Playground Picture
Page 2 of 8 •
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 
Re: Playground Picture

juliet- Posts: 150
Join date: 2011-06-21
That photograph is highly suspect.
juliet wrote:More and more, "premeditation" comes to mind.
Quite a few photographs have been proved to be faked with photoshopping. I pointed out earlier that photoshopping is a favourite tool for paedos, who can put themselves or children in all sorts of 'situations'.
The ice cream photo (above) is one of the worst with all sorts of inuendos. The arm doesn't belong to a toddler for a start.
Re the playground photo, yes loads of things wrong with it. It has a girl in pink, no proof at all that that is Maddie. Definitely not Amelie in the photo. I feel that the colour pink is rather rammed down our throats by Kate. Pink = Maddie, that's what we must think.
Bad news, Kate, we can think for ourselves. That photograph is so badly done, SY can't even use it as an example for their trainees, I'd wager.
____________________
What need we fear who knows it, when none can call our power to account? Macbeth Act V

tigger- Posts: 5013
Join date: 2011-07-20
Re: Playground Picture
tigger wrote:juliet wrote:More and more, "premeditation" comes to mind.
Quite a few photographs have been proved to be faked with photoshopping. I pointed out earlier that photoshopping is a favourite tool for paedos, who can put themselves or children in all sorts of 'situations'.
The ice cream photo (above) is one of the worst with all sorts of inuendos. The arm doesn't belong to a toddler for a start.
Re the playground photo, yes loads of things wrong with it. It has a girl in pink, no proof at all that that is Maddie. Definitely not Amelie in the photo. I feel that the colour pink is rather rammed down our throats by Kate. Pink = Maddie, that's what we must think.
Bad news, Kate, we can think for ourselves. That photograph is so badly done, SY can't even use it as an example for their trainees, I'd wager.
tigger, you have stated this as a fact, when there is no actual proof of this is there, apart from discussions on forums?

candyfloss- Super duper Moderator
- Posts: 11771
Join date: 2009-11-27
Age: 60
Re: Playground Picture

Marian- Posts: 1071
Join date: 2010-12-19
Location: England
Re: Playground Picture
____________________
The truth will out.

Smokeandmirrors- Posts: 1015
Join date: 2011-07-31
Re- Playground Photo-
its a hell of a pose,must have frightened the sh---out of the poor little nipper!
Another thing if I had known there were experts in the field of photography on this site we would
have approached them for advice for our followers of our space phenomena photographs
now shown on over eight hundred channel's globally
Why do I get the feeling its a small nomber of admin who are the main
posters and not the hard slog researches who send in their post
Nice too lighten the discussion some times eh

joan thomas- Posts: 43
Join date: 2011-07-05
Photoshopping
candyfloss wrote:tigger wrote:juliet wrote:More and more, "premeditation" comes to mind.
Quite a few photographs have been proved to be faked with photoshopping. I pointed out earlier that photoshopping is a favourite tool for paedos, who can put themselves or children in all sorts of 'situations'.
The ice cream photo (above) is one of the worst with all sorts of inuendos. The arm doesn't belong to a toddler for a start.
Re the playground photo, yes loads of things wrong with it. It has a girl in pink, no proof at all that that is Maddie. Definitely not Amelie in the photo. I feel that the colour pink is rather rammed down our throats by Kate. Pink = Maddie, that's what we must think.
Bad news, Kate, we can think for ourselves. That photograph is so badly done, SY can't even use it as an example for their trainees, I'd wager.
tigger, you have stated this as a fact, when there is no actual proof of this is there, apart from discussions on forums?
I've done quite a lot of photoshopping, but I'm also a figurative artist, so I'm always looking at the composition as a whole.
None of the four figures in the foreground are relating to each other at all. They all seem to be in their own world. The weird stance of the man by the playhouse, why interfere with that part of the photograph?
I'm not worried about the man looking through the playhouse, may just be looking for or at his child.
It's the pink girl who is too big if she stands up. It's Sean and the other toddler (not Amelie) not relating to each other either.
Gerry's stance doesn't relate to the girl in pink who is too close to him. His stance is related to something lower down.
I haven't run this one through a programme to see how many changes have taken place, a little complicated to do, but I'll try. Just wanted to let you know that it is a considered analysis and not based on wild surmise.
____________________
What need we fear who knows it, when none can call our power to account? Macbeth Act V

tigger- Posts: 5013
Join date: 2011-07-20
Re: Playground Picture
____________________
The truth will out.

Smokeandmirrors- Posts: 1015
Join date: 2011-07-31
Re: Playground Picture
____________________
"It wasn't as bad as the night we found her"
Molly- Posts: 310
Join date: 2011-06-28
Re: Playground Picture
Im defently sure that Tuck Price and The playgroundphoto man is not one and the same. After seeing four pictures of him taken 3 weeks after the PDL picture, well he is just way to fat (the PDL playg.photo man) . If not he would have had to lost a lot of weight in only three weeks. They are both balled and were sunglasses, but the resemblance stops there.
[img]
[/img][img]
[/img]
Guest- Guest
Page 2 of 8 •
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 
Similar topics» Sneak Peak Tickling Picture
» Playground Picture
» It's a Christmas Picture!
» Criminal Profiling Topic of the Day: A Picture Worth a Thousand Words


