Skip to main content

View Diary: Quick one: photos of signs real? (72 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Here's more: (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Yellow Canary

    Two photos of the same guy carrying the same sign, but the text on the sign is different in each photo.  Both of these are from diaries currently on the rec list.  Now, maybe the sign had two sides with different messages on each side, but if you look at the first photo, you can see the stick that the sign is attached to through the paper, which would suggest that there's only one side.  Anyway, I could be wrong, but my guess is that the second one was photoshopped.  

    Photobucket

    Photobucket

    •  What makes you think (7+ / 0-)

      That that's the "same guy" carrying the "same sign"?  The guy in the first picture is barely visible -- all you can see is a sleeve.

    •  That's not the same sign. (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      WIds, Nina, citizenx, Gay In Maine

      The dimensions are different.  Both were probably made together though.

      "By God, the drugs must be in her underpants." - U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia

      by stunzeed on Wed Aug 05, 2009 at 06:57:15 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  No, I think it's the same sign. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Yellow Canary

        The dimensions being different means nothing, since that's probably part of the photoshop job.  

        The thing is, the two pictures were taken from the same angle and you've got, from left to right: a guy with a white t-shirt and sunglasses, a woman with blondish hair and a tan hooded shirt, another guy in a white t-shirt wearing a cap ... and on the left side a guy in a tucked-in black t-shirt, ALL standing in the exact same spot relative to the guy holding the sign.

        So, unless the guy holding the sign in one photo left the premises and was then replaced by another guy with an almost identical sign, wearing the same clothes, to stand in the exact same spot with the exact same posture ... then they're the same sign, and one has been photoshopped.  

        •  The dimensions matter. (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Nina, Yellow Canary

          The dimensions being different means nothing, since that's probably part of the photoshop job.

          If you're suggesting (as most are) that the second photo is the doctored one, then the sign must have been cropped at the top.  If so, the person must have simulated sky and distant tree branches behind it.  Any idea how difficult that is?

          "By God, the drugs must be in her underpants." - U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia

          by stunzeed on Wed Aug 05, 2009 at 07:30:17 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Not so difficult, really. (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Yellow Canary, stunzeed

            Just widen the sign.

            Actually, the fact that the perspective on the second sign is perfectly flat, as if the camera were facing it head on, could be evidence that someone just superimposed a fake sign over the real one, with different perspective and different dimensions.

            I'm not saying that this is what was done, but I am saying that it wouldn't be difficult.

            Basically, I'm pretty convinced that the guy holding the sign in both photos is the same guy.  I suppose it's possible, as you suggest, that he swapped signs with someone else between the time the two photographs were taken, although that seems like a bit of a stretch.  Given the fact that there are already a bunch of photoshopped pics of teabagger signs floating around out there, I think there's a reasonable probability that this is one of them, given what I'm seeing.

            Now, as to why people are out there photoshopping teabagger signs, I have no idea.  I mean, the real thing is batshit-crazy enough without the "enhancement," so it seems pointless.  Not to mention self-defeating, since it makes us all look dishonest.

        •  No. Neither photo has been 'shopped. Both (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          WIds, Nina, Yellow Canary

          are natural.

          Where is the woman in the pink jacket in the second picture? I'll tell you where. She moved on, much like the person holding the sign in the first picture and the man in the grey jacket obscuring him.
          NB. the relative positions of the red and white flags. There appears to be a movement of the crowd from left to right. Although, not everyone is moving. Sort of what you expect, really.

          These are two pictures in a series, in which the photographer is interested in signs. The photographer (as already noted) has changed his/her position slightly.

          I can do magic. If you want miracles, well... that's gonna take a little longer.

          by Clive all hat no horse Rodeo on Wed Aug 05, 2009 at 08:08:57 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  aspect ratio is different (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Yellow Canary

      And I'm a little concerned about the mismatched perspective on the second sign.  It could be the Photoshop job, maybe.  

      If it came from the same source as the first one (a different photo to be sure), then someone WIDENED the sign.

      I'm not sure these are from the same source, actually.

      Happy little moron, Lucky little man.
      I wish I was a moron, MY GOD, Perhaps I am!
      -Spike Milligan

      by polecat on Wed Aug 05, 2009 at 07:20:13 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  The "white slavery" one is legit. (0+ / 0-)

      It was taken in Madison, WI, by Jesse Russell, and posted here the next day.  I got my version of the image from Huffington Post.

      And I believe you're actually looking at a two-sided sign, with offensive messages on both sides.  But neither was photoshopped.

      "When those windmills start to chop people up, tilting at them may not only be rational, but may become a necessity." -arodb

      by JR on Wed Aug 05, 2009 at 11:24:52 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  You could always just ask the photographer... (0+ / 0-)

      "When those windmills start to chop people up, tilting at them may not only be rational, but may become a necessity." -arodb

      by JR on Wed Aug 05, 2009 at 02:58:33 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site