I have the same concerns I had with the Polarik(sp?) analysis. Many of the things some are looking at, such as image artifacts, etc are not the best to use and can actually lead you to a false conclusion when you are dealing with an image of an image. In this case, this is supposedly a copy of a document > scanned > uploaded. That is three layers of ‘processing’ through computer programs that can add in these artifacts or other oddities. Those kind of ‘proofs’ only really work on an original, not a copy of a copy of a copy.
If you want to debunk this, focus on factual issues or things like the infamous “Buckhead” discovery regarding fonts that aren’t correct (non existent for the time, etc).
Playing around in Photoshop or Illustrator only reveal oddities that may have been put there though the multiple scanning and copying processes.
Sometimes. Here though the theory is it's only been compressed twice. Once by the original digitization, then again by whatever setting the pdf converter/printer had.
As someone who makes their living using graphic applications, I find most of these "fake doc" threads humorously entertaining......
What these people are saying is if you scan a piece of paper into Adobe Acrobat, to create a pdf from the image, it will create a single image, kind of like a polaroid photograph.
Here, Obama claimed this is a scan of his long form. Yet when you open it in Illustrator or Photoshop, or Preflight it on Acrobat Pro, you see this is a layered image.
When you “Photoshop” an image, you lay down a base layer, Kind of like a single polaroid. When you add stuff to it, it’s like taking a snippet of another photo and laying it on top of the polaroid. The polaroid is still underneath. After you are done altering the image, what you have is a digital version of a polaroid photo with a bunch of snippets taped on top of it. You can later remove a snippet, hide it, or alter it alone, without altering the rest of the image.
When you open the file in a program, it will show this, and this BC image does. Amazingly amatuerish, and almost would reek of setting up some type of ambush, if it wasn’t so stupid.
What is signifigant here is that somebody scanned Obama’s Long form, took some snippets from it, and created a new BC from them, and it is easy to see this, digitally. When you open the file in the image editor, you can actually move the snippets around to different places, and re-edit it. If this was simply a scanned image, with a single layer, that wouldn’t be possible.
Obama may still be hiding some piece of information on the long form. He pulled the minimum needed to create this one, and excluded whatever embarrasses him. Of this is a phoney, but it would seem they’d get somebody smarter to do a phoney BC.
Or, some genius might have just transfered the long-form’s data to a photoshoped image en toto, to make it all look better, but why he would do that, instead of just releasing a simple unaltered scan of the original is beyond me.
As with everything Obama, it all is just puzzling.