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

by Tony Cadogan 16.11.16 13:52

kaz wrote:
kaz wrote:
kaz's post:

I'm not so sure. These two (above) photographs look more alike to me than the 'Make Up' photo and the 'Last Photo' by the pool where Madeleine's skin has a definite sunblush. If the head was tilted (making the hair a fraction longer at the shoulders ) and make up applied IMO they would be very similar.

I don't think the 'knowing' look comes from Madeleine herself. It's more from the eyes. Interesting that the awkward pose of the head, the heavy blue eyeshadow and the upward angle of the camera all conspire to make the eyes the focus of this discomforting demeanour.

Incidentally, why is this photograph cropped at a very odd point? Is that the way it was published? The reason I ask is because the McCanns aren't usually shy about having their happy smiling faces shown alongside the children's in publicity photographs.

===================================================

REPLY BY TONY BENNETT

I'm not so sure. These two (above) photographs look more alike to me than the 'Make Up' photo and the 'Last Photo' by the pool where Madeleine's skin has a definite sunblush. If the head was tilted (making the hair a fraction longer at the shoulders ) and make up applied IMO they would be very similar.

REPLY: I think you might be in a minority of one on that issue @ kaz. The face in the top picture is manifestly that of a much younger Madeleine. Remember Madeleine was nearly 4 on 29 April 2007 when it is suggested both the Make Up Photo and the Last Photo were taken

I don't think the 'knowing' look comes from Madeleine herself. It's more from the eyes. Interesting that the awkward pose of the head, the heavy blue eyeshadow and the upward angle of the camera all conspire to make the eyes the focus of this discomforting demeanour.

REPLY: Indeed. One of the many strange features of this photo.

Incidentally, why is this photograph cropped at a very odd point? Is that the way it was published? The reason I ask is because the McCanns aren't usually shy about having their happy smiling faces shown alongside the children's in publicity photographs.

REPLY: This photo has only ever appeared as part of a video film. It is quite clear that it has indeed been 'cropped'. Or rather, what happens during the few seconds the image is on the screen is that the image is in close-up to begin with, then gradually the image opens up, to the point that we just manage to see the blue object which I think is a blue plastic chair. Then it clicks over to another very posed image of Madeleine. I personally consider that the reason we do not see more of the background location is so as to give as little away as possible about where it was actually taken

“I don't think the 'knowing ' look comes from Madeleine herself .”

Neither do I.

“Interesting that the awkward pose of the head , the heavy blue eyeshadow and the upward angle of the camera all conspire to make the eyes the focus of this discomforting demeanour. Incidentally, why is this photograph cropped at a very odd point?”

I Concur: conspire indeed!

“…why is this photograph cropped at a very odd point?”

Why do you think this photograph is cropped?

Do you remember or have you recently looked at the video in which this image first appeared?

There is an image on the net marked PA (Press Association), for instance at [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] which it’s clearly not original. PA do not show this image among about 2400+ Mccann-related images in their collection..

If you compare the image in the video with the image above you will notice that the video image is different: the image above has Madeleine’s face elongated and therefore less chubby due to an aspect ratio adjustment. From what I remember, there is no way of telling whether the image in the video is cropped. Tony Bennett may be right on this.

by **Tony Bennett** 16.11.16 14:21

Tony Cadogan wrote:
There is an image on the net marked PA (Press Association), for instance at [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] which it’s clearly not original. PA do not show this image among about 2400+ Mccann-related images in their collection..

If you compare the image in the video with the image above you will notice that the video image is different: the image above has Madeleine’s face elongated and therefore less chubby due to an aspect ratio adjustment. From what I remember, there is no way of telling whether the image in the video is cropped. Tony Bennett may be right on this.

We now have over 300 posts on this very important thread. Here's the link again for anyone who wants to have a good look at the original video: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

The Make-Up Photo begins to be shown at 1 minite 13 seconds and lasts until 1 minute 19 seconds.

I think actually we CAN say that the image is cropped. When we get to 1 min 19 secs and the image fades into another controversial photo of Madeleine, it clearly looks as though there is quite a bit more of the image to be shown. Especially when you look at the bottom of the photo.

I think there might be a very specific reason for this.

Look at the Last Photo, and Madeleine is wearing a pink smock top with narrow straps at the top.

Now look at the Make-Up Photo, and we also see that Madeleine is wearing a pink garment with a narrow strap at the top.

