Re: If there is ONE last photo.........................

by Lance De Boils 22.12.13 17:45

tigger wrote:
Spaniel wrote:The logical day IMO to wear her new outfit was the Saturday they arrived. There was no kids club that day to get it messed up and they were all dining at the Millenium later.

It was 22 degrees on the 28th April, the pool had to be tried out but too cold to get into so a little paddle as a photo opportunity.

But they'd (k and m) already been in the pool on the day they arrived, which was a cooler day by all accounts.

The best weather that week was 28th and 29th.

I'm inclined to agree with Spaniel, especially as Gerry is wearing the same t-shirt as in the airport bus video.

Unless of course they took very few clothes and they had to wash dry and iron the same top for him to wear again later in the week. How likely is that?

by Guest 22.12.13 18:26

Lance De Boils wrote: [...]

Unless of course they took very few clothes and they had to wash dry and iron the same top for him to wear again later in the week. How likely is that?

***
Very unlikely [as is one toothbrush for a family ...].

Having said that: every time my 2nd husband and I were leaving for holiday, he was packed within 3 minutes. Two t-shirts, two undies, a sweater and some socks. Looking at my luggage, he would propose we'd rather put my wardrobe on wheels and just hook it up to the car big grin

by bobbin 01.01.14 20:52

Lance De Boils wrote:
tigger wrote:
Spaniel wrote:The logical day IMO to wear her new outfit was the Saturday they arrived. There was no kids club that day to get it messed up and they were all dining at the Millenium later.

It was 22 degrees on the 28th April, the pool had to be tried out but too cold to get into so a little paddle as a photo opportunity.

But they'd (k and m) already been in the pool on the day they arrived, which was a cooler day by all accounts.

The best weather that week was 28th and 29th.

I'm inclined to agree with Spaniel, especially as Gerry is wearing the same t-shirt as in the airport bus video.

Unless of course they took very few clothes and they had to wash dry and iron the same top for him to wear again later in the week. How likely is that?

On the current "Holiday Weather" thread, pages 1 + 2 discussing the wind on 3rd May, there are several references to the weather from friends' statements. Accordingly, the sun was only just about trying to come out, clouds clearing a little, by later in the afternoon .
So, there was 'No Hot Weather’ available for the last photo by the pool, at the time stated by Gerry and Kate McCann.

by **PeterMac** 01.01.14 21:59

Bu they also had nine pairs of pyjamas, if we go by the three pairs they took for Madeleine.

by loopzdaloop 02.01.14 0:44

tigger wrote:
saltnpepper wrote:
Portia wrote:
Lostfridge wrote:oh man!. come on peeps. The one in the bedroom may just be another photo taken at the same time! just because we have never seen it doesn't mean there isnt more than one photo taken by the pool that day. Different pic, slightly different angle ....

Little pics hair looks about 10 cms shorter

Gerry McCann said in a recent interview that the last photo was his last best memory of Madeleine...another pic which suggests misuse of a pc

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

I've also never been happy about that strong diagonal line in her neck, not what I expect to see - only when there's excess flesh in the neck.

Can't believe I've never seen this. Thanks everyone. Tigger is spot on, that line on her neck is where the new head has been photoshopped on the old picture!

by canada12 02.01.14 1:23

Watch this thread attract a whole lot of Photoshop experts now :-)
I'm in total agreement with Tigger and loopzdaloop.
There will be people who will now argue that the strands of hair can't be effectively pasted into the picture, but that's not how a good Photoshopper would do it. They'd take a photo of a blonde haired little girl wearing the clothing in the picture, sitting on the edge of the pool, with exactly the background you see. They'd then replace the face and some of the hair around the face with a photo of Madeleine's face, and for good measure possibly pop on a hat to conceal the Photoshopping of the forehead area. They'd keep some of Madeleine's hair, around her face, to ensure a good blend and match with the hair of the stand-in child.

The neck area is difficult to blend in but they've shrouded it in shadows in the hope that it's not too obvious. There is no detail whatsoever, other than that diagonal and completely unnatural line. Also her right shoulder (left side facing us) has no natural curve to it. It just sort of ends.

