Posted on 02/25/2006 7:31:48 AM PST by george76
MIA Peter Arnett magically appears in Vietnam journo reunion pic
In its December 2005 issue, Vanity Fair magazine manipulated a photograph to make it appear that veteran journalist Peter Arnett was among a group of war correspondents gathered on a teeming Ho Chi Minh City street during a reunion of the Vietnam press corps.
In fact, according to a source familiar with the photo shoot, Arnett was not present when photographer Jonas Karlsson shot a group portrait of eight journalists last April.
Instead, the former CNN star (who covered the war for the Associated Press) was subsequently photographed solo and grafted--apparently through the magic of Photoshop--onto the group picture.
Arnett, who attended part of the Vietnam reunion, which coincided with the 30th anniversary of the war's end, is seen at the far left of the Vanity Fair photo. His space had actually been occupied during the group session by curious Vietnamese passersby.
A photo caption claims that Arnett and the other reporters were "photographed outside their old hangout the Givral Café on April 29, 2005."
Well, eight of nine ain't bad. Usually, when publications combine images into a single picture, the resulting photo is described as a composite.
The Vanity Fair byline reads, "Photograph By Jonas Karlsson."
The photo on the far right is a distinct improvement.
In the old Soviet Union, commies that fell out of favor were removed from photos. It only makes sense to add faithful commies to reunion photos.
One can only imagine what the KGB could have accomplished with Photoshop.
She only wishes she looked that good. LOL!
The scene was shot with a wide angle lens. It has what's called "barrel distortion". (As opposed to pincushion distortion.) Distortion in an image is defined as mapping errors between the object and the image. A rectangle in the object space should map to the image space as a rectangle. When its edges bow outward, as the do with a wide angle lens, the image has barrel distortion. If they bow inward, it's pincushion distortion. Arnett, if he were really there, can be thought of as the edge of that rectangle. He should appear bowed outward, just as the fellow on the other side of the scene is. Instead, his image is mapped out along a vertical line.
So, unless Arnett was feeling particularly swishy that night, there's no way he could have been present for the photo.
"unless Arnett was feeling particularly swishy that night..."
Isn't Arnett always swishy ?
ROFL! LMAO! I've got my lunch (boiled chicken pot pie) on my monitor! Best laugh I've had all week!
I meant more than usual.
"I knew it was fake the minute I didn't see Jane Fonda and Effin Kerry."
Thanks for the best laugh of the day!
"The picture was taken at night. I don't see high contrast shadows like you would with flash photograpy. I would'nt be suprized if Peter wasn't the only on photoshopped."
The whole picture looks like it has been photoshopped to put in a lot of people. It looks like a shot in a cheap movie where an actor or actors is or standing in front of a large photo or image of mountains or some other scene.
CBS just got caught doing the same thing. They were running one of their periodic ultra-lib "it's awful they put this fine young criminal in prison, when he should be out voting for Democrats with us" stories. They showed the front page of a newspaper with the guy's picture, but they photoshopped his orange Dr Denton Felon Special Jumpsuit into a suit and tie.
http://editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1002074141&imw=Y
I realize that will surprise everyone who expects CBS to set the standard in forthright... I'm sorry, I can't continue, I'm all choked up.
d.o.l.
Criminal Number 18F
...'photoshoping' ping
Anti-Arnett Sarcasm Torpedo ARMED. FIRE!!
I read this sentence too quickly and almost got my hopes up. ;-)
I remember an issue of "Bazaar" which I did a column on, relabelling it "Bizarre". The issue had an article written by a woman who had an incestuous relationship with her father - written approvingly, or course. No word on what the mother thought.
it is amazing isn't it?
fembot rags keeping the sistas down.....for advertising dollars..lol
Well, at least they didn't have Arnett nude on the cover. |
Some people we do not want to see nude, ever.
outside, indeed.
well, what to say about this...it's like, "the straw" for me. You know, the one that might cause me launch off on a tirade about the children of the sixties now running the world...the childred on moral relativity...the Generation of Fraud...if this is their world, what will the world of their children be like...
but I'm not gonna go there...
Martin, have you considered sending this to Helen so she can use it as a publicity still? It's the best photo I've seen of her yet!
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.