Now, if we had seen a bit more of the Make-Up Photo it might be possible to determine absolutely whether the Make-Up Photo shows her in the same pink smock as she was wearing in the Last Photo.

Or not, as the case may be.

If indeed she is wearing the identical pink smock on both photos, what is already strong evidence that the two photos were taken on the same day would become almost overwhelming.

And that would further suggest that we have not been told the truth about either photo

by Tony Cadogan 16.11.16 14:47

Tony Bennett wrote:
Tony Cadogan wrote:
There is an image on the net marked PA (Press Association), for instance at [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] which it’s clearly not original. PA do not show this image among about 2400+ Mccann-related images in their collection..

If you compare the image in the video with the image above you will notice that the video image is different: the image above has Madeleine’s face elongated and therefore less chubby due to an aspect ratio adjustment. From what I remember, there is no way of telling whether the image in the video is cropped. Tony Bennett may be right on this.
We now have over 300 posts on this very important thread. Here's the link again for anyone who wants to have a good look at the original video: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

The Make-Up Photo begins to be shown at 1 minite 13 seconds and lasts until 1 minute 19 seconds.

I think actually we CAN say that the image is cropped. When we get to 1 min 19 secs and the image fades into another controversial photo of Madeleine, it clearly looks as though there is quite a bit more of the image to be shown. Especially when you look at the bottom of the photo.

I think there might be a very specific reason for this.

Look at the Last Photo, and Madeleine is wearing a pink smock top with narrow straps at the top.

Now look at the Make-Up Photo, and we also see that Madeleine is wearing a pink garment with a narrow strap at the top.

Now, if we had seen a bit more of the Make-Up Photo it might be possible to determine absolutely whether the Make-Up Photo shows her in the same pink smock as she was wearing in the Last Photo.

Or not, as the case may be.

If indeed she is wearing the identical pink smock on both photos, what is already strong evidence that the two photos were taken on the same day would become almost overwhelming.

And that would further suggest that we have not been told the truth about either photo

Thank you, Tony Bennett, I appreciate your comment and take note of what you've said and will look into it. I was interested to learn what made 'kaz' think the photo was cropped.

by Guest 16.11.16 15:13

Tony Cadogan wrote:
Thank you, Tony Bennett, I appreciate your comment and take note of what you've said and will look into it. I was interested to learn what made 'kaz' to think the photo was cropped.

Because it's unlikely anybody would take a portrait photograph and chop off the top of the head and anything from the neck down and not use the background to enhance the image?

Your comment leads me to think you are an expert, or at least perhaps reasonably knowlegeable, on the subject of photography. Great! I look forward to your analysis when you've taken @TonyBennett's comments into consideration and hada look into it. It's very laborious but you might also take the opportunity to browse past posts on the subject of the three lone photographs of Madeleine McCann taken at the Ocean Club, Praia da Luz, along with the 'make-up' photograph to get a feel of the general thoughts of other members - if you haven't already done so of course. Who knows, your diligent eye might throw new light on the subject, over and above the experts and novices who have taken an interest over the past months/years..

by **Nina** 16.11.16 16:48

Tony Bennett wrote:
Tony Cadogan wrote:
There is an image on the net marked PA (Press Association), for instance at [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] which it’s clearly not original. PA do not show this image among about 2400+ Mccann-related images in their collection..

If you compare the image in the video with the image above you will notice that the video image is different: the image above has Madeleine’s face elongated and therefore less chubby due to an aspect ratio adjustment. From what I remember, there is no way of telling whether the image in the video is cropped. Tony Bennett may be right on this.
We now have over 300 posts on this very important thread. Here's the link again for anyone who wants to have a good look at the original video: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

The Make-Up Photo begins to be shown at 1 minite 13 seconds and lasts until 1 minute 19 seconds.

I think actually we CAN say that the image is cropped. When we get to 1 min 19 secs and the image fades into another controversial photo of Madeleine, it clearly looks as though there is quite a bit more of the image to be shown. Especially when you look at the bottom of the photo.

I think there might be a very specific reason for this.

Look at the Last Photo, and Madeleine is wearing a pink smock top with narrow straps at the top.

Now look at the Make-Up Photo, and we also see that Madeleine is wearing a pink garment with a narrow strap at the top.

