Re: The Mystery of the Make-Up Photo - was it taken on the same day as the Last Photo?

by MayMuse 05.07.16 13:38

The corner shoulder of DP'S T-shirt looks similar IMO.

Looking at it enlarged on my PC there is a noticeable "blurring" on the blue area and also Madeleine in some areas, this can usually be done by using a "tool" to edit any image to obscure.

by MayMuse 05.07.16 13:41

Roxyroo wrote:
MayMuse wrote:Why would her disappearance be pre-planned?
What reasoning would there be for this or what "situation" would it be necessary ?
I don't believe she was taken by paedophiles, not saying that those "type" are not involved but do not believe a "gang" took her, with or without considering the dogs intelligence.
So, where does that lead to?

Even if the "Lolita" photo was taken deliberately (Pre-planning) to point to reference of paedophilia; what kind of parent puts their child in that position and for what kind of "wider agenda"?
Micro chipping agenda

I have had that thought myself however IF that was the case, it failed miserably!

by Nina 05.07.16 13:53

Get'emGonçalo wrote:
Nina wrote:
Get'emGonçalo wrote:

This man, Nina?

From wiki:
Journalism professor Roy Greenslade called the Daily Express coverage a "sustained campaign of vitriol against a grief-stricken family.
Thank you Get'em. I was searching through all the tapas members for any signs of the distinctive blue colour at the edge of the makeup photo and that was the only photograph with this shade of blue. I am torn between a blue plastic chair or fabric.Anyway, no matter and thank you.
Just to add I am not accusing him.

Gerry's got a lot of blue shirts.

Although I tend to think the blue in the make up photo is a plastic chair.

Haha, missed that one amongst his wardrobe of blues.
I have always thought it was a plastic chair but am examining this photograph on 500 magnification and it is dulled where plastic chairs usually have a sheen to them, so wondering if it is cloth.
I am sure this photograph is amongst the ones we need to learn as much from as possible.
Regards roses

by Verdi 05.07.16 13:55

MayMuse wrote:The corner shoulder of DP'S T-shirt looks similar IMO.

Looking at it enlarged on my PC there is a noticeable "blurring" on the blue area and also Madeleine in some areas, this can usually be done by using a "tool" to edit any image to obscure.

Everything blurs to a certain degree when enlarged on a PC. In my opinion the blue object behind Madeleine in the make-up photograph is a plastic chair, of the type used on a balcony.

The question remains - where and when was this photograph taken and by whom.

by MayMuse 05.07.16 14:09

Verdi wrote:
MayMuse wrote:The corner shoulder of DP'S T-shirt looks similar IMO.

Looking at it enlarged on my PC there is a noticeable "blurring" on the blue area and also Madeleine in some areas, this can usually be done by using a "tool" to edit any image to obscure.
Everything blurs to a certain degree when enlarged on a PC. In my opinion the blue object behind Madeleine in the make-up photograph is a plastic chair, of the type used on a balcony.

The question remains - where and when was this photograph taken and by whom.

I'm talking of lines, blurs, shading, not the resolution loss. There is overlap too on the whites of her eyes too.
I know that some believe a plastic chair others cloth, I think the later and it is someone behind Madeleine.

We may never know where and when and by whom. We do need to be careful on trying to make things "fit", that would go against all of the truth so far. I believe that the McCann's know exactly where etc that photo was taken and by whom, they are never going to tell other than be "evasive " or "confusing" in their answers. Undoubtedly, the "suggestive" photos were used to make a "point". Whether it is to confuse the public or to send a message I cannot fathom, as in the whole of this case it is awash with lies and suspicion.
IMO

by MayMuse 05.07.16 14:36

What are we to believe the blocked "black area" is to the side of the ochre wall?
Is this a door, a screen or just an "abyss" as it shades into Madeleines hair?

Could this image of Madeleine have been superimposed onto the background?

by JRP 05.07.16 15:41

The "abyss" I believe is an open patio doorway. It looks like it has been darkened for some reason. The hair near Madeleine's ear, (on the dark side) there are thin wisps, but further up near the bobble faint hair has merged with the black. I would say that shows a digital manipulation. The hair on the stucco side also blends. Also the hair near Madeleine's ears both sides show the effects of being darkened. There is also a nick in her neck edge which looks strange... just another weird pic for the family collection.

by NickE 05.07.16 15:44

I´ve found this:
Can someone with photo skills explain please?

