Posted on 06/07/2011 6:45:09 PM PDT by conservativegramma
Typeface analysis shows images come from different machines
The online image of a Hawaiian "Certificate of Live Birth" was trumpeted by the White House when it was released on April 27 as "proof positive" that Barack Obama was born in Hawaii.
Now an expert in typefaces and typography says it sure was "proof," but not of what the White House would have wanted.
Paul Irey, a retired professional typographer with 50 years experience in his business, has says an analysis of the typefaces used in the Barack Obama's long-form birth certificate that the White House released on April 27 reveals it absolutely to be a forgery.
"My analysis proves beyond a doubt that it would be impossible for the different letters that appear in the Obama birth certificate to have been typed by one typewriter," Irey told WND.
"Typewriters in 1961 could not change the size and shape of a letter on the fly like that," he said. "This document is definitely a forgery."
Irey acknowledges that an IBM Selectric typewriter could have produced different typefaces in a given document, but only if the Selectric ball was changed every time a different typeface letter was struck which would be unlikely to have been done to produce the word "Student," for example, that had two different styles of the lower case "t."
(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...
I have? Name one.
But you're going to get them to convict him on bowing to the King of Saudi Arabia or ordering Boeing out of Governor Haley's state. LOLOL
It's late, and I won't do the 1's, but I copied the first of the three blank boxes, pasted it onto a new transparent layer, nudged the copied and pasted first box over the second box with the move tool, lowered the opacity of the top layer so I could see better compared to the layer below if they matched. Totally identical. Did it twice to make sure.
I didn't post the examples. UnwashedPeasant did. I just commented on the post.
Sorry, you posted that to UnwashedPeasant not me. The rest of my post to both of you is as I said.
If they were identical, the "RGB" or "CMYK" composition of each pixel would also be identical. It clearly is not.
Choose a pixel. For example, upper right corner pixel. Use your eyedropper tool (point sample) with the color picker window open. Compare the upper right corner pixel of each "1". They're different colors. Thus, they are not "identical".
There are other visible differences as well. Minor, but they're there.
Let me chime in here from my long ago years as a typographer (and by the way I knew Irey and his company).
Proportional spacing accounts for the difference in space that each character occupies on a horizontal line in a typeset line. For example, the character M, which is the widest character is most fonts (along with W), takes up the most space, and would be allocated, in one system, 18 units (an EM space), the maximum. Now the letter "i" as the narrowest in the font, would be perhaps 3 or 4 units wide.
Proportional spacing was not a common feature in typewriters, where all characters were given equal amounts of space in early typewriters. In later years, and with the IBM Selectric series' use of the ball element, limited proportional spacing was available. Proportional spacing is characteristic of typography, rather than common office typewriters. I make the distinction because IBM had a series of typewriters called Composers, which in some ways emulated typography in a limited manner.
Numbers by the way, are traditionally all the same width, or else you could never create columns of numbers that aligned. There are a few fonts where the numbers have different widths, but those font designers have since been severely reprimanded.
Kerning, on the other hand, takes into account the way characters fit together in a manner that is pleasing to the eye. For example, an upper case "W" and a lower case "e" would be kerned, with the "e" sitting nicely under the serif and stroke of the "W", making them easier to read.
I hope this helps.
No sarc tag needed.
You just don’t know what you’re talking about.
Your crap is becoming stinky. Do you really believe that if criminal acts are proven to the satisfaction of a majority of American voters that the democraps and republicant’s would not impeach and remove your bastard? Can’t axelgreasy come up with better talking points for you people?
How about the worst economy since the Great Depression? How about overt attempts by his administration to take over private enterprises and use american tax dollars to pick winners and losers? How about trying to stop a private company from choosing where it will set up shop? What about shoving a non-constitutional mandate down the throats of every American?
And we want to waste time on parsing the definition of “Native Born?”
Thank you for your efforts in that!
Don’t let ‘em get to you.
They are doing what they believe is right.
There’s a difference between being an enemy, and someone who is blind.
Good observation, but one doesn't have to post on a matter to be interested in it.
Some folks only get involved where there's controversy. And there's not much controversy about the sorry state of the economy, I'm afraid.
Why don’t you address your questions to the guys at Langley.
Although it was far fetched to believe that someone with access to Hiss' original typewriter would even think to create a different one with the same microscopic characteristics in the typed text.
Still, it could be done just no one could think of a single reason why it would be done ~ particularly since Hiss had not yet been caught!
Now, does that mean they changed typewriters in the middle of a word? Probably not, but they did change the location where certain items were typed.
Irey would need to demonstrate that everything typed at the BOH office, including other forms typed at the same time (they exist), do not show that characteristic.
Throughout this particular debate I've assumed both machines were electric typewriters. However, the typewriter at the hospital in the Birthing Center may have been a manual. In that case you would EXPECT differences to occur in typing due to the typist pressing the keys with different pressure ~ particularly if the typist's primary job was not, for example, typing, but, instead carrying babys around.
Maybe Irey has done nothing but prove the nature of the environment and the type of typewriter used (manual vs. electric).
Irey's examination shows many beaucoup "a" impressions that he thinks are different enough for us to be interested in. Lo and Behold, the "a" on the keyboard is pressed by the little finger on the lefthand and that's usually the weakest carpel in the bunch.
That means Irey's discovery is highly probable if one of the typewriters used to prepare the document was a manual!
There's nothing new in any of this.
I find it odd.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.