HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » A tale of two photos: Is ...

Fri Nov 24, 2017, 08:24 PM

A tale of two photos: Is Franken accuser's photo shopped?

As someone who messes around with Photoshop quite a bit, I agree with the author of this post.

These are just a few snippets, but her detailed analysis is pretty persuasive.

The most convincing to me was the odd shape & darkness of the shadow on Al's face, and when she pulled up the brightness on the photo, you could see the angular rather than smooth edge of the woman's hair and light where it should be in the shadow.

This doesn't mean her accusation isn't true, but it does go to credibility.

But then there’s this photo, offered by Franken’s second accuser, Lindsay Menz, who went to CNN with the story, as evidence that Franken groped her rear at the Minnesota State Fair in 2010. According to CNN, Franken said he did not recall the photo-shoot, which is plausible considering that he would have had his photo taken with dozens if not hundreds of people at the event. Menz originally posted it on Facebook.



***

My opinion is that this was originally a picture of Franken alone against this same background, to which Menz was added in such a way to make them appear very close together. It would have been easy to do compared to the Tweeden one. Why? The background is simple (makes a huge difference), the dark figures contrast well against it (except in two places, about which more later, but also makes a huge difference), and the light is diffuse, so the shopper doesn’t have to worry about placing shadows precisely.


[link:https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2017/11/22/1717807/-A-tale-of-two-photos|
FULL TEXT]

84 replies, 7856 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 84 replies Author Time Post
Reply A tale of two photos: Is Franken accuser's photo shopped? (Original post)
yurbud Nov 2017 OP
Kingofalldems Nov 2017 #1
bagelsforbreakfast Nov 2017 #4
VMA131Marine Nov 2017 #2
lapucelle Nov 2017 #7
riverwalker Nov 2017 #11
blimablam Nov 2017 #28
riverwalker Nov 2017 #9
Demsrule86 Nov 2017 #39
The Velveteen Ocelot Nov 2017 #3
Angry Dragon Nov 2017 #5
njhoneybadger Nov 2017 #60
pnwmom Nov 2017 #6
elehhhhna Nov 2017 #8
elehhhhna Nov 2017 #10
Demit Nov 2017 #12
L. Coyote Nov 2017 #43
Meowmee Nov 2017 #13
jalan48 Nov 2017 #14
Meowmee Nov 2017 #15
A Brand New World Nov 2017 #20
Meowmee Nov 2017 #32
L. Coyote Nov 2017 #44
Meowmee Nov 2017 #81
njhoneybadger Nov 2017 #62
Meowmee Nov 2017 #80
anneboleyn Nov 2017 #69
Meowmee Nov 2017 #79
Generic Brad Nov 2017 #16
LisaL Nov 2017 #17
LisaL Nov 2017 #23
L. Coyote Nov 2017 #45
LisaL Nov 2017 #46
L. Coyote Nov 2017 #49
LisaL Nov 2017 #51
L. Coyote Nov 2017 #59
ProudLib72 Nov 2017 #18
NotASurfer Nov 2017 #21
Control-Z Nov 2017 #22
ProudLib72 Nov 2017 #24
NotASurfer Nov 2017 #25
Wellstone ruled Nov 2017 #19
The Velveteen Ocelot Nov 2017 #64
Wellstone ruled Nov 2017 #66
Name removed Nov 2017 #26
fleabiscuit Nov 2017 #27
Name removed Nov 2017 #29
MFM008 Nov 2017 #30
brooklynite Nov 2017 #31
DeminPennswoods Nov 2017 #33
GatoGordo Nov 2017 #35
Demsrule86 Nov 2017 #40
brooklynite Nov 2017 #48
yurbud Nov 2017 #53
yurbud Nov 2017 #56
brooklynite Nov 2017 #61
yurbud Nov 2017 #58
Demsrule86 Nov 2017 #83
yurbud Nov 2017 #78
GatoGordo Nov 2017 #34
Hassin Bin Sober Nov 2017 #38
Demsrule86 Nov 2017 #41
yurbud Nov 2017 #52
The Velveteen Ocelot Nov 2017 #68
Hugin Nov 2017 #36
DetlefK Nov 2017 #37
Demsrule86 Nov 2017 #42
L. Coyote Nov 2017 #47
LisaL Nov 2017 #50
B2G Nov 2017 #54
LisaL Nov 2017 #55
B2G Nov 2017 #63
L. Coyote Nov 2017 #57
Sancho Nov 2017 #65
brooklynite Nov 2017 #67
Sancho Nov 2017 #71
Calista241 Nov 2017 #70
LisaL Nov 2017 #72
oberliner Nov 2017 #73
LisaL Nov 2017 #75
yurbud Nov 2017 #77
oberliner Nov 2017 #74
L. Coyote Nov 2017 #82
forthemiddle Nov 2017 #76
yurbud Nov 2017 #84