The Mystery of the Make-Up Photo - was it taken on the same day as the Last Photo? - Page 6 Maddieeyeshadow-fromForum02May20-1

The Mystery of the Make-Up Photo - was it taken on the same day as the Last Photo? - Page 6 Maddieeyeshadow-fromForum02May20-1

by Guest 05.07.16 15:49

Roxyroo wrote:What a great post Tony! Only thing I have to dsagree about is the hair bead. In the last photo if looks to me like a "bobble" / pink elastic band. In the other photos it looks to me to be hair clips/slides, one a purple/ violet colour, another pink

I made a quick photo on this:

The Mystery of the Make-Up Photo - was it taken on the same day as the Last Photo? - Page 6 12310

It is definitely a hair clip in the tennis photo. However I think it is a trick of the eye that the makeup photo seems to be a hair clip - if you check the 'thickness' of it, the thickness is contiguous. If it was a hair clip you'd expect the middle to be almost flat, not fat. The shape appears different, probably because it's been fiddled with after being moved higher.

When you play with the contrast, all kinds of weird shapes appear. There's blue all over her chin and around her cheeks. This makes it a lot harder to manipulate the image yourself (ie to try and smudge away the makeup), because you end up spreading blue you didn't want.

Someone up thread mentioned the 'kink' in her neck. I noticed this too. It looks very much like a smudge tool in Photoshop. I tested this and made exactly the same shape;

The Mystery of the Make-Up Photo - was it taken on the same day as the Last Photo? - Page 6 21110

The Mystery of the Make-Up Photo - was it taken on the same day as the Last Photo? - Page 6 21110

(my edit to show how a smudge tool looks exactly the same)

The odd thing is the 'kink' appears where her right shoulder should begin. You should see her trap area beginning, but it's not there. Look at her left shoulder - her hair is clearly falling over it - you can even determine where thanks to the shadow. But her right shoulder is invisible, with hair clearly falling behind it.

This is a good reference image. And so is this. You can clearly see in both that she has a natural neck 'wrinkle', yet it's not visible here. What is visible is obvious tampering (just raise the contrast and darkness and it jumps out at you). You can also see where her trap/shoulder muscle area should begin, right below that 'kink' area.

The question is, why would her neck need obscuring? I've seen the bruise theory, and that may be correct, but what we are seeing is not a bruise, it's a shoddy coverup.

@NickE I don't see anything in the circled area except degredation of the image from reproduction.

@MayMuse I would say it's the patio/veranda door of an apartment, not part of the 'McCanns block'.

by Verdi 05.07.16 16:49

NickE wrote:I´ve found this:
Can someone with photo skills explain please?

Something connected with Jon Corner's video perhaps - from whence I believe the make-up still originates?

Look at around 00:51 seconds..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ghIWyEdEB00

Just a thought.

by Verdi 05.07.16 16:51

Nina wrote:
Get'emGonçalo wrote:
Nina wrote:
Get'emGonçalo wrote:

This man, Nina?

From wiki:
Journalism professor Roy Greenslade called the Daily Express coverage a "sustained campaign of vitriol against a grief-stricken family.
Thank you Get'em. I was searching through all the tapas members for any signs of the distinctive blue colour at the edge of the makeup photo and that was the only photograph with this shade of blue. I am torn between a blue plastic chair or fabric.Anyway, no matter and thank you.
Just to add I am not accusing him.

Gerry's got a lot of blue shirts.

Although I tend to think the blue in the make up photo is a plastic chair.
Haha, missed that one amongst his wardrobe of blues.
I have always thought it was a plastic chair but am examining this photograph on 500 magnification and it is dulled where plastic chairs usually have a sheen to them, so wondering if it is cloth.
I am sure this photograph is amongst the ones we need to learn as much from as possible.
Regards

Good job it wasn't pink or tongues would start wagging..

by joyce1938 05.07.16 17:14

Maybe that photo has been tampered with, the light blue colour is spread around her face .that's why at first it appeared to me ,the eyes had been made up by a kid ,an adult would not apply this to her face ,they would apply in regular fashion . So if it has been played around with ,seems more the case ,to keep us all interested ?well it has worked eh ,just so odd to release it .joyce1938

by Roxyroo 05.07.16 18:12

Tennison wrote:
Roxyroo wrote:Just an idea, and I don't know if this has maybe been checked already; if we are suspicious that the eye-shadow has been applied by Photoshop, can the pupils also have been enlarged by someone trying to add the "fleck" and failing miserably?

There's also this very odd thick black line which does suggest to me that her eyes have been tampered with.

