Reuters Doctoring Photos from Beirut? [photo inside]

Little Green Footballs ^ | 8-5-2006

[Man50D]

Even a picture isn't worth a thousand words anymore, especially if its from the MSM.

I can't help but wonder why we continue to refer to them as the main stream media instead of accurately referring to them as the socialist/communist media?

[MAexile]

The smoke on the left looks very "odd". But someone could come with an off the wall explanation for it's appearance.

However the smoke on the center right shows a similar pattern, so it looks like doctoring to me.

[Dallas59]

You beat me to it...

[Mygirlsmom]

Wow, I'm a Photoshop amateur, and even I could do better than that!!!

[saquin]

Definitely looks to me like someone using the Photoshop clone stamp. You can tell that the rounded portion of smoke was copied from the left side of the smoke plume and repeatedly stamped but when they copied it they caught a little of the light colored sky to the left and that was repeated in each stamp. It's clear as day. Each circular portion of smoke, bounded by the lighter color on the left, is identical in size and shape. There's no way that's natural.

[dighton]

Here ya go.

This is the image hotlinked at LGF.

[SWAMPSNIPER]

Very poor quality fraud! Someone doesn't know how to use a clone brush!

[beaware]

The MSM has that age old saying a bit altered:

A Picture is Worth a Thousand EDITS!

[saquin]

You don't really need side by side evidence with the "original" to see that the repeating patterns in this smoke do not appear natural in any way but I'll agree with you that no one will admit that there's definitive proof of this alteration until and unless and original is displayed.

[prion]

all im saying is if you dont have the actual photo then people sound just like any tinfoil conspiracy theorist. I also think it looks suspicous....but we need to have a side by side evidence

That certainly will be necessary to convince the "straights." I know from experience that many people don't automatically spot the repeating pattern.

But there's a reason so many Photoshoppers are jumping up and down here: this is a rookie mistake. It's easy to do, hard to overcome, and everybody who works with Photoshop has struggled with it. When you do this for a living, it SCREAMS out at you.

Kinda like the fonts thing on the CBS story.

[HAL9000]

Can you supply the original Reuters URL for these pictures?

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/060805/photos_ts/2006_08_05t152933_450x304_us_mideast

The photo on Yahoo is one pixel higher, but shows evidence of the cloning tool. The opacity and turbulence of the smoke looks wrong.

[Hexenhammer]

I adjusted the brightness in photoshop by manipulating the light curves and added an arrow to more clearly show the retouching.

[Fiddlstix]

..........Smoke simply does not contain repeating symmetrical patterns like this, and you can see the repetition in both plumes of smoke. There’s really no question about it.

Fake but accurate???
(Paging Dan Ra^ther)

[sionnsar]

Next, they’ll be using this…

Or this:

[sneakers]

I've retouched old family photos - to repair stains and tears. If you copy and past a section of a photo using the same section you copied, it's very obvious. This photo definitely looks doctored.

[sneakers]

OOPS!

past = paste

[Crazieman]

100% fake. I don't have it installed right now, was waiting for someone to put it through a filter.

[HAL9000]

Anyone got an image correlation tool handy? We need to throw some math on this image.