'The Last Photo': The key questions

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
the photo on the right???????????????????????????????????????????????????
and is she the tennis girl ? and look at her arm size......creepy
sophie murat also looks like madeleine

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

Background2may2010 newPhoto ??????????????????????????

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
Murat with daughter Sophie

@C. Edwards

Are you able to "blow up" the image in Gerry's sunglasses and say whether these were photoshopped onto Gerry's face.

Marian wrote:Rosa: no I don't think that the hats are the same. The one at the tennis court looks a darker shade of pink and when I enlarged it to 400% (the largest I can do) I could see that it has some kind of pattern on it which the other one does not.

i think though with editing etc the pattern can be removed shade changed plus the tennis pic hat has the front folded up all possible

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
DELIGHT: With pink shoes


[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
SMILES: Maddie on her bike


[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
SO PRETTY: In fairy outfit


[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.] i dont know what to think of all these different looking maddies

Angelique wrote:@C. Edwards

Are you able to "blow up" the image in Gerry's sunglasses and say whether these were photoshopped onto Gerry's face.

Not to show any detail, no. There are absolutely no signs of tampering with that (or any other) area of the picture that I can see. I'm aware there is debate about the 90 degree rotation of the reflection in the glasses, but if these are polarised sunglasses where the filter, from my limited understanding, is offset to 90 degrees to reduce polarised light (helps to cut glare from water reflection) then I wouldn't be surprised to see some kind of effect on the reflected image too. I'm not a scientist, however, but I suppose if anyone has a pair of good quality polarised glasses available it would be easy enough to test!

Again, looking in close detail at the area of the sunglasses, there is NO sign of phtoshopping. The large image I linked to a page back IS photoshopped as it has some extra "exif" data added (see below) but that doesn't mean the image has been altered and, as I said before, if this has been photoshopped to add/remove anyone then it's brilliantly done and someone that good would NOT make a stupid error in 90 degree reflection rotation!

*** Marker: APP13 (xFFED) ***
OFFSET: 0x00002482
length = 732
Identifier = [Photoshop 3.0]
8BIM: [0x0404] Name=[] Len=[0x02C0]
IPTC [0x1C02:005] Object Name = [CORRECTION-PORTUGAL-BRITAIN-CRIME]
IPTC [0x1C02:015] Category = [CLJ]
IPTC [0x1C02:020] SuppCategory = [Crime]
IPTC [0x1C02:040] Special Instructions = [CORRECTING SOURCE IN IPCT]
IPTC [0x1C02:055] DateCreated = [20070524]
IPTC [0x1C02:060] TimeCreated = [152129+0000]
IPTC [0x1C02:085] By-line Title = [HO]
IPTC [0x1C02:090] City = [Lagos]
IPTC [0x1C02:100] CountryCode = [PRT]
IPTC [0x1C02:101] CountryName = [Portugal]
IPTC [0x1C02:103] OriginalTransmissionRef = [POR01]
IPTC [0x1C02:105] Headline = [-]
IPTC [0x1C02:110] Credit = [AFP]
IPTC [0x1C02:115] Source = [FAMILY HANDOUT]
IPTC [0x1C02:116] CopyrightNotice = [ImageForum]
IPTC [0x1C02:120] Caption-Abstract = [CORRECTING SOURCE IN IPCT:
Picture released by the McCann family 24 May 2007 and was taken 03 May 2007, the same day Madeleine McCann (R) went missing from the family's holiday apartment in the southern Algarve region. The photo also shows Madeleine's father Gerry and sister Amelie. Madeleine was abducted as she slept with her brother and sister in a hotel apartment at the Ocean Club Resort while her parents dined at a nearby restaurant. AFP PHOTO/HO]
IPTC [0x1C02:122] ? size=3
IPTC [0x1C02:135] LanguageID = [EN]
IPTC [0x1C02:243] ? size=10

Hello again C Edwards, wish I didn't have to be quite so formal in addressing you! Is it possible for you to comment with your experience as to whether the girl by the poolside is the same as the one at the tennis court? Considering that they were supposedly taken within a day or two of each other, they look like different girls.

Marian wrote:Hello again C Edwards, wish I didn't have to be quite so formal in addressing you! Is it possible for you to comment with your experience as to whether the girl by the poolside is the same as the one at the tennis court? Considering that they were supposedly taken within a day or two of each other, they look like different girls.

Hi Marian

I'm not aware I have expertise in saying if it's the same girl in different pictures! That's not a technical issue really. Knowing how different my own girls can look from picture to picture, I don't see how it's easy to identify the children in the pictures you're referring to, sorry.

