Photographic evidence is worthless.

Off Topic » in reply to Check out the shadows.

ER — 2/7/2007 7:25:28 PM (archived)

I worked as a photogrammetrist for years, and if it wasn't for the obvious anachronism of the subject, I wouldn't have the slightest hint it was faked. Now, if we could only insert an iceberg with some polar bears into it....

The whole thread (13 posts)

This might be useful in photo analysis of the typical anomalist fashions-of-the-day - Yeti - 2/7/2007 6:53:15 PM
- More Photoshop fun - TB - 2/12/2007 7:58:02 AM
- This is an ancient art: Photogrammetry. - ER - 2/7/2007 7:08:25 PM
- Here is a picture to test it on. - REB - 2/7/2007 7:08:00 PM
  - Use the tail-hook, Luke, use the tail-hook. (n/t) - ER - 2/7/2007 7:11:03 PM
    - Check out the shadows. - REB - 2/7/2007 7:15:56 PM
      - Photographic evidence is worthless. - ER - 2/7/2007 7:25:28 PM
        
        re: Photographic evidence is worthless. - SteveS - 2/8/2007 5:24:09 AM
        
        re: Photographic evidence is worthless. - TB - 2/7/2007 9:22:15 PM
        
        I was talking about altering an image so it looked like something else. - ER - 2/7/2007 10:05:02 PM
        
        I know. - TB - 2/7/2007 10:09:13 PM
        
        re: Photographic evidence is worthless. - REB - 2/7/2007 9:52:11 PM
        
        An example of the "locate the original" technique.... - TB - 2/7/2007 10:04:42 PM

Recent posts

On this day in Off Topic

The whole thread (13 posts)