Posted on 10/30/2001 4:13:23 PM PST by TheOtherOne
|
| A Lebanese man looks at a giant billboard produced by Hizbollah situated near the Israeli border opposite the disputed Shebaa Farms area, October 30, 2001. The billboard dedicated to the "great capture operation" of three Israeli soldiers last year from the occupied Shebaa Farms. Israel said on Monday that the three soldiers captured by Lebanese Hizbollah guerrillas and declared missing in action after they were seized in a cross border raid in October 2000 were probably dead. Hizbollah have erected several giant billboards along the border with Israel in south Lebanon to mark the first anniversary of their operation. REUTERS/Karamallah Daher |
The odds of that occuring by chance are almost as slim as TheOtherOne breaking 70 on an IQ test.
Might Reuters have cropped it before posting it?
When the original photo is converted to a web formatted jpeg, it was probably reduced to 72 or 100 dpi, that would result in the stright line pixels if that portion of the image had been close to straight in the original photo.
Keep in mind that news photographs come from tens of thousands of people -- some directly employed by a media agency, but most simply free-lancers.
That Rueters published a bogus photo doesn't mean Rueters is in on some conspiracy. It just means (without knowing more) that it was sloppy on this one occasion and, probably, will never accept a photo from that photographer ever again.
I would like to see you try. Why don't you illustrate some of the "problems" for us here. Please don't waste our time with your perfectly straight edge "interpretation", that one's been debunked at least twice now.
I love it when people are "experts".
Whether or not I am an expert is apparently irrelevant to you because you seem unwilling to consider contrary opinions and observations. I will tell you I can be wrong, because this is called photo interpretation. That means you can be wrong too. I can tell you with some authority that this photo appears altered, and thus its AUTHENTICITY can logically be called into question.
No one has "debunked" the straight line issue, only responded with their own interpretation, so hold on to your keyboard. This is a discussion forum. I suggest you track the discussion I had with a FReeper named Truth Addict. (we coverd a lot more issues than just one element in question. Without name calling, we covered this back and forth pretty well, then agreed on where we agree and disagree on interpreting what we see. We both agree the photo has been altered, but disagree on its authenticity. We also BOTH know that without seeing the original photo negative or jpeg, we cannot KNOW.
So go drink a little less coffee and lighten up.
Why don't you tell this forum what you are really angry about. AND get off my a$$.
Your reasoning is fine. THe issue with the bottom line of the 'billboard' to me is not just that is it straight, but that is it perfectly level/horizontal as well in a photo that should have some noticeable perspective. This, I believe is especially telling when the top of the billboard has a noticeable curvature due to perspective and the likley use of a moderately wide angle lens.
ISPY4U won't listen to this argument, but you may.
I welcome your response.
Yes. I checked the link.
You guys as so pathetic, this display is so sick, even you both think it is fake.
I'm not sure calling us 'pathetic' fits within the rules around here. That said, the photo appears to either be 'fake' or has been undermined by some over enthusiastic (sloppy) work by a digital retoucher. The saturation of the singage, the abnormal perspective, the sudden loss of detail in the lower left of the billboard, and so on--all of these things give me pause.
I have no problem being suspicious of wire images which appear amateurish, appear to lack accompanying corraborating images--I did a cursory look, if anyone finds some please add to the thread and put our questions to rest--and so on. I have no problem being suspicious of single digital images.
We've had the stories in the past about Media doctoring images so they better reflect the "reality" being reported--which would be my most generous reading of this photo. We've had debates over how far is too far in 'altering' reality.
I think it's pretty pathetic to attack freepers--FREEPERS, for crying out loud--who *dare* question the veracity of a digital image, a press account, etc.
One wonders about the overenthusiastic, automatic insistance one must believe all bad things claimed about Arabs, Muslims and Palestinians.
Sorry if that was too offenisve for you.
I think it's pretty pathetic to attack freepers--FREEPERS, for crying out loud--who *dare* question the veracity of a digital image, a press account, etc.
Pathetic, LOL. "Attack" -- me thinks you are being a little sensitive, ehh?
One wonders about the overenthusiastic, automatic insistance one must believe all bad things claimed about Arabs, Muslims and Palestinians.
What is anti-mulsim or anti-palestinian about thinking the photo is real? What negative am I believing about them? The funny thing to me is I am not sure if this 'photo' is anti-muslim or anti-jewish or anything. To me, I cannot see any reason for a fake, that is why I do not understand the fake angle. Now, it being true makes sense. It is not as if Hezbollah is shy about taking credit and holding these 3 guys. Why is the idea that they put up a billboard celebrating it one the 1 year aniversay so so odd?
I am not an expert but it does not look right to me.
Cheers Tony
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.