Yes, compared to the other eye the waterline looks to have been accentuated.

by **Tony Bennett** 05.07.16 18:38

MayMuse wrote:
We may never know where and when and by whom. We do need to be careful on trying to make things "fit", that would go against all of the truth so far. I believe that the McCann's know exactly where etc that photo was taken and by whom, they are never going to tell other than be "evasive " or "confusing" in their answers.

I am in general agreement with your post @ MayMuse but I am at a complete loss as to how this discussion could go 'against all of the truth so far'. Maybe you could kindly explain what you meant by that? - especially what is your understanding of 'the truth so far'.

Given that there is strong evidence that the 'Last Photo' was taken on Sunday 29 April, how would a conclusion that the Make-Up Photo was taken later the same day 'go against any truth'?

You wrote:

"I believe that the McCanns know exactly where etc that photo was taken and by whom..."

REPLY: Agreed, of course they do

"...they are never going to tell other than be "evasive " or "confusing" in their answers".

REPLY: And how much does that apply to so many secrets and mysteries in this 'mystery of mysteries'. Remember Father Pacheco and former Det Sgt Arthur Cowley. Both men - who knew a great deal - vowed on the record that they would 'take the McCanns' secrets to their graves'

, they are never going to tell other than be "evasive " or "confusing" in their answers.

by Roxyroo 05.07.16 18:51

MayMuse wrote:
Roxyroo wrote:
MayMuse wrote:Why would her disappearance be pre-planned?
What reasoning would there be for this or what "situation" would it be necessary ?
I don't believe she was taken by paedophiles, not saying that those "type" are not involved but do not believe a "gang" took her, with or without considering the dogs intelligence.
So, where does that lead to?

Even if the "Lolita" photo was taken deliberately (Pre-planning) to point to reference of paedophilia; what kind of parent puts their child in that position and for what kind of "wider agenda"?
Micro chipping agenda
I have had that thought myself however IF that was the case, it failed miserably!

I.m beginning to wonder if it isn't all some big psy-op to test the publics reactions to things, such like Sophia Smallstrom describes the way the data was collected and analysed after the Sandy Hook shooting. Maybe this is the UK version! laughat

I.m just so baffled by it all, and all the different "characters involved! angrypcuser

by MayMuse 05.07.16 19:08

Tony Bennett wrote:
MayMuse wrote:
We may never know where and when and by whom. We do need to be careful on trying to make things "fit", that would go against all of the truth so far. I believe that the McCann's know exactly where etc that photo was taken and by whom, they are never going to tell other than be "evasive " or "confusing" in their answers.
I am in general agreement with your post @ MayMuse but I am at a complete loss as to how this discussion could go 'against all of the truth so far'. Maybe you could kindly explain what you meant by that? - especially what is your understanding of 'the truth so far'.

Given that there is strong evidence that the 'Last Photo' was taken on Sunday 29 April, how would a conclusion that the Make-Up Photo was taken later the same day 'go against any truth'?

You wrote:

"I believe that the McCanns know exactly where etc that photo was taken and by whom..."

REPLY: Agreed, of course they do

"...they are never going to tell other than be "evasive " or "confusing" in their answers".

REPLY: And how much does that apply to so many secrets and mysteries in this 'mystery of mysteries'. Remember Father Pacheco and former Det Sgt Arthur Cowley. Both men - who knew a great deal - vowed on the record that they would 'take the McCanns' secrets to their graves'

, they are never going to tell other than be "evasive " or "confusing" in their answers.

Hi @TonyBennett I didn't mean the discussion, I meant all of what has been painstakingly uncovered over the years by those who have spent time to "investigate" and highlight the deceit and show the truth and possibilities of what happened to Madeleine. If we try to make things "fit" where they do not belong, that is when it can come unstuck in my opinion. We cannot categorically say that the photos discussed were taken on the same day, as you know I believe that the hairstyle is different, differences of opinion matter as they can get people to re-look at things not noticed before ( more minds together etc) and this forum sure has helped me to re-think on certain aspects of the case; although I do understand the importance of "ironing" out the details to come to a possible conclusion. I'm just worried that we may be looking in the wrong place, not sure exactly why?
The lies, secrets and mysteries are (I believe) far deeper than we could anticipate; people who take things to their grave are usually "scared", what exactly of in the case of Pacheco and Cowley is anyones guess. I pray and hope that justice is achieved for Madeleine but how it has "played" out the past 9 years looks like many are getting away with it,whatever IT exactly is which is being protected and covered up!

by Verdi 06.07.16 0:12

MayMuse wrote:
Verdi wrote:
MayMuse wrote:The corner shoulder of DP'S T-shirt looks similar IMO.