Now, if we had seen a bit more of the Make-Up Photo it might be possible to determine absolutely whether the Make-Up Photo shows her in the same pink smock as she was wearing in the Last Photo.

Or not, as the case may be.

If indeed she is wearing the identical pink smock on both photos, what is already strong evidence that the two photos were taken on the same day would become almost overwhelming.

And that would further suggest that we have not been told the truth about either photo

Madeleine is also wearing a strappy pink top in the skirting board photograph.

by worriedmum 16.11.16 20:51

You can see there is a dark flower pattern on the dress in the 'skirting board picture' which is NOT present on the smock top in the 'Last Photo':they are different items of clothing entirely.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
In fact the dress in the skirting board picture looks very like the one in the odd ice-cream picture[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

by MayMuse 16.11.16 21:32

worriedmum wrote:You can see there is a dark flower pattern on the dress in the 'skirting board picture' which is NOT present on the smock top in the 'Last Photo':they are different items of clothing entirely.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
In fact the dress in the skirting board picture looks very like the one in the odd ice-cream picture[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

This photo and the make up photo leads me to believe they are taken at a similar time frame, and not the last photograph as Madeleine's hair is a shorter bob type and as you can see in this one clearly longer... there are blue objects in both this and the make up photo also.
I'm aware I'm in the minority with this opinion.

by **Nina** 16.11.16 21:36

Who is this little girl in the middle at 1:54 looks much too old to be Madeleine with the twins so young......... [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

by kaz 17.11.16 9:04

kaz wrote:
kaz wrote:
kaz's post:

I'm not so sure. These two (above) photographs look more alike to me than the 'Make Up' photo and the 'Last Photo' by the pool where Madeleine's skin has a definite sunblush. If the head was tilted (making the hair a fraction longer at the shoulders ) and make up applied IMO they would be very similar.

I don't think the 'knowing' look comes from Madeleine herself. It's more from the eyes. Interesting that the awkward pose of the head, the heavy blue eyeshadow and the upward angle of the camera all conspire to make the eyes the focus of this discomforting demeanour.

Incidentally, why is this photograph cropped at a very odd point? Is that the way it was published? The reason I ask is because the McCanns aren't usually shy about having their happy smiling faces shown alongside the children's in publicity photographs.

===================================================

REPLY BY TONY BENNETT

I'm not so sure. These two (above) photographs look more alike to me than the 'Make Up' photo and the 'Last Photo' by the pool where Madeleine's skin has a definite sunblush. If the head was tilted (making the hair a fraction longer at the shoulders ) and make up applied IMO they would be very similar.

REPLY: I think you might be in a minority of one on that issue @ kaz. The face in the top picture is manifestly that of a much younger Madeleine. Remember Madeleine was nearly 4 on 29 April 2007 when it is suggested both the Make Up Photo and the Last Photo were taken

I don't think the 'knowing' look comes from Madeleine herself. It's more from the eyes. Interesting that the awkward pose of the head, the heavy blue eyeshadow and the upward angle of the camera all conspire to make the eyes the focus of this discomforting demeanour.

REPLY: Indeed. One of the many strange features of this photo.

Incidentally, why is this photograph cropped at a very odd point? Is that the way it was published? The reason I ask is because the McCanns aren't usually shy about having their happy smiling faces shown alongside the children's in publicity photographs.

REPLY: This photo has only ever appeared as part of a video film. It is quite clear that it has indeed been 'cropped'. Or rather, what happens during the few seconds the image is on the screen is that the image is in close-up to begin with, then gradually the image opens up, to the point that we just manage to see the blue object which I think is a blue plastic chair. Then it clicks over to another very posed image of Madeleine. I personally consider that the reason we do not see more of the background location is so as to give as little away as possible about where it was actually taken

Now I'm thoroughly confused....................not a difficult thing to achieve I might add.
@ Tony Bennett:
How did you manage to insert replies to my little contribution whilst the whole post is still under my name? I never posted it like that! Is there any particular reason for this? Does this mean that you have the ability to surreptitiously change anyone's post ? You haven't changed mine I hasten to add , other than insert your own replies, but the facility is obviously there. Don't like the avatars being on the left hand side now either. Reminds me too much of the many mirror image photographs in this saga.
Last post for me.

by **Jill Havern** 17.11.16 9:13

kaz wrote:@ Tony Bennett:
How did you manage to insert replies to my little contribution whilst the whole post is still under my name? I never posted it like that! Is there any particular reason for this? Does this mean that you have the ability to surreptitiously change anyone's post ? You haven't changed mine I hasten to add , other than insert your own replies, but the facility is obviously there. Don't like the avatars being on the left hand side now either. Reminds me too much of the many mirror image photographs in this saga.
Last post for me.