I think Rosa asked about how police look at pictures and whether layers can be stripped off. The simple answer is "no" for standard "jpg" type images as they don't contain layer information. You can see some basic image information in the files but this can be manipulated and edited anyway, so it's no indicator as to whether an image is original or not. There is no "easy" way to see if an image has been manipulated, it's a matter of looking at the background sort of "pattern" visible in the image and see if that is different around some areas, but it's by no means infallible.

C.Edwards
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
Just a quick question before i log off
can you tell me why in image edit do they have invert option and how does the strange effect help?
you are a busy man with all our questions but many thanks for all the info

ROSA wrote:C.Edwards
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
Just a quick question before i log off
can you tell me why in image edit do they have invert option and how does the strange effect help?
you are a busy man with all our questions but many thanks for all the info

It's not the strangest effect out there! It is basically just a way of quickly "flipping" the pixel colour values from one state to another. It sort of creates a "negative" type version of the image, but it wouldn't be an exact match of a colour negative of a picture due to slight differences in the way the red or orange channel is handled from memory. I can't really give you a simple answer, to be honest. Why would anyone want to rotate, resize, colourise, blur, sharpen, mirror, create swirl effects and many other obscure things you can do in photoshop...? "because they can" and "it creates interesting effects" normally!

If you have a specific question relating to a particular image then I'll try and answer in the contect of that particular question?

MANY THANKS C.Edwards
IM LEARNING HEAPS
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

i found this take a look at full size
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

C.Edwards

Many thanks for your reply - although I don't understand all the information you provided - I will accept your conclusion.

@ROSA - re: Tennis court pics.

Not sure what's going on with this? Is the implication that the picture of Madeleine with the balls can't have been from the Ocean Club as the courts aren't the same? I don't really follow that from those pictures. They both look the same to me, just with different light causing the surface to look different, maybe? I was always under the impression from the videos I'd seen that the Ocean Club courts were the standard hard surface so I've no idea why someone has captioned the picture you posted as "gravel" and "generic grass" in different shots.

I do know (from experience playing there) that Rothley Tennis Club has the same hard court surface and colours but as to whether the picture of Madeleine with the balls was taken there or at the Ocean Club, I've no idea!

Edited to add a picture from the Ocean Club:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

I'm no expert, but I can guarantee you that that is not a gravel surround!

i will get more info on the reason behind the photo i think it has something to with location yes
The Tennis photo beleived to be the real last photo of Madeleine
Gerry Mccann went back to his home in England 3 weeks after Madeleines disappearance it was only then that the pool photo of Madeleine was given to police and became the last photo -many suspiscions are raised about that claim

Why did it take 3 weeks to hand over such a vital important photo -you would think that the most important last photo ever taken of her would be handed over immediately

Why is it suddenly the last photo (pretty and more marketable?)

Madeleine looks younger sweeter and completley different from the poor older looking girl in the tennis photo

Thanks again i read your post you say you have played at Rothley Tennis Club and it has the same hard court surface and colours i woudn't be surprised if the photo was taken there at the club in Rothley

Could you please take a look at the photo of Madeleine with the icecream seems like a real weird one
:flower:

i found this info about this photo 2 tennis courts[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

---

See the photos and judge for yourself, as the court that Gerry is standing next to in the Ocean Club hotel complex the surface is green tarmac with a pink gravel border, the type used in public parks and hotels because it's pretty cheap, whereas the photo inlay of Madeleine standing on the said same tennis court in the Ocean Club hotel complex, the surface is Leisuretex green court and pink border, the type used in professional matchplay leasure centers in the UK.

There's also a watermark on the Madeleine tennis court photo on the green Leasuretex edge, which indicates that just priro to the photo being taken there was a shower of rain, you can just see the rain watermark just along the white line on the green Leasuretex, which prove's this photo of Madeleine was taken in the UK around April and not Portugal, as indicated by the time the McCann's say this photo was taken at the Ocean Club, it was the brightest time of the day in Portugal. But the photo of Madeleine is not that bright and sunny as compared with the photo of Gerry taken a year later at the same time of day as the Madeleine photo, the difference in brightness of the sun is a hell of a lot different between the two photos, and could not possibly be the same global location between both photos.

So not only are these two tennis courts two entirely different tennis courts, the locations of each tennis court are entirely different globally also, which proves that Madeleine could not possibly have had her photo taken on the Ocean Club tennis courts with Gerry, Jez Wilkins and his girl friend Bridget O'Donnell, on or prior to the 3rd May 2007 as stated by the McCann's!