Response to yurbud (Original post)

Fri Nov 24, 2017, 08:26 PM

1. Look out below.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kingofalldems (Reply #1)

Fri Nov 24, 2017, 08:33 PM

4. Hahaha! n/m

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yurbud (Original post)

Fri Nov 24, 2017, 08:28 PM

2. So is the contemporary Facebook post photoshopped too?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to VMA131Marine (Reply #2)

Fri Nov 24, 2017, 08:52 PM

7. Do you have a link to the contemporaneos Facebool post photo?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lapucelle (Reply #7)

Fri Nov 24, 2017, 09:07 PM

11. Sister not on Facebook until 2011 ?


not on Facebook until 2011 ?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to riverwalker (Reply #11)

Sat Nov 25, 2017, 01:36 AM

28. Nice catch!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to VMA131Marine (Reply #2)

Fri Nov 24, 2017, 09:05 PM

9. No one has seen the Facebook post which is weird

I asked MJ Lee of CNN who broke the story if she actually saw it or was entire story based on a phone call. She never answered me.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to VMA131Marine (Reply #2)

Sat Nov 25, 2017, 08:35 AM

39. She is a right wing liar...no way Franken groped this right wing person with her husband

snapping the picture...those who believe this shit want to believe it and are doing the heavy lifting for the GOP. For shame on all of them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yurbud (Original post)

Fri Nov 24, 2017, 08:31 PM

3. It doesn't matter because what's depicted in the photo isn't at issue.

Can we just bury this dead horse now?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Velveteen Ocelot (Reply #3)

Fri Nov 24, 2017, 08:39 PM

5. I agree

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Velveteen Ocelot (Reply #3)

Sat Nov 25, 2017, 12:26 PM

60. Of course it matters

Her credibility is the issue.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yurbud (Original post)

Fri Nov 24, 2017, 08:44 PM

6. Also, I don't remember where I saw it, but there's another photo of Franken at the fair that day

wearing a different shirt.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #6)

Fri Nov 24, 2017, 09:04 PM

8. Yet because he got girl cooties on that one.

 

Lol

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yurbud (Original post)

Fri Nov 24, 2017, 09:07 PM

10. If I'm going to Photoshop an Al picture...

 

It will totally unquestionably have his hand on my ass or it will show me making a face like I'm being goosed by a big pervert.

Not buying this one

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yurbud (Original post)

Fri Nov 24, 2017, 09:12 PM

12. You can't draw any definitive conclusions from a 72dpi image.

 

Photoshop power users will tell you that. I think this analysis is a lot of woo.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Demit (Reply #12)

Sat Nov 25, 2017, 11:32 AM

43. True. If you blow this image up in Photoshop to 1200% it is also obviously very compressed.

Why such a low quality, tiny image to bolster an accusation? Maybe because a tiny, very compressed image actually masks the Photoshopping. Someone had to turn this into a small image. Why?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yurbud (Original post)

Fri Nov 24, 2017, 09:14 PM

13. What looks odd

To me are the two white triangles between their faces- they do not look like the background behind them and appear to have been altered in some way. Fine art Photographer here. I’ve done lots of editing

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Meowmee (Reply #13)