All Tony had to do was 'quote' your post then write inside it.

Anyone can do that.

by kaz 17.11.16 9:14

Get'emGonçalo wrote:
kaz wrote:@ Tony Bennett:
How did you manage to insert replies to my little contribution whilst the whole post is still under my name? I never posted it like that! Is there any particular reason for this? Does this mean that you have the ability to surreptitiously change anyone's post ? You haven't changed mine I hasten to add , other than insert your own replies, but the facility is obviously there. Don't like the avatars being on the left hand side now either. Reminds me too much of the many mirror image photographs in this saga.
Last post for me.
All Tony had to do was 'quote' your post then write inside it.

Anyone can do that.

Then why isn't it Tony's post? Why is it under my name?

by **Jill Havern** 17.11.16 9:16

kaz wrote:
Get'emGonçalo wrote:
kaz wrote:@ Tony Bennett:
How did you manage to insert replies to my little contribution whilst the whole post is still under my name? I never posted it like that! Is there any particular reason for this? Does this mean that you have the ability to surreptitiously change anyone's post ? You haven't changed mine I hasten to add , other than insert your own replies, but the facility is obviously there. Don't like the avatars being on the left hand side now either. Reminds me too much of the many mirror image photographs in this saga.
Last post for me.
All Tony had to do was 'quote' your post then write inside it.

Anyone can do that.
Then why isn't it Tony's post? Why is it under my name?

Because he quoted your post.

See how I've just added an emoticon to your post but it's still got your name?

Your original post remains unchanged.

by kaz 17.11.16 9:19

Like I said the post is under MY name. I never posted it with TB's replies. Page 12.

by **Tony Bennett** 17.11.16 9:21

kaz wrote:
Now I'm thoroughly confused...not a difficult thing to achieve I might add.
@ Tony Bennett:
How did you manage to insert replies to my little contribution whilst the whole post is still under my name? I never posted it like that! Is there any particular reason for this? Does this mean that you have the ability to surreptitiously change anyone's post? You haven't changed mine I hasten to add, other than insert your own replies, ut the facility is obviously there.

I am sorry about this.

As a Moderator I have powers to edit any post. I only do so if there is something that has to be deleted, or to add a Moderator's comment. I don't otherwise change anyone's post.

All that happened is that, in replying to your post, I had entirely by mistake clicked on 'Edit' instead of 'Quote'. Only after I had clicked on 'Send' did I realise my error.

Again I apologise for the confusion caused roses

by kaz 17.11.16 9:45

by Tony Cadogan 17.11.16 16:24

kaz wrote:

Very good. Sorted!

by worriedmum 20.11.16 22:16

I've been looking through images of Madeleine to see if it would help to answer this question if members posted photographs of her in order to compare them. It strikes me that the benchmark photo(s) should be the one(s) of her taken in the playground at the Ocean Club on the first day of the holiday.
Hair length ,dentition etc could then be compared.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

I can't take an image from it , but does this video of Madeleine on her bike look to anyone else like she has a 'hair bead' strand sweeping across her face?

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

by **Tony Bennett** 20.11.16 23:06

worriedmum wrote:I've been looking through images of Madeleine to see if it would help to answer this question if members posted photographs of her in order to compare them. It strikes me that the benchmark photo(s) should be the one(s) of her taken in the playground at the Ocean Club on the first day of the holiday.
Hair length ,dentition etc could then be compared.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

I can't take an image from it , but does this video of Madeleine on her bike look to anyone else like she has a 'hair bead' strand sweeping across her face?

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

The video is interesting.

I counted 43 different views of her on this 4-minute video, all but a handful were still photos.

The image you refer to @ worriedmum at 3 mins 07 secs appears to be some form of eye protection around her forehead, unless I am mistaken.

The distinctive little gap between Madeleine's two front teeth features in all the photos where her lips are parted.

There is a clip, not a hair bead, shaped like a flower, on the black-and-white photo of her at 3 mins 11 secs.