All speculation of course, and no Photoshopping has ever been proven, though it's been discussed to the point of getting threads locked.

by **PeterMac** 02.01.14 7:53

Anther one which has not been photoshopped.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]" />

by Guest 02.01.14 9:56

When I look at these two images, aside from any possible 'photoshopping' it seems to me in any case that the smaller version of the photo appears to be a shortened flatter version of the other one, or even vice versa, since it is not possible to say whether one was flattened down from the larger version or the longer version was stretched out upwards from a flatter original version. No doubt someone somewhere has the means to actually try and stretch out and flatten the photos to see whether this is possible.

by Guest 02.01.14 10:00

One of the main things that has bugged me about the pool photo (apart from its inherent "weirdness", which seems to pervade a lot of their photos) is the composition. Take Maddie out and everything's perfect - as the doctor said to the doctor.

by Rasputin 02.01.14 10:33

This picture I find really strange , I can't put my finger on it but the perspective of the background just doesn't fit, once again the Madeleine is sitting almost alone , no sign of warmth or love from Gerry , and it has that 70's vibe Clay mentioned previously ....like there is some quality loss as if its a photo of a photo , which shouldn't be necessary this digital day and age ?
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

by bobbin 02.01.14 10:47

loopzdaloop wrote:
tigger wrote:
saltnpepper wrote:
Portia wrote:
Lostfridge wrote:oh man!. come on peeps. The one in the bedroom may just be another photo taken at the same time! just because we have never seen it doesn't mean there isnt more than one photo taken by the pool that day. Different pic, slightly different angle ....

Little pics hair looks about 10 cms shorter

Gerry McCann said in a recent interview that the last photo was his last best memory of Madeleine...another pic which suggests misuse of a pc

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

I've also never been happy about that strong diagonal line in her neck, not what I expect to see - only when there's excess flesh in the neck.

Can't believe I've never seen this. Thanks everyone. Tigger is spot on, that line on her neck is where the new head has been photoshopped on the old picture!

Also, with the head twisted round at such an acute angle for the chin to be so close, next to and slightly above, the shoulder one would see the muscle ridge, of the frontal spur, of the 'sterno-cleido-mastoid', under strict tension, like a strong vertical bar.
Turn your head onto your left shoulder and you'll feel the tight ridge of muscle. Look sideways in the mirror and you'll see it.
There is no evidence whatsoever, in Maddie's neck, of the presence of this essential muscle for this pose 'assigned to' Madeleine.

Image of sterno-cleido-mastoid muscle at:-
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

by **tigger** 02.01.14 14:48

The neck is the same colour as the face, everything else in the neck area is in shadow.

by russiandoll 02.01.14 17:08

a younger looking girl than tennis ball Maddie......not this exact photo but one taken from multiples at the same time as this below ?

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

by Lance De Boils 02.01.14 18:21

Rasputin wrote:This picture I find really strange , I can't put my finger on it but the perspective of the background just doesn't fit, once again the Madeleine is sitting almost alone , no sign of warmth or love from Gerry , and it has that 70's vibe Clay mentioned previously ....like there is some quality loss as if its a photo of a photo , which shouldn't be necessary this digital day and age ?
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

A photo of a photo! Bingo!
[Maybe?]

If someone took a photo of a photoshopped photo.... then surely the resulting image would not show any signs of photoshopping? [I'm referring to the technical side of it, not whether, say, a head looks blatantly 'pasted' on.]

by The Snapper 03.01.14 14:06

If this is a 'new' head, would anyone care to suggest who the body belongs to?

by Lance De Boils 03.01.14 14:51

... a child...? big grin

by The Snapper 03.01.14 15:04

anyone in particular?

by **tigger** 03.01.14 15:24

Since Kate could not even recall the correct colour in her book, since Chatelaine has researched the 2007 collections of Gap and Monsoon, as these items were new and bought by Kate ( allegedly) it is my conviction that the body was that of a child about three years old (not 8 days off 4 yrs) possibly the sub.
If there was a substitute child, smaller than Maddie it would explain the first two out of date photos published rather than recent ones.
I've also always found the title of their documentary syrange: 'Madeleine was here'. Well, where's the proof? No holiday photos, no artwork, conflicting statements of when tennis took place, no pink dress for the dogs to sniff, no trainers.

Why that title?

by suep 03.01.14 15:48

Lance De Boils wrote:
Rasputin wrote:This picture I find really strange , I can't put my finger on it but the perspective of the background just doesn't fit, once again the Madeleine is sitting almost alone , no sign of warmth or love from Gerry , and it has that 70's vibe Clay mentioned previously ....like there is some quality loss as if its a photo of a photo , which shouldn't be necessary this digital day and age ?
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

A photo of a photo! Bingo!
[Maybe?]

