Reply #136: Can you read?

[QuietStorm]

I work with images regularly. I use photoshop. these are photo images not illustrations. generally when I export to web what I find is a color loss can occur not a color enrichment. jpgs rendered for web, reduced and compressed certainly could cause banding (a kind of gradiation in solid color areas) depending on what number of colors are chosen (8, 256, thousands, millions) and yes, even without a decrease in colors the compression itself on a low res photo would cause pixelation frays around egdes of things (as we see in the renderings here), but this is not what I was referring to.

I was referring to the DARK STROKE LINES they can even be scene across the top of the pentagon which WOULD NOT becaused by pixelation, even in a significant reduction in size. Generally this softens or blurs edges. It would not create DARK STROKE LINES especially around shadows. Instead they would fade out just as the stated in the links.

The only thing that would have create DARK STROKE LINES OF THIS NATURE would be a redraw or if the photo was sent through an artistic filter of some sort which would render it more an illustration. For clarity sake utilizing artistic filters would certainly defeat the purpose. The purpose here would be MORE CLARITY not less.


NOW if the photos ARE authentic IMHO we still have a problem HOUSTON

http://digitalsword.co.uk/impactvideo.htm

tell me does that CRAFT that is enlarged look to you like a boeing 757 or any other commercial liner you have seen? Even with significant denigration of quality it would not render a long sleek line as one sould see in the body of a beoing to that strange curvey looking blip we see on in the enlargement. That always struck me as a draw in of a craft and a very poor one at that.

SO TO ME I DOES NOT. There are too many curves evident it in fact. I will also capture that but the curves within the body of the craft is more consistent with an F-16 than a boeing or actually even a cumulous formation in truth it is quite small IT COULD EVEN BE A MISSILE. To my eye it is impossible to identify what that craft actually is.

ALSO notice in the enlargments of the area of the photo where the plane is. There is pixelation i the horizon but no where in that enlargement do you see DARK STROKE LINES. The fraying of pixels WILL NOT CAUSE dark stroke at the outside of objects. It just would not occure... if you blow up a photo in photoshop so that you can see the pixels what you will notice is that the pixels (the squares) FADE IN COLOR NOT DARKEN.


DARK STROKE LINE AROUND THOSE SHADOWS ARE PROBLEMATIC.


YOU ASK THIS
<<The "series of photos" were possibly the only ones available. No original report ever referred to a "video". Why should a camera set up to record the traffic passsing by a security booth need to record constantly?>>

I DRAW YOUR ATTENTION TO THIS FROM THE DIGITALSWORD LINK

snip
The footage was released about six months after the Pentagon was attacked and some have claimed the foootage is a fabrication because the date and time details are wrong.

snip

As can be seen from the time stamp the security camera footage (as it is said to be) is shooting a single colour image every second). That means that this camera is shooting in full colour at a minimum rate of sixty frames per minute (sixty seconds in a minute, at one frame every second).

Cameras of this calibre are usually very expensive and produce very good quality images yet this one didn`t, in fact a pole that creates the shadow between between the first two cones isn`t registered by the camera.

end snip

FOOTAGE suggests video (in this case as you see 60 fpm) so the DoD, who we assume gave the PR guy the series of photos, COULD HAVE INSTEAD just given him a clip of the relevant footage. AGAIN MY QUESTION IS THE SAME. why a series of photos? why not a clip of footage?

why go to the trouble of rendering separate photos? It is easy to double check who FOOTAGE from a security camera such as this can be outputted as MEDIA.

POINT: I still find it strange that the DoD would have given the PR guy a "series of photos" RATHER THAN "footage"

ACCORDING TO DIGITALSWORD THIS IS THE KIND OF SECURITY CAMERA USED BY THE DOD

http://www.cctvusa.com/dvr.htm (scroll down to view page).