8/6/2006: Beirut Photoshop
 

http://cellar.org/2006/beirutphotoshop.jpg

IotD is not a political blog at all, and that's by design. On the rest of the Cellar, I personally enjoy talking politics all the time. But on IotD, when it comes to politics, what's mind-boggling to me might not be mind-boggling to you and vice-versa. And the mideast, well that's like the abortion of talking politics; everyone harshly, completely on one side or the other, bringing maximum outrage to the topic. Plenty mind-boggling about it, but the arguments weigh down the enjoyable side of mind-boggling very quickly.

So why this political entry about the mideast? I dunno, I guess I think this photo is mind-boggling no matter which side you're on. Let's see what you think.

The above photo is from the Reuters news service, and I found it in Yahoo! Most Popular today at 10:30 am. As of this writing, it's still there. The caption reads:
Problem is, it's Photoshopped. The repeating sections of smoke clouds are unmistakeable "clone tool" use.

The blogosphere caught this really fast -- because it's really bad work. The photo was then cancelled by Reuters:

http://cellar.org/2006/beirutphotokill.jpghttp://cellar.org/2006/beirutpicturekill.jpg

This might be the original:

http://cellar.org/2006/beirutunaltered.jpg

There are various non-political aspects of this which make it mind-boggling, and I think you can enjoy it no matter whether you love or hate Israel, no matter whether you love or hate Hezbollah, no matter whether your love or hate Lebanon.

Although perhaps "enjoy" is not the right word.

It is a sign of the times. But does it mean that our information today is LESS accurate, or is it MORE accurate? The tools make it easier to fake information... while at the same time, giving the skeptical audience a way to share notes and disseminate corrections.

One other note...

http://cellar.org/2006/hajjearlier.jpg

I've heard news service photographers say that when Hezbollah specifically sets up a shot, sometimes it's obvious that the photographers are being "fed" -- and some photographers refuse to shoot such situations. What do you take from the above shot?

What do you take, when you find out it was taken by Adnan Hajj, the same Reuters photographer reponsible for the Photoshop?

I, for one, don't know.

Good link at the bottom. Nothing surprising about their tactics, but good to see it being exposed.

Why would they have bothered photoshopping that? It looks about the same.

Because Arabs are way big into drama.

Anyway, those little girls were mere females (no big loss) and dying for your faith is the sure-fire way to Heaven, right? Only...only what do female martyr's get for their sacrifice? Surely not the same 70-some virgins the men are eagerly awaiting? Right? Right?

got to AMP it up some to make the pic look good .

The multiple plumes makes it look like the bombing/artillery is more indescriminate than it really was. That lack of precision is something that plays very nicely into the extremists hands. Of course, such an obvious plant could be put out there to create the impression that all complaints of indescriminate bombing are over-blown. confused yet?
edit smelling

For the same reason the sat images "showing the level of destruction in Beruit" was.

"World War III will be a guerilla information war with no division between civilian and military participation." --Marshall McLuhan

cock

:biglaugha :biglaugha :biglaugha

Are you now claiming those pictures I posted on the other thread were photoshopped? I know you scowled at the caption, but this takes your accusations to another level.

No, no, I'm not making that accusation at all. Insofar as I could see the WaPo image was the same as what CNN showed...although not at the same resolution.

But the (embedded) caption on the WaPo version itself was pure propaganda.

The images are best viewed to this soundtrack.

My guess is they brightened and added contrast to give the buildings in the foreground more definition. That resulted in the sky being bright white so they expanded the area of smoke to tone down the sky.

It's disturbing the editor, probably a photo editor, but at least a pro, didn't spot this as a fake immediately. Deadlines be damned, the whole story, and the agency for that matter, lose credibility.

One thing is apparent, though.....Hezbollah has used the media much more effectively than the IDF, from the git-go. :tinfoil:

Layer Style> Big Noisy Border
Window> Show Options
Select> All
Filter> Pixelate> Fragment
Layer> Flatten Image

And when US DoD "uses the media", they get criticized intensely for it. No reason to think IDF is any different; Israel has a left-wing too.
http://www.michaeltotten.com/archive...ry%20Media.jpg
Caption: "They do like to fashion themselves as media savvy."
http://www.michaeltotten.com/archives/001226.html