Are the McCann's playing a game of 'Much ado about nothing', because I say the McCann's Madeleine never existed, and Charity out of Sympathy is the game the McCann's are playing is just to generate profit out of the public!

---

i agree with the writer it does seem like a suspicious image as with everyhing else about this case no surprises there

I'm all for people having opinions and I respect anyone's right to express those opinions, but equally I have the right to disagree and with some of the above, I have to disagree. The tennis court thing is a bit of ropey logic to me. Firstly the photo the person claims is showing the ocean club courts as having pink gravel surround is, in my opinion (and based on other pictures and video of the ocean club courts) clearly wrong. It's the same hard rubber cement type that madeleine is pictured standing on with the tennis balls. Using the logic that the "ball" photo shows recent rain as not being in portugal is baloney! It rains in portugal too, even if a light shower. Equally they may have used sprinklers if the weather was dry. Comparing the light is ridiculous as it's taken from a different angle and this affects the perception of light as well.

In the ball picture, Madeleine is dressed in definitively "holiday" clothes and I doubt that you'd do that in England in April much (this April was exceptional) so I have little doubt it was taken in PDL and on that tennis court at the ocean club.

The "neck" photo is just daft logic too, I'm afraid. If you process any photo from the original (left) to the sort on the right it will show all sorts of odd shadows and marks as the colours and contrast are being oversaturated.

The McCanns and their friends may be guilty of all sorts of things (and clearly know a lot more than they're letting on) but the whole "Madeleine never existed" line is, in my opinion of course, a load of rubbish!

Tony Bennett wrote:1. Why was that 'last photo' of Madeleine not available on Thursday 3 May 2007?

2. Why did it take a visit to England by Dr Gerald McCann to produce it?

3. Was it really taken at 1.29pm/2.29pm on Thursday 3 May?

4. Who took it?

5. Was it photoshopped, by either Dr Gerald McCann and Amelie, or Madeleine, being 'photoshopped in' to an existing photograph?

6. What is the evidence that the photo was 'photoshopped'?

__________

Hi, Tony and any who read this - I am new to this forum but not unfamiliar with the case. I have no interest in villifying the McCanns, but I do hope, for Madeleine's sake, and for the sake of all her family, that the truth will one day be established with regard to how she was lost.

I have not read all this topic so apologies if a similar opinion has already been posted. I'd like to re-offer my much earlier opinion that the photo has been photoshopped, with particular reference to the pink elastic band in Madeleine's hair. Opened in Photoshop, PaintShop Pro or a similar image editing program, viewed full size and magnified x 5, it appears the pink band and a short length of hair beneath has been cut and pasted into the photograph. The half inch or so of hair below the band is a slightly different shade, and the 'cut and paste' line is quite visible. Just as apparent, the band is not attached to any hair above, giving the impression that it is an addition rather than part of the original image.

If I recall correctly, there was an occasion upon which Kate McCann recounted 'carefully removing a bead from Madeleine's hair' on the evening of the abduction. It may or may not be significant - only those closely involved in the investigation will know if there was any issue surrounding a hair bead. I recognise that there is no way of knowing by whom the photo may have been edited, or even if it is the original photograph as released by Gerry McCann - it may have been edited since. In other circumstances one could just think it was a photoshop-handy parent improving the family snaps, but one wouldn't expect any cosmetic alterations to be made to the last known photo of a missing child. What reason, if any, could there be, for anyone to edit in a hair band/bead? Personally, I would not have thought to look that closely if Kate McCann had not mentioned a hair bead.

There are many 'red herrings' in the case and perhaps this is just another, but as it is at least a little strange, I am putting it out there.

__

In my opinion the sunglasses have not been added in - close viewing shows perfect shadows which look original to the print; if they are not original, then such an addition would be far beyond the photoshopping skills of whoever did the hair band/bead. The poster who is desperately manipulating photos of Madeleine to make her appear like an abused child should just acknowledge that he/she is desperately manipulating photos of Madeleine.

C.Edwards wrote: The McCanns and their friends may be guilty of all sorts of things (and clearly know a lot more than they're letting on) but the whole "Madeleine never existed" line is, in my opinion of course, a load of rubbish!