Fri Nov 24, 2017, 09:18 PM

14. I agree. They seem to be floating is space.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jalan48 (Reply #14)

Fri Nov 24, 2017, 09:28 PM

15. Yep

It’s obvious to me. I also do not believe this witness account because she started a blinking a lot in an nbc video when she was asked and described what happened when he allegedly groped her. Not proof but it’s my private hunch.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Meowmee (Reply #13)

Fri Nov 24, 2017, 10:37 PM

20. In the close-up picture the white triangles look like cloth that has a ripple in it.

It doesn't seem to look like vinyl siding.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to A Brand New World (Reply #20)

Sat Nov 25, 2017, 05:01 AM

32. Yes it could be a piece of cloth

In between hair strands but they look very odd to me- the “ triangles” don’t seem to be attached to either of their clothes. That kind of thing can happen when you do cloning.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Meowmee (Reply #32)

Sat Nov 25, 2017, 11:33 AM

44. Agreed. Very obvious when blown up to 1200%.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to L. Coyote (Reply #44)

Sat Nov 25, 2017, 08:43 PM

81. I havent blown it up

I’ll try that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Meowmee (Reply #13)

Sat Nov 25, 2017, 12:30 PM

62. They wouldn't be that bright

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to njhoneybadger (Reply #62)

Sat Nov 25, 2017, 08:41 PM

80. Yep

Prolly not. They’d have some shadows.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Meowmee (Reply #13)

Sat Nov 25, 2017, 03:01 PM

69. To me, the right side of Frankens body seems to be missing (his right) Compared to the left side

of his body (his left), which looks like the normal size of his shoulder and chest, his right side seems to be cut down severely If it is photoshopped it looks like his right side was cropped poorly perhaps to make it look more like he was angled just right to grab her butt. He is missing half of what should be there, and if his right shoulder was the same size as the left this photo would look very different. It looks extremely odd to me — it also looks much darker than his left side and there doesn’t seem to be a huge difference in the light available.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to anneboleyn (Reply #69)

Sat Nov 25, 2017, 08:38 PM

79. Agree

It looks like the right side has been altered and part is missing. If his arm were around her etc I think you’d expect to see more of his right shoulder etc.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yurbud (Original post)

Fri Nov 24, 2017, 09:41 PM

16. That appears to be the same shirt he wore at the 2015 Rondo Days parade

It looks exactly like the one he wore the day he posed for a photo with my daughter and wife (his hands were on their shoulders in the photo I have of them together). Perhaps it is his favorite summer shirt.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yurbud (Original post)

Fri Nov 24, 2017, 09:43 PM

17. There is a reflection in the window behind them of what appears to be an arm (presumably hers?)

It doesn't prove anything, but I just noticed its there.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LisaL (Reply #17)

Sat Nov 25, 2017, 12:12 AM

23. Looking at it some more, looks like an arm around his waist?

I can see a short sleeve and a watch.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LisaL (Reply #23)

Sat Nov 25, 2017, 11:41 AM

45. No arm. There is a light and shadow line in the reflection which is missing on the door itself.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to L. Coyote (Reply #45)

Sat Nov 25, 2017, 11:45 AM

46. I am talking about the window behind them, not the door.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LisaL (Reply #46)

Sat Nov 25, 2017, 12:06 PM

49. The photgrapher's eye level is just higher than his, three siding lines in reflection.

The lowest siding line is the one behind his forehead. Why are their heads missing in the reflection?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to L. Coyote (Reply #49)

Sat Nov 25, 2017, 12:08 PM

51. Given that you don't know the distances or the angles, or where the photographer was,

I have seen no proof the heads should have been reflected.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LisaL (Reply #51)

Sat Nov 25, 2017, 12:23 PM

59. We do know the distances and angles and where the photographer was, as revealed by the photo.

All of this can easily be measured in the photo itself, especially when we have siding lines and reflections. It is easy to determine the disappearing point where the siding lines converge, ...... I learned this stuff in fifth grade art doing drawings with perspective.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yurbud (Original post)

