Re: Faked Photos

by LG78 01.09.11 17:08

Tigger says: I think this was put out to show that the image we now all know to be photoshopped is pasted on a 'normal' family scene. If you can find the christmas 2005 photos, that's when there are others when she looks the same and is wearing that dress

Thats even more strange, you say this picture is from christmas? who the hell wears a brown Tshirt on christmas? I mean if she is all dressed up in a red dress I would asume that it is christmaseve..

by LG78 01.09.11 17:15

I found this video [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] and seems like you are right Tigger, the dress she wears at christmas 2005. BUT, didnt she disappear in 2007 ? Because when you look at this vid, the twins must be over 1 year here? and in 2007 they where 18 months? Or am I wrong? -because looking at this I would assume they must be close two 3 years in 2007?

( Did not see anyone with a brown tshirt on in that 2005 christmas vid)

by Guest 01.09.11 18:22

LG78 wrote:I found this video [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] and seems like you are right Tigger, the dress she wears at christmas 2005. BUT, didnt she disappear in 2007 ? Because when you look at this vid, the twins must be over 1 year here? and in 2007 they where 18 months? Or am I wrong? -because looking at this I would assume they must be close two 3 years in 2007?

( Did not see anyone with a brown tshirt on in that 2005 christmas vid)

They were 27 months old in 2007 according to this..................

[snipped]

Birthday Party For McCann Twins

Feb 1 2008

THE parents of Madeleine McCann are laying on a huge birthday party for their twins tomorrow.

Sean and Amelie turn three today.

Kate and Gerry have planned a party at their home in Rothley, Leicestershire.

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

by **tigger** 01.09.11 20:36

LG78 wrote:I found this video [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] and seems like you are right Tigger, the dress she wears at christmas 2005. BUT, didnt she disappear in 2007 ? Because when you look at this vid, the twins must be over 1 year here? and in 2007 they where 18 months? Or am I wrong? -because looking at this I would assume they must be close two 3 years in 2007?

( Did not see anyone with a brown tshirt on in that 2005 christmas vid)

If you google Donegal and Madeleine McCann, you'll get two newspaper cuttings with photographs from april 2007! Maddie looks quite tall and so do the twins. They all seem to have rather long legs, which a month later seem to have shrunk again! There is a thread on this site as well.
The photographs, as you are discovering, are a minefield. It's not credible that Maddie in Donegal is the same age as the girl by the pool a month later where she looks much younger. Or the tennis ball girl, who must be all of 114 cm tall.
The photo of the girl who is just leaving the plastic house in the playground in PdL isn't Maddie IMO. She has no coloboma. Just because we are told little blond girls in pink are Maddie, we don't have to believe the McCanns.

Christmas 2005 the twins were just about 10 months old. I think the clip where she is unwrapping a big parcel must be christmas 2006 as the twins are walking quite well by then?

by Guest 02.09.11 2:07

Here's a link to one Donegal photo:

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

This has been discussed somewhere else though I can't find it now. The way that Madeleine is holding the ice cream is odd. It is perfectly possible to hold something like that with the thumbs supporting it at the back but whether a child could do that I don't know.

One can only wonder why the McCanns did not issue such a recent photo immediately rather than old ones.

by LG78 02.09.11 7:38

Hi,
Found this, maybe someone with English as first language and some photo experience can have a look at this

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

by **tigger** 02.09.11 14:06

LG78 wrote:Hi,
Found this, maybe someone with English as first language and some photo experience can have a look at this

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

What is you first language? Because I might explain it better? Yes, this is a useful quick way of determining alterations. In easy language it is just that Jpegs are compressed photographs, every time you save them there is a slight change, what he is saying is that every time you do something new to a photograph the pixels are 'new' so to speak and will be saved for the first time, unlike the rest of the pixels, which will have already been saved dozens of times. This difference can be seen with this programme.
I'm sure Scotland Yard have far more sophisticated equipment!

I'll see if I can use it with my own photos as an experiment and then try with screen jpegs.

by LG78 02.09.11 14:13

tigger wrote:
LG78 wrote:Hi,
Found this, maybe someone with English as first language and some photo experience can have a look at this

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

What is you first language? Because I might explain it better? Yes, this is a useful quick way of determining alterations. In easy language it is just that Jpegs are compressed photographs, every time you save them there is a slight change, what he is saying is that every time you do something new to a photograph the pixels are 'new' so to speak and will be saved for the first time, unlike the rest of the pixels, which will have already been saved dozens of times. This difference can be seen with this programme.
I'm sure Scotland Yard have far more sophisticated equipment!

I'll see if I can use it with my own photos as an experiment and then try with screen jpegs.

Thanks I did understand a little bit better when u explain it :) My first language is Norwegian.
I want you to look at the famouse poster picture ( red dress and showing hte fleck in the eye) because when taking it in to this program I did see (I think) that where the fleck are in her eye, that part was a little bit lighter/brighter/whiter then the other eye?
I want you to look at it an give an oppinion, because I might see something that is really not there? Or understanding the program explainings correct.

by LG78 02.09.11 14:16

Im sure SY have a much better program, question is if they use it, or if we can trust them to do so?

by LG78 02.09.11 14:31

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

by **tigger** 02.09.11 14:45

LG78 wrote:[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

At least we're lucky, because most of the photoshopping is done by an amateur on Maddie's photos. I read many years ago, that it has been a favourite tool for paedo's and other pornography for a long time as they can adjust images as they like.OMG I can't think about that, I really, really hate those people.
It has to be someone in the UK, because Gerry needed to get home in order to fake the poolside photo. I reckon he isn't smart enough and it must have been too risky to do it himself as he was being watched by that time. One hopes.
I think the same person who did the poster photo, did all the others. I've got two people in mind. But if it was one of those two, the poster photo was done in the UK, before the holiday.... that is something I can't get away from, neither could the Portugese police I take it.

I'll send you a link to Dr. Luke, who thinks the same.

by **tigger** 02.09.11 14:47

LG78 wrote:[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

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

Very much worth a read, published 7/9/07!

by LG78 02.09.11 15:01

It so easy to make
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Now compere this one to the original one in this program [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

by LG78 06.09.11 19:24

LG78 wrote:Hi,
Found this, maybe someone with English as first language and some photo experience can have a look at this

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

Look at this one and compear to the Example photo of that homepage

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

And this one that is Photoshopped, using Tennis pic face on the pool pic
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Can anyone with English as first language and a good understanding of photo work explain this to me please?
Because to me the original pool picture looks a lot more fake compeared to the example picture of the site than the one we know for sure is photoshopped.

by SkruffyKat 23.10.12 14:06

I know this has nothing to do with MM, but shows just how easy it can be to even manipulate videos to show exactly what you want. Please move/remove if this isn't acceptable. Its called Two Dogs Dining, and can be found on youtube under that same title.