I searched for images on google "Reflections in sunglasses" and out of a hundred sunglasses near
Water or glass or both, 100% had a horizontal reflection, I now know that it is impossible to get a vertical
reflection in sunglasses (Unless you are laid on your side).

So the Photograph has definitely been manipulated, This leads me to question if the Exif data should have
changed for that Image as well and changed the date to when it was altered. Because it still reads May 3rd 2007.

It ABSOLUTELY must have been created as a new image well after the 3rd ???

Long story short the reflection must have been altered to hide the reflection of the actual photographer, also the
fact that the Bougainvillea WASN'T blooming that week in May means that section of the photograph was taken
later. Taking all this into account I can now also see a way of photoshopping Maddie onto the background without the
hair being an issue, which leaves open the possibility that there was a pool photo of Maddie on her own from earlier
that week ???

So In conclusion yes I was wrong, I retract my vote for no alteration and await TextUSA's further analysis.

PS it is apparently very common to change sunglasses reflections in a very complex manner nowadays (See Youtube) [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Hi
Well here's a link to further interesting discussion on the sunglasses - both worth reading to help you make up your mind

https://www.facebook.com/groups/JillHavernCompleteMysteryofMadeleineMcCann/permalink/1670008623243624/

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

by HelenMeg 10.11.15 10:05

Some points regarding the Last Photo

The Exif data takes very little time to change i.e. minutes at the most - so it does not explain the lengthy delay in waiting for this photo to be released.
How has a circular shaped pool and a convex lense turned the triangular piece of AM's hat from being horizontal to vertical?
A convex lens cannot flip a horizontal to a vertical - FACT.

Why is it so important for people to have us believe it is a GENUINE photo with simply the EXIF data changed? It is clear to some of us that the sunglasses reflection had to be changed
in order to hide whoever it was that took the photo (e.g it was not Kate). Why can those who believe it is a genuine photo not just say - 'OK lets agree to differ'?

Textusa releases new statement (6 Nov 2015) on 'The Last Photo' - says it is a photoshopped composite of THREE different photographs, two of which were taken on Friday 18 May 2007

The Last Photo...