Fri Nov 24, 2017, 09:49 PM

18. If there were a pic of him alone on a deserted island

the claim would be he is touching someone's ass. I guess we could then discuss the sandcastle in the background instead of the fact that the accusation is pure bullshit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProudLib72 (Reply #18)

Fri Nov 24, 2017, 10:39 PM

21. Or so they could write about sex clams

Especially juveniles. Because false equivalency

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NotASurfer (Reply #21)

Fri Nov 24, 2017, 11:25 PM

22. What are these "sex clams" I'm hearing about?

You are not the first to mention them on DU.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Control-Z (Reply #22)

Sat Nov 25, 2017, 12:38 AM

24. I don't know what a sex clam is

But no one had better touch its butt! The only person on a desert island surrounded by sex clams!

Actually, we had better not overdo the sex clams bit because "clam" is a synonym for 'vagina". It's derogatory.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Control-Z (Reply #22)

Sat Nov 25, 2017, 01:04 AM

25. Alabama newspaper headline



I'll let that speak for itself..,

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yurbud (Original post)

Fri Nov 24, 2017, 10:06 PM

19. Hey,does anyone notice something strange with the first Picture?

Quit familiar with the DFL Booth on the Fair Grounds. Not aware of 2 1/2 inch lap siding on any of the Booth. Notice the awning window directly behind Al. Never seen any windows of that type on the Fairgrounds Booth.

Again,when we were at the Booth when Al was there,first he was wearing a white polo,seen him later during the Street Parade wearing the same shirt.

What did Richard Painter say earlier today,why are Roy Moore people hanging around the Twin Cities,and he said this smells like a GOP dirty tricks operation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Wellstone ruled (Reply #19)

Sat Nov 25, 2017, 01:36 PM

64. This probably wouldn't have been taken at the DFL booth

but at Franken's own smaller booth (I think it's on Judson), which, IIRC, is kind of an open shed-type structure that does have lap siding. He makes some appearances at the big DFL building and I've seen him at the small one as well (but I did not get my picture taken or my butt grabbed).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Velveteen Ocelot (Reply #64)

Sat Nov 25, 2017, 02:20 PM

66. Ah,do remember

that Booth. And yes,both my Spouse and I did the Photo thingee at the DFL pavilion,again,thanks for the info. We used to make the trek back to Minny each Summer and close it out at the Fair.

Interesting thing about the White Polo Pic,our Son's partner is leaning against the post in the background.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yurbud (Original post)


Response to Name removed (Reply #26)

Sat Nov 25, 2017, 01:36 AM

27. Is english your second language? nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fleabiscuit (Reply #27)


Response to yurbud (Original post)

Sat Nov 25, 2017, 01:44 AM

30. Intetesting

I use a program similar called paintshop pro.
It is indeed possible.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yurbud (Original post)

Sat Nov 25, 2017, 01:46 AM

31. Quick: send this exonerating evidence to Al Franken!

In the meantime, Franken hasn't disavowed this or any other photo he's in.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Reply #31)

Sat Nov 25, 2017, 05:55 AM

33. Not quite

Franken has said he doesn't remember the events described by the two anonymous accusers. He's accepted responsibility regardless.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DeminPennswoods (Reply #33)

Sat Nov 25, 2017, 06:30 AM

35. No, he has not accepted responsibility.

 

He said, he is "sorry that these women feel badly".

That is a far cry from apologizing for acting badly.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Reply #31)

Sat Nov 25, 2017, 08:39 AM

40. How would he remember all the photos...and they will just keep making claims because there

true intent is to destroy Franken and take the seat...righty liars don't work...so look now we have anonymous liars...you have to want to believe ill of Franken and Democrats in general to believe this shit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Demsrule86 (Reply #40)

Sat Nov 25, 2017, 12:04 PM

48. Occams Razor...

Choice 1: A well-organized conspiracy finds multiple women to launch a coordinated attack of accusation of inappropriate behavior, but does such a sloppy job of producing corroborating evidence that an amateur blogger can see through their scheme.