If someone took a photo of a photoshopped photo.... then surely the resulting image would not show any signs of photoshopping? [I'm referring to the technical side of it, not whether, say, a head looks blatantly 'pasted' on.]

Does anyone know what that black and white thing is between Madeleine and Gerry's right leg in the photo linked above?

by Guest 03.01.14 15:52

A cat. Madeleine was more red-headed when she was younger.

by suep 03.01.14 15:56

Thanks, Ladyinred.

by Guest 03.01.14 16:49

The Snapper wrote:If this is a 'new' head, would anyone care to suggest who the body belongs to?

I've wondered before if they used a mannequin for some of the photos, hence the need to photoshop in things like hands and faces. And use a wig for the hair. Also explains why there was no DNA and why, if Smithman was Gerry, there was no cadaver scent on him. On the downside, doesn't explain any of the dog's findings. Unless the abduction was actually cover for another, unrelated demise....

I'll stop now before I tie myself in mental knots.

by Guest 03.01.14 18:01

I think it was Russian Doll talked a while back about possible 'same batch' photos. This photo is interesting. Madeleine's hair colour is different and so is the colour of the hair clip, but the position of her eyes are incredibly like the eyes on the Tennis photo.

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

by Guest 03.01.14 19:34

MILLIE wrote:I think it was Russian Doll talked a while back about possible 'same batch' photos. This photo is interesting. Madeleine's hair colour is different and so is the colour of the hair clip, but the position of her eyes are incredibly like the eyes on the Tennis photo.

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

Wow that photo is creepy. The eyes are very clearly ringed, they look they've been drawn on the photo with a biro. It's got that "retro" look about it too. In all honesty I think these ones where she looks a bit more elfin might actually be of Kate.

by Guest 03.01.14 20:36

If you try and put the photo alongside the tennis court photo, ok the heads are at different angles but look at the eyes on the two pics.

by canada12 04.01.14 4:10

How about these two...?
Compare the faces, not the hair.
If you have the ability, save both to your computer and crop each picture so that it only shows her face.
Rotate the top photo about 6 to 8 degrees to the left.
Make each photo the same size.
The eyes are identical, and the rest of her face, including her expresson, is almost identical.

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

by russiandoll 04.01.14 9:36

Any advice please? Can't even do a copy of an image from the forum, am following recent advice rather than a simple copy/paste, to insert the URL and click on insert an image in the reply icons when replying to a post....still getting a link not a picture when I hit preview...I have never had this problem until this week and am frustrated.

by canada12 04.01.14 9:40

I just pasted a link and on either side of it I manually added the words img and /img inside square brackets.

by russiandoll 04.01.14 9:47

russiandoll wrote: a younger looking girl than tennis ball Maddie......not this exact photo but one taken from multiples at the same time as this below ?

https://i.servimg.com/u/f55/18/67/48/80/mirror10.jpg

what I am trying to place side by side in a post so that they can be immediately seen together is the actual image of my earlier post [ crimped hair Maddie] alongside the pool photo........for comparison of the face.

I am unsure where and when the crimped hair photo was taken but it shows a similar aged Maddie to pool photo and a similar facial expression.
Whilst appreciating that we will see similar expressions from the same child in various photos, it is completely normal to see them, I still wonder re the photoshopping if it is possible that a face has been used from an earlier batch.... the crimped hair shot to me shows a sunkissed face and I am wondering if this shot was from an earlier holiday.
The direction Maddie is looking in is also to the left although her eyes are slightly different due to the lighting conditions, indoors and so not narrowed to manage the sunlight

by suep 04.01.14 13:27

Nelly6969 wrote:[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

The symbolism of the rather unusual cross attached to the photo on the left above - which may or may not have been significant for the McCs - is quite interesting. When any of these crosses are used in a religious context, however tenuous, the style is referred to as a St. John's Cross or Maltese Cross.This is sometimes called the Regeneration Cross because it has eight points. Eight symbolises regeneration for many religions, It is the holistic number in Buddhism for the number of steps to end suffering.
The number 8, like the lemniscate symbol for infinity , is a never-ending line. Tracing the shape of the 8 differs from the circle, square, triangle, etc., in that the line crosses itself in the centre. This crossing symbolises death. But the line does not stop there; it carries on into a new life, just as the Christian cross symbolises new life. The eight therefore represents life, death, and rebirth.

Latest topics