[Paine in the Neck]

The second has obviously been photoshopped from the first. You can overlay the wto (in phtoshop, for example) and they are identical. Noone can do that with two images, separately taken.

[Paine in the Neck]

I need sleep...

wto = two

phtoshop = photoshop

[aruanan]

The second has obviously been photoshopped from the first. You can overlay the wto (in phtoshop, for example) and they are identical. Noone can do that with two images, separately taken

Good point. I just did the overlay in PS. So the second, more pixilated version (due to its being about 1/3 the image size of the first), came from the first, having had the fabric background removed. But even if you select the document image and the invert and then fill the background to get rid of the fabric, you don't get the little piece out of the top right fold. In some instances you could get something like that if you select and the contrast is such between the background and the object selected that selection doesn't include the entire object selected, but not in this case.

If intentionally done to try to make it look older, it was stupid. There's no reason that a >40 year old document has to look tattered to be genuine. Besides, there is damage visible in folds anyway on the image with the fabric background.