Looking at it enlarged on my PC there is a noticeable "blurring" on the blue area and also Madeleine in some areas, this can usually be done by using a "tool" to edit any image to obscure.
Everything blurs to a certain degree when enlarged on a PC. In my opinion the blue object behind Madeleine in the make-up photograph is a plastic chair, of the type used on a balcony.

The question remains - where and when was this photograph taken and by whom.
I'm talking of lines, blurs, shading, not the resolution loss. There is overlap too on the whites of her eyes too.
I know that some believe a plastic chair others cloth, I think the later and it is someone behind Madeleine.

We may never know where and when and by whom. We do need to be careful on trying to make things "fit", that would go against all of the truth so far. I believe that the McCann's know exactly where etc that photo was taken and by whom, they are never going to tell other than be "evasive " or "confusing" in their answers. Undoubtedly, the "suggestive" photos were used to make a "point". Whether it is to confuse the public or to send a message I cannot fathom, as in the whole of this case it is awash with lies and suspicion.
IMO

My apologies, I assumed (wrongly it would seem) that when you said that 'looking at the photograph enlarged on your PC there is noticeable blurring' you actually meant that when 'looking at the photograph enlarged on your PC there is noticeable blurring.'

Not sure who is included in the collective 'we' you refer to but I ask that you leave me out. I go out of my way to avoid encouraging unfounded theorizing and trying, as you say, to make things fit.

Of course the McCanns know where, when and by whom the photograph was taken and of course they are not going to fill in the detail - that goes without saying. I don't agree that 'undoubtedly' the inappropriate photographs were used by the McCanns to 'make a point' or 'confuse the public' or 'send a message'. What I see is a totally inappropriate image of a three year old child being used, along with other equally inappropriate images, in a video to promote the 3rd anniversary of Madeleine's disappearance and the search campaign.

I want to know where when and why the 'make-up' photograph was taken and by whom. I don't expect the parents or their entourage to be truthful nor do I believe that this particular issue will be resolved in the absence of a miracle. It may however be possible to deduce something positive by further analysis.

by Roxyroo 06.07.16 3:47

Roxyroo wrote:
MayMuse wrote:
Roxyroo wrote:
MayMuse wrote:Why would her disappearance be pre-planned?
What reasoning would there be for this or what "situation" would it be necessary ?
I don't believe she was taken by paedophiles, not saying that those "type" are not involved but do not believe a "gang" took her, with or without considering the dogs intelligence.
So, where does that lead to?

Even if the "Lolita" photo was taken deliberately (Pre-planning) to point to reference of paedophilia; what kind of parent puts their child in that position and for what kind of "wider agenda"?
Micro chipping agenda
I have had that thought myself however IF that was the case, it failed miserably!

I.m beginning to wonder if it isn't all some big psy-op to test the publics reactions to things, such like Sophia Smallstrom describes the way the data was collected and analysed after the Sandy Hook shooting. Maybe this is the UK version!

I.m just so baffled by it all, and all the different "characters involved!

A bit like number 4 in this:

https://youtu.be/ujjgXgZjefo

by **Tony Bennett** 06.07.16 9:20

MayMuse wrote:
Hi @TonyBennett I didn't mean the discussion, I meant all of what has been painstakingly uncovered over the years by those who have spent time to "investigate" and highlight the deceit and show the truth and possibilities of what happened to Madeleine. If we try to make things "fit" where they do not belong, that is when it can come unstuck in my opinion. We cannot categorically say that the photos discussed were taken on the same day...

I think you may have misunderstood me.

The main question I have posed is: Could the Make-Up Photo have been taken in Portugal during the week the McCanns were there in 2007?

I think that the majority view on the thread by far is: "Yes, it could have been". That is, apart from one comment about hair length and style, which quite honestly I don't think is a very persuasive argument .

And I think you will agree with me that if that is the case, it does not in any way 'contradict all of what has been painstakingly uncovered over the years by those who have spent time to 'investigate' and highlight the deceit and show the truth and possibilities'.

Do you agree?

Or put it another way: Is there any known fact which could disprove that the Last Photo and the Make-Up Photo were both taken on Sunday 29 April?

