If John Kerry Becomes President, this foot will never walk the earth...

Crushelits ^ | October 21, 2004 | Crushelits

[Polybius]

It is my understanding that this photo is real. My brother's wife sent me the picture. and she had the following in her email message: The most amazing and awe inspiring picture!!

Snopes.com states that the photo has been making Internet rounds since August.

I have been performing OB ultrasounds for 20 years.

It's fake. There's absolutely no doubt about it.

It is certainly true the you often see the impression of a fetal leg, head, rump, etc. on the mother's belly. However, such an impression will look like a rounded bump.

Look at the detail on that foot. Look at how every toe stands out.

In order for the photo to be real, the uterine muscle that will expell the baby during the birth process would have to be tissue paper thin, the muscle of the abdominal wall would have to be tissue paper thin and the subcutaneous fat would have to be tissue paper thin.

It's PhotoShop.

[backslacker]

Read about little sam armas and his "hand of hope."

http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1012548/posts

"It was the 'hand of hope,' a photo of an unborn baby's hand, that made its way around the world within days of appearing in USA Today. Taken by Michael Clancy, the color photo showed Samuel's tiny hand grasping a surgeon's finger during in utero surgery."

[djf]

But there should be no copyright owner. If it's a lie, how can there be a copyright owner?

[crushelits]

Hi, but did you see the copyright symbol anywhere?

[steve-b]

If it's a lie, how can there be a copyright owner?

WTF? The person who Photoshopped it is the copyright owner, obviously (though he'd also need permission from the owners of the original images to publish).

[Dawgreg]

I'm with you blondee.........I don't think it's real myself, but what a great campaign poster for the pro-life crowd.

[spinestein]

As a part time professional photographer, I have to know the basics of copyright law. Legally the owner of the negatives is the copyright owner, unless under special contract agreeing to otherwise. If the owner of the negatives is also the one who edited the picture, then you have to get his permission. If the picture editor did it without the owner's consent, then the picture cannot be used for commercial purposes without copyright infringement.