Choice 2: The photo is real.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Reply #48)

Sat Nov 25, 2017, 12:14 PM

53. shitty photoshop for propaganda purposes has a long tradition

even mainstream media has been caught doing worse, like recycling photos or clips from one incident to cover a new one.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yurbud (Reply #53)

Sat Nov 25, 2017, 12:19 PM

56. remember the Kerry Fonda photo?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yurbud (Reply #56)

Sat Nov 25, 2017, 12:27 PM

61. ...but we're not talking about the average FREE REPUBLIC user creating their own meme...

...we're talking about something organized enough and with sufficient resources to find multiple women to launch coordinated and consistent attacks on a US Senator with sufficient credence that he won't disavow the event or the photo.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to brooklynite (Reply #48)

Sun Nov 26, 2017, 10:42 AM

83. Even if the photo is 'real'. I still don't see anything there...are woman who's husband is taking

the photo is standing next to Franken smiling...meaningless drivel.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Reply #31)

Sat Nov 25, 2017, 04:02 PM

78. I admire Al's response to this, but that doesn't mean his accusers are all on the up and up

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yurbud (Original post)

Sat Nov 25, 2017, 06:26 AM

34. Women cannot be believed?

 

The double standards on this forum are appalling.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GatoGordo (Reply #34)

Sat Nov 25, 2017, 07:51 AM

38. It must be a real burden gracing us with your presence on this forum.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GatoGordo (Reply #34)

Sat Nov 25, 2017, 08:39 AM

41. I would not believe lying rightie women in what is obviously a ploy to destroy Franken.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GatoGordo (Reply #34)

Sat Nov 25, 2017, 12:12 PM

52. Women can be believed at least as much as men but charges need to be verified

before you throw someone under the bus.

and Democratic politicians have a history of throwing people under the bus as soon as the right clears their throat.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GatoGordo (Reply #34)

Sat Nov 25, 2017, 02:34 PM

68. Women can be believed, and their complaints should be taken seriously.

But women are also people, and sometimes they (we), too, have agendas. Taking a complaint seriously does not mean you must believe every single word unquestioningly. It means you don't dismiss it out of hand, as used to happen all the time and sometimes still does. It means that you proceed under the assumption that it could be true, but you also have to consider evidence that it might not be, or that it is not 100% accurate in all respects.

I could sit here at home in my bathrobe and make a phone call to CNN and tell them Al Franken groped me at the State Fair, which he never did. What if I were an avid Trump supporter who wanted to discredit Franken further? I'm a Minnesota resident who does go to the fair almost every year, so how could my false claim be defended against? I'm a woman, so does that mean I must be absolutely believed?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yurbud (Original post)

Sat Nov 25, 2017, 06:37 AM

36. Okay, I'll play. How come his glasses are not displaced to the right?

Whenever, I've taken a head tight photo wearing glasses the earpiece is pushed in to my head and the lenses are displaced an equal distance in front of my eyes.

Also, her hair is not disturbed or indented where the earpiece would contact it.

Doesn't matter, tho. Everyone paying attention has already come to a determination and judged the validity of the photo for themselves. This won't change any minds.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yurbud (Original post)

Sat Nov 25, 2017, 07:03 AM

37. Oh FFS, I've had it with these "photo is fake" conspiracy-theories.

RUN A FUCKING AUTOCORRELATION-ANALYSIS ON THE PIC.

THAT WILL TELL YOU WHETHER IT'S PHOTOSHOPPED.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DetlefK (Reply #37)

Sat Nov 25, 2017, 08:51 AM

42. I don't see any issues with the photo period...and I doubt very much that Franken

would grab a woman's ass at a fair with her husband taking the picture...this is a rightie plot and those who pile on are only helping Trump and the Republicans.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yurbud (Original post)

Sat Nov 25, 2017, 11:47 AM

47. Standing right next to a window reflected in the background, their heads missing in the reflection.

We see the entire window width reflected, the building corner, and a patch of more area. Given the angles and photographer position, shouldn't we see at least part of her head in that background window showing such a wide swath beside the window they arew almost touching on her right?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to L. Coyote (Reply #47)