I don't think there is, is there?

by MayMuse 07.07.16 2:36

Tony Bennett wrote:
MayMuse wrote:
Hi @TonyBennett I didn't mean the discussion, I meant all of what has been painstakingly uncovered over the years by those who have spent time to "investigate" and highlight the deceit and show the truth and possibilities of what happened to Madeleine. If we try to make things "fit" where they do not belong, that is when it can come unstuck in my opinion. We cannot categorically say that the photos discussed were taken on the same day...
I think you may have misunderstood me.

The main question I have posed is: Could the Make-Up Photo have been taken in Portugal during the week the McCanns were there in 2007?

I think that the majority view on the thread by far is: "Yes, it could have been". That is, apart from one comment about hair length and style, which quite honestly I don't think is a very persuasive argument .

And I think you will agree with me that if that is the case, it does not in any way 'contradict all of what has been painstakingly uncovered over the years by those who have spent time to 'investigate' and highlight the deceit and show the truth and possibilities'.

Do you agree?

Or put it another way: Is there any known fact which could disprove that the Last Photo and the Make-Up Photo were both taken on Sunday 29 April?

I don't think there is, is there?

I don't think that there is any known "fact" that could prove that both photos were taken on the 29th either unless I have totally missed something? I have not been trying to prove or sway any "argument" as I was under the impression the "discussion" was for observations/opinions. Mine was the comment whereby I view Madeleine's hair different I.E. longer, and I have viewed it countless times in consideration of others viewpoints. I stand by that observation even it is the minority. The photo is cut short (make up) so comparisons in my opinion are more difficult due to the length, although I believe that her bangs are longer and are similar to the "football" photo which is where I am basing my observations also. Of course the majority of opinion takes precedence which I have no problem with at all, not everyone is going to agree as we have seen over the years and appreciate everyone's input, like I have said before it helps to put a fresh perspective and re-think over Madeleine's sorry fate. I hope I have explained myself better, thank you for engaging and for all the work you do to get to the truth for Madeleine.

by MayMuse 07.07.16 2:40

JRP wrote:The "abyss" I believe is an open patio doorway. It looks like it has been darkened for some reason. The hair near Madeleine's ear, (on the dark side) there are thin wisps, but further up near the bobble faint hair has merged with the black. I would say that shows a digital manipulation. The hair on the stucco side also blends. Also the hair near Madeleine's ears both sides show the effects of being darkened. There is also a nick in her neck edge which looks strange... just another weird pic for the family collection.

Thank you, I did wonder if it had been darkened to obscure something else as I too noticed the blackened areas in the hair etc. which is very odd indeed. I find most of the photos released make uncomfortable viewing for such a little girl, it is as if she has been "made" to look older? IMO

by JRP 07.07.16 9:46

I had another read through the opening post, and noticed that Tony states that the lollypop photo was taken indoors and that the blue objects in the photo are indoor furniture.
Is that because the rough looking area between Madeleine's face and the blue object is taken to be carpet?

I think the lollypop pic was taken outdoors, the blue object is a blue chair, possibly tipped on its side and the ocre colour is concrete.
I thought it was a patio area, is that not possible?

by **Tony Bennett** 07.07.16 11:00

JRP wrote:I had another read through the opening post, and noticed that Tony states that the lollypop photo was taken indoors and that the blue objects in the photo are indoor furniture. Is that because the rough looking area between Madeleine's face and the blue object is taken to be carpet?

I think the lollypop pic was taken outdoors, the blue object is a blue chair, possibly tipped on its side and the ocre colour is concrete. I thought it was a patio area, is that not possible?

@ JRP     The discussion has been focusing on the Make-Up Photo and the Last Photo, but the 'Ice Lolly Photo' remains of interest to me because it is a third photo with Madeleine having a hair bead, and raises for me the possibility that those three photos were all taken on the same day. So thank you for your comments. It's of interest that no-one has yet shown me any other photos or videos of Madeleine wearing hair beads

I think we are agreed that what I called the 'Floorboard Photo', but would better be named the 'Skirting Board' photo, was almost certainly taken in England in the McCanns' own home.

To me, the Ice Lolly Photo looked as though it was taken indoors because I thought maybe she was sitting in a sofa. I am quite open to all other interpretations of where it might have been taken. If you look on the very top left, the shape looks to me very much like part of a rear passenger car window, so I also wonder if she was being taken somewhere by car? I would be very interested to see any other interpretations of where this picture might have been taken.

------

@ MayMuse      To answer some of your points above:

re: "I don't think that there is any known "fact" that could prove that both photos were taken on the 29th either unless I have totally missed something?"

REPLY: As yet there is no known fact absolutely proving either (a) that both photos were taken on 29 April or (b) that they were both taken that week in Portugal, and I haven't said that there is. But there could yet be in the future. I think it's correct to say that there is broad agreement on the thread that the Make-Up Photo was taken in Portugal, which is a staggering conclusion to reach, but is justified by hat we see in the photo. That means it was taken between 28 April and 3 May. The only real objection we have had to that, so far on this thread, is your suggestion that the hair lengths are not the same on the two pictures - but you concede that we don't see the full length of Madeleine's hair on the Make-Up Photo.

re: "I have not been trying to prove or sway any "argument" as I was under the impression the "discussion" was for observations/opinions".

REPLY: Discussion, observations, opinions and 'trying to prove or sway an argument' are ALL very welcome on this forum - that is why we are all here. So please carry on trying to sustain your opinion. But, as always, we look for opinions to be supported by good evidence.

re: "Mine was the comment whereby I view Madeleine's hair different i.e. longer, and I have viewed it countless times in consideration of others viewpoints. I stand by that observation even it is the minority. The photo is cut short (Make-Up) so comparisons in my opinion are more difficult due to the length, although I believe that her bangs are longer and are similar to the "football" photo which is where I am basing my observations also".

REPLY: Noted, but I think most people on here would agree that that the 'Football Photo' which you showed was of a much younger Madeleine.

re: "Of course the majority of opinion takes precedence which I have no problem with at all, not everyone is going to agree as we have seen over the years and appreciate everyone's input, like I have said before it helps to put a fresh perspective and re-think over Madeleine's sorry fate".

REPLY: The majority view is significant, as in this case where I think nearly all agree that the Make-Up Photo was taken in Portugal in the same week as the Last Photo. But it is by no means final. If anyone thinks that their opinion is to be preferred and can bring evidence in support, so much the better. Some of our best threads on the forum (like the Last Photo and 'Smithman' threads) have been successful precisely because people on here have argued passionately, and with evidence, on opposite sides of the argument.

by JRP 07.07.16 12:59

@TonyBennett
Others have pointed out that the skirting board in the "Skirting Board" photo isn't a popular item in Portugal, so I would agree this photo is likely to have been taken in the UK.

I was looking at the curve in the blue object in the "Ice Cream" photo, and comparing it to the plastic chairs in the photo of the balcony in Burgau, this may be a mistake as there is no link to this photo having been taken in Burgau, but once a seed is sewn it's difficult to shake the idea off.

There is a strange perspective to the photo, if the grey area is a concrete floor, then it doesn't look to be on the correct plain, it looks more upright than horizontal.

The car seat theory is interesting. The curve of the blue object top left could be the corner of a side window and rear pillar, the lighter grey/white (very top left) could be the outside world, a pavement or road. The area which is mottled which I took to be blurred concrete next to Madeleine's cheek could be a material covered car door lining.
Looking at the other version of this photo, where Madeleine is holding an ice cream cone, her right elbow (our left) is almost resting on something dark grey. A car door arm rest or a child car seat perhaps?

by **Tony Bennett** 07.07.16 14:22

JRP wrote:@TonyBennett

Others have pointed out that the skirting board in the "Skirting Board" photo isn't a popular item in Portugal, so I would agree this photo is likely to have been taken in the UK.

REPLY: Not only that, but there is a another McCann photo taken in their kitchen with exactly the same type of skirting board and coloured wall, so I think we could probably all agree that the 'Floorboard Photo' was taken in the McCanns' kitchen

The car seat theory is interesting. The curve of the blue object top left could be the corner of a side window and rear pillar, the lighter grey/white (very top left) could be the outside world, a pavement or road. The area which is mottled which I took to be blurred concrete next to Madeleine's cheek could be a material covered car door lining. Looking at the other version of this photo, where Madeleine is holding an ice cream cone, her right elbow (our left) is almost resting on something dark grey. A car door arm rest or a child car seat perhaps?

REPLY: Yes, I think all of this is a possibility. Upthread, 'worriedmum' thought that Madeleine was wearing the same dress in the Skirting Board Photo and the Ice Lolly Photo, I think she could be right. That suggests the possibility that those two photos were taken on the same day, maybe one on the kitchen floor and one in a luxury car - is the ochre colour upholstery? - and is the blue behind Madeleine some kind of cloths or cushions?

The Mystery of the Make-Up Photo - was it taken on the same day as the Last Photo?