But back to the five or six images we have of Madeleine from the holiday, we have:

1, 2, 3 Playground photos - Saturday

4 'Last Photo' - Thursday or Sunday

5 'Tennis Balls Photo' - controversial and much disputed, certainly Madeleine's head at least, and

6 The 'Make Up Photo' - Sunday?

So far there's only one person on the forum who has said that the hair length of Madeleine in the Make Up Photo is any different from the other five

by worriedmum 20.11.16 23:49

To put them in order, we have to decide whereabouts the Tennis balls photo fits in to the sequence. If there is a 'sunburn' on Madeleine's wrist, WHEN was she exposed enough to the sun? Bearing in mind the weather pattern and the fact that she was was in the creche.. It's important to decide where it fits because Gerry and Kate claim the 'last photo' was taken on 3rd May. And Madeleine and Gerry look flushed as if it is hot..

by **Tony Bennett** 21.11.16 7:54

worriedmum wrote:To put them in order, we have to decide whereabouts the Tennis Balls Photo fits in to the sequence. If there is a 'sunburn' on Madeleine's wrist, WHEN was she exposed enough to the sun? Bearing in mind the weather pattern and the fact that she was in the creche. It's important to decide where it fits because Gerry and Kate claim the 'Last Photo' was taken on 3rd May. And Madeleine and Gerry look flushed as if it is hot.

@ worriedmum

If for a moment we look at the Tenis Balls Photo...

1. It is universally agreed that we have two different accounts of WHEN the photo was taken and WHO took it. That alone, for the overwhelming majority of people, makes it suspect

2. It is universally agreed that the head is Madeleine

3. It is overwhelmingly recognised that the body is not that of Madeleine, mainly on the size and shape of the body, which looks like that of an older girl, and also because of the generally much browner skin and certain marks which loo like bruises and scratches.

Many doubt for these reasons that even the head of Madeleine on the Tennis Balls Photos was from that holiday.

So for the purposes of discussing the 'sequence' of photos of Madeleine on that holiday, we really have only five to consider: four that we KNOW were taken on that holiday, and one that were told WASN'T taken on that holiday ,but probably WAS, viz:

3 playground photos - SATURDAY

Last Photo - THURSDAY or SUNDAY

Make-Up Photo - SUNDAY?

We therefore have THREE photos about which people say we have not been told the truth:

1) Tennis Balls Photo
2) Last Photo
3) Make-Up Photo

by Guest 21.11.16 11:13

Tony Bennett wrote:
worriedmum wrote:To put them in order, we have to decide whereabouts the Tennis Balls Photo fits in to the sequence. If there is a 'sunburn' on Madeleine's wrist, WHEN was she exposed enough to the sun? Bearing in mind the weather pattern and the fact that she was in the creche. It's important to decide where it fits because Gerry and Kate claim the 'Last Photo' was taken on 3rd May. And Madeleine and Gerry look flushed as if it is hot.

3. It is overwhelmingly recognised that the body is not that of Madeleine, mainly on the size and shape of the body, which looks like that of an older girl, and also because of the generally much browner skin and certain marks which loo like bruises and scratches.

I overwhelmingly disagree.

I don't see any issues with the actual photo.

Who took it and when is a different matter.

by Doug D 21.11.16 12:22

Got to agree with BlueBag here. Whilst it is vaguely possible that the head has been photoshopped onto someone else's body, based on peoples's analysis of the neck angle, body size etc, to my mind it is fairly implausible and certainly hasn't been proved conclusively.

If you were going to the trouble to mock up a photo to show that MM was somewhere at some time, you would surely do a better job, with a bit of actual background to evidence where it was actually taken.

Unless of course the 'body' came from the Rothley court and was deliberately taken in this way so the location could not be identified. Anything is possible.

Sorry but got to sit half on the fence here based on the available evidence.

by Tony Cadogan 21.11.16 15:26

Doug D wrote:Got to agree with BlueBag here. Whilst it is vaguely possible that the head has been photoshopped onto someone else's body, based on peoples's analysis of the neck angle, body size etc, to my mind it is fairly implausible and certainly hasn't been proved conclusively.

If you were going to the trouble to mock up a photo to show that MM was somewhere at some time, you would surely do a better job, with a bit of actual background to evidence where it was actually taken.

Unless of course the 'body' came from the Rothley court and was deliberately taken in this way so the location could not be identified. Anything is possible.

Sorry but got to sit half on the fence here based on the available evidence.

Wise.

An aside:

The highest-resolution ‘tennis balls’ image I know of is 662361f at [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wherein it’s accompanied by ‘Special Instructions’: “Rex Features Ltd do not claim any Copyright or Licence for this image”, It follows therefrom that the image is likely to have been delivered to Rex by the Mccanns or their circle and Rex would not have been entitled to manipulate the image.

Helpfully, Rex provide the resolution of the image in their possession as 2111 x 1583, and checking the specs of KM’s (“One of my photographs is known around the world…”) alleged camera, Canon PowerShot A620, at [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] , one finds that Cannon A620 does not offer such a resolution natively (credit is partly due to ‘Peg’ at [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] Wed Apr 27, 2016).

The Rex image has been manipulated therefore (KM’s camera, wrong resolution).

Whether the image of the child itself had been ‘Frankensteined’ is another matter.

by joyce1938 21.11.16 15:37

Wasn't there a time when we thought that the tennis photo was taken one late afternoon after the fathers match? joyce1938

by Guest 21.11.16 15:45

We know where it was taken because of the downward angle.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

And because of the downward angle, any comments about "it looks funny" have to take into account what cameras do to proportion at such angles.

by Doug D 21.11.16 16:32

Tony Cadogan:

‘The Rex image has been manipulated therefore (KM’s camera, wrong resolution).’

Did we ever find out what JT’s camera was, as Rachael claimed it was JT that took the photo, which certainly made more sense than KM's story of having to run back to the apartment to get her camera, in what would have been a forlorn hope that MM would still be holding that magical pose.

by **Nina** 21.11.16 16:43

What has always struck me about that photograph is the total lack of any evidence of other people,not a shadow, not a glimpse of a foot or a hand of her fellow creche children.

by Guest 21.11.16 16:47

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

by **Tony Bennett** 21.11.16 17:10

Tony Cadogan wrote:[PART SNIPPED]

Helpfully, Rex provide the resolution of the image in their possession as 2111 x 1583, and checking the specs of KM’s (“One of my photographs is known around the world…”) alleged camera, Canon PowerShot A620, at https://www.cnet.com/uk/products/canon-powershot-a620/specs/ , one finds that Cannon A620 does not offer such a resolution natively (credit is partly due to ‘Peg’ at [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] Wed Apr 27, 2016).

The Rex image has been manipulated therefore (KM’s camera, wrong resolution).

Whether the image of the child itself had been ‘Frankensteined’ is another matter.

@ Tony Cadogan Many thanks for the investigations you have done and presented here.

Can I clarify please what you mean by the bit in bold above.

Does it mean this: "This photo was definitely taken on a Canon A620 but has been edited in some way before being released to the public"?

If I have got this wrong, please correct what I've said.

Furthermore, how certain can we be (if at all), from the data you've provided, that this photo was definitely taken on a Canon A620?

Or do we not know what camera it was taken on?

Also, I take it there are no data available from the image on either:

(1) the date it was taken, or
(2) the date it was amended/edited.

I think I am also correct in saying that:

A. The three playground photos, clearly taken on the Saturday, are all in the PJ files, but

B. None of the three controversial photos of that week:
* Last Photo
* Make Up Photo (assuming it was that week)
* Tennis Balls Photo...
...are in the PJ files.

by worriedmum 21.11.16 19:49

BlueBag wrote:
Tony Bennett wrote:
worriedmum wrote:To put them in order, we have to decide whereabouts the Tennis Balls Photo fits in to the sequence. If there is a 'sunburn' on Madeleine's wrist, WHEN was she exposed enough to the sun? Bearing in mind the weather pattern and the fact that she was in the creche. It's important to decide where it fits because Gerry and Kate claim the 'Last Photo' was taken on 3rd May. And Madeleine and Gerry look flushed as if it is hot.

3. It is overwhelmingly recognised that the body is not that of Madeleine, mainly on the size and shape of the body, which looks like that of an older girl, and also because of the generally much browner skin and certain marks which loo like bruises and scratches.
I overwhelmingly disagree.

I don't see any issues with the actual photo.

Who took it and when is a different matter.

I think the picture looks odd because the t shirt is on back to front. For me , the issue is when it was taken and therefore how the sequence of photographs works out.

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