Sniffer dog evidence said it all she existed but a cover-up hides so many things and many of the photos i find more than strange

Hilary wrote:I'd like to re-offer my much earlier opinion that the photo has been photoshopped, with particular reference to the pink elastic band in Madeleine's hair. Opened in Photoshop, PaintShop Pro or a similar image editing program, viewed full size and magnified x 5, it appears the pink band and a short length of hair beneath has been cut and pasted into the photograph. The half inch or so of hair below the band is a slightly different shade, and the 'cut and paste' line is quite visible. Just as apparent, the band is not attached to any hair above, giving the impression that it is an addition rather than part of the original image

Hi Hilary. I'm pretty new to this forum too. I'm afraid I completely disagree with you. I don't know what you're looking at (although it may be the small strand of hair that intersects the bunch of hair below the band?) to say there's a clear cut & paste line as there quite clearly isn't. The hair band and the rest of the photo as far as I can tell are untouched. I'm not a forensic expert, but I'm pretty handy with photoshop and with spotting fakes. The interplay of light caused by the hat and angle of light is causing confusion in this I think, but I'd stake a lot of money on that being completely untouched. I can very clearly see where the elastic is attached. No-one attempting that level of deception would make that simple a mistake. There is plenty of other stuff to focus on with the whole Team McCann story, but this photo (and none of those I've yet seen) are worthy of such analysis as people are seeing things that aren't there, in my opinion.

HIllary

Having looked at the very large picture of the "pool group" is it possible that you are seeing something else. The hair looks distorted above from the bead because its holding the hair in a small plait. It does look odd but that's what the bead is for. Have another look.

Hilary

Hilary wrote:

Tony Bennett wrote:1. Why was that 'last photo' of Madeleine not available on Thursday 3 May 2007?

2. Why did it take a visit to England by Dr Gerald McCann to produce it?

3. Was it really taken at 1.29pm/2.29pm on Thursday 3 May?

4. Who took it?

5. Was it photoshopped, by either Dr Gerald McCann and Amelie, or Madeleine, being 'photoshopped in' to an existing photograph?

6. What is the evidence that the photo was 'photoshopped'?

__________

Hi, Tony and any who read this - I am new to this forum but not unfamiliar with the case. I have no interest in villifying the McCanns, but I do hope, for Madeleine's sake, and for the sake of all her family, that the truth will one day be established with regard to how she was lost.

I have not read all this topic so apologies if a similar opinion has already been posted. I'd like to re-offer my much earlier opinion that the photo has been photoshopped, with particular reference to the pink elastic band in Madeleine's hair. Opened in Photoshop, PaintShop Pro or a similar image editing program, viewed full size and magnified x 5, it appears the pink band and a short length of hair beneath has been cut and pasted into the photograph. The half inch or so of hair below the band is a slightly different shade, and the 'cut and paste' line is quite visible. Just as apparent, the band is not attached to any hair above, giving the impression that it is an addition rather than part of the original image.

If I recall correctly, there was an occasion upon which Kate McCann recounted 'carefully removing a bead from Madeleine's hair' on the evening of the abduction. It may or may not be significant - only those closely involved in the investigation will know if there was any issue surrounding a hair bead. I recognise that there is no way of knowing by whom the photo may have been edited, or even if it is the original photograph as released by Gerry McCann - it may have been edited since. In other circumstances one could just think it was a photoshop-handy parent improving the family snaps, but one wouldn't expect any cosmetic alterations to be made to the last known photo of a missing child. What reason, if any, could there be, for anyone to edit in a hair band/bead? Personally, I would not have thought to look that closely if Kate McCann had not mentioned a hair bead.

There are many 'red herrings' in the case and perhaps this is just another, but as it is at least a little strange, I am putting it out there.

__

In my opinion the sunglasses have not been added in - close viewing shows perfect shadows which look original to the print; if they are not original, then such an addition would be far beyond the photoshopping skills of whoever did the hair band/bead. The poster who is desperately manipulating photos of Madeleine to make her appear like an abused child should just acknowledge that he/she is desperately manipulating photos of Madeleine.

The Poster? these photos are all over the web you will see some of these photos in the police police files it doesn't mean the police or anyone else is manipulating them it means they have been investigated

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

This photo a happy family enjoying a hot sunny day at the resort pool maybe Kate took the photo her son Sean might be with her the other families the tapas 7 might be near the pool with their children

Location is important here the Ocean Club complex is a busy place in the resort town of Praia Da Luz
was this scene witnessed by anyone at all because you would expect many other people to be there also enjoying the pool families young people old people all sorts of passers by and maybe some staff also this is where the creche timetable might be useful to give a idea of what times the family was together