Sat Nov 25, 2017, 12:06 PM

50. But I see what appears to be an arm and a back reflected in there.

I think the photo is real. Regardless it doesn't show any groping. So it doesn't prove the allegation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LisaL (Reply #50)

Sat Nov 25, 2017, 12:14 PM

54. An arm?

 

I don't see anything reflected in the window.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to B2G (Reply #54)

Sat Nov 25, 2017, 12:16 PM

55. There are a whole bunch of things that are reflected in the window, how do you not see

anything?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LisaL (Reply #55)

Sat Nov 25, 2017, 12:33 PM

63. On first glance, it looked like

 

you were viewing a room that had additional windows and that's what you were seeing.

If it is a reflection, you would be seeing what's in FRONT of them, not behind them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LisaL (Reply #50)

Sat Nov 25, 2017, 12:20 PM

57. The reflection in the reflected window is positioned behind the photographer.

The window beside her reflects what is out in front of them as viewed in the reflection behind them. The corner of the building is next to the window beside her.

Nothing below their eye level is in the reflection behind them. The camera lens is at the elevation of his eyebrows. Note the siding lines in the reflection.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yurbud (Original post)

Sat Nov 25, 2017, 01:59 PM

65. Al's eyes appear to be looking to the left of her focus...

and he's not really smiling. Wouldn't they take several to get a better expression?

I don't know if it's photoshopped, but she doesn't look "grabbed" at all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sancho (Reply #65)

Sat Nov 25, 2017, 02:26 PM

67. No they would not "take several"...

...if it's a photoline, they'd be processing a lot of people through, and wouldn't have the time. If it's a one-off encounter, the photo would be taken by friend of the subject and would probably be a single shot unless something went seriously wrong.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Reply #67)

Sat Nov 25, 2017, 03:45 PM

71. I thought Franken stopped by their booth/shop...

and the husband took the picture. Most of the time with phones now, you click off several pictures.

As far as she described, there was no line.

Of course, the situation description may be changing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yurbud (Original post)

Sat Nov 25, 2017, 03:01 PM

70. As a photographer, I work with Lightroom all day long modifying pictures

The photo is clearly taken by an amateur; the composition is awful and the entire photo is horribly underexposed.

I’m inclined to believe the photo is genuine. The light source is fairly consistent on their faces and on their clothes. Shopping background in between hair strands like the garage detail on the left side of the woman is extraordinarily difficult. Someone would have spent dozens of hours on those two dozen hairs, and even then it would be super obvious under close inspection.

Whether Franken is grabbing her ass is not reflected in the photo. As someone who takes a fair number of photos of people in this exact pose, my belief is that you’d see some reaction on her face if she was being felt up.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Calista241 (Reply #70)

Sat Nov 25, 2017, 03:46 PM

72. Her husband took the photo.

So it was taken by an amateur. And yes, she has a very pleasant smile on her face. One would think that she would have shown some reaction if she were being groped.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LisaL (Reply #72)

Sat Nov 25, 2017, 03:48 PM

73. "One would think that she would have shown some reaction if she were being groped."

 

This is why people are hesitant about giving their real name and providing photographs in these circumstances.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oberliner (Reply #73)


Response to Calista241 (Reply #70)

Sat Nov 25, 2017, 03:59 PM

77. good point.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yurbud (Original post)

Sat Nov 25, 2017, 03:49 PM

74. What would convince you that it's not photo shopped?

 

Anything?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oberliner (Reply #74)

Sat Nov 25, 2017, 09:12 PM

82. The original full-sized file would be a good start. Where is it?

Whose camera takes 550 x 309 pixel images? Show us a 1600 x 900 version, or larger.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yurbud (Original post)

Sat Nov 25, 2017, 03:53 PM

76. Gee, I still cant figure out why some women

Want to stay anonymous???

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yurbud (Original post)

Tue Nov 28, 2017, 03:49 PM

84. Conspiracy theory or justifiable suspicion? See this thread:

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread