Proof of Photomanipulation

[Oystein]

To me it just seems that you guys are making a bare assertion. You are just claiming that foreshortening can explain away an apparent illusion in your opinions without having to demonstrate this.

The opposite is true.
We draw the lines of sight that demonstrate why everything in the photos is where it ought to be.
YOU are the one making bare assertions because you never draw a line of sight to prove your point.

 

[NutCracker]

1000 posts. The more untenable the claim is, the longer the resulting thread.

 

[Oystein]

...
Can someone produce for me a photograph made with a telephoto lens where a (near) 90 degree angle appears to be much less than that? Because I've been looking and can't find one.

The first photo is my stove top from above. It is really a rectangle with straight edges - they appear a bit rounded because of the exteme wide-angle lense I use with it.


The same stove, this time with a tele lens from the side.
Focal length is 120mm on a full format (35x24mm) sensor, which produces the same angle of the field of view as the 80mm Ingersoll used for Photo 2 with a DX-format camera.


(original width, I cut away a bit on top and bottom of the image)

Note that the stove corner in the bottom center of the image appears like an angle of maybe 145°, and the corner on the right as 35° or something like that.
It's pretty dark in my kitchen now, and I had to use a wide open aperture which lends the photo a focus depth that helps us to "see" that the angles are really closes to 90°, but take away such clues, add some obstacles and make the edges not quite so straight, and you will lose all sense of true angles.

 

[Oystein]

No, it doesn't sound rude.



Just tell me this: in photo #2 it at least looks like the west side of the bridge is to the north of the cab, and the east side is to the south right?

Neither side of the bridge is in the photo.

 

[Oystein]

Bumped for Mobertermy.

Where do you think Ingersoll was when he took DSC_0412 and the photos immediately before and after that?

Why do you think the bridge is on the wrong side of the cab in DSC_0412? I ee it on the correct side, so does Drewid, and probably everybody else who ever looked at it. You are the lone exception. You should give us a little photo analysis (ya know - point of view, line of sight) to explain why you, and you alone, think the bridge is on the wrong side of the cab.

Why do you dodge these questions so stubbornly?

Why do you think drawing a line of sight is not the way to go? How else do you determine on which side of what things should appear in a photo?

BUMPED

You run away from picture DSC_0412 without resolving it.

Where was Ingersoll when he took DSC_0412?

(and remember: There are a few more questions which you have been dodging!)

 

[Oystein]

That has to do with foreshortening...not angles. I haven't seen anything in any of the photos you all have shown me which in any way correlates to the apparent angle distortion in photo #2.

Can you indicate in Photo 2 where you see any part of the bridge or Columbia Pike?
(I expect you to reproduce Photo 2 with a few markings in it)

 

[BCR]

These are all public roads and there is a huge memorial right beside the route.
Its a free country and you are quite entitled to take pictures of the pentagon (I would however stay off the lawn

Wrong. That is there now, but even after the AF Memorial was erected taking pictures can result in you being surrounded by police officers who will at their discretion either make you delete your photos or confiscate your camera. That happened to me and it has happened to many others.

I was lucky. When the DPS officer saw my law enforcement credentials and after some discussion with his supervisor with me sitting in the back of his car, he let me keep my photos. After that his only real concern was where my gun was. I explained that I had left it locked in my truck. We parted ways on friendly terms, but I still had to be very 'covert' in taking my photographs. That was either in late 2007 or early 2008.

Like I said, they may have loosened the restrictions now because of the Memorial, but we are not talking about now, we are talking 2001 and the restrictions were very much in place then. And yes, I was on a 'public sidewalk' on Columbia Pike when the powers that be descended upon me

More: Yes, they informed me that I could take no more photographs in the Pentagon/Navy Annex ... subject to confiscation and arrest.

 

[Mobertermy]

Oystein,
I have no idea what you are saying...I took a mod's advice and put you on ignore. Have a nice life.

 

[Mobertermy]

More: Yes, they informed me that I could take no more photographs in the Pentagon/Navy Annex ... subject to confiscation and arrest.

You wouldn't happen to have any pictures taken from the Navy Annex parking lot would you?

 

[Gamolon]

Not sure if this was shown yet, but your "lightpole box" is wrong.

The yellow rectangle is how you have it. The red rectangle is where it should be.

 

[tsig]

Can you indicate in Photo 2 where you see any part of the bridge or Columbia Pike?
(I expect you to reproduce Photo 2 with a few markings in it)

QFM

 

[Oystein]

Oystein,
I have no idea what you are saying...I took a mod's advice and put you on ignore. Have a nice life.

Way to go not to learn

 

[Sunstealer]

1000 posts. The more untenable the claim is, the longer the resulting thread.

It's par for the course.

1. Truther has preconceived notion/conclusion.
2. Truther sees something he doesn't fully comprehend.
3. Truther posts claiming 2 supports 1.
4. JREFers point out what is wrong and advise.
5. Truther ignores all claims, refuses to do the analysis/maths/work, moves goalposts, dodges legitimate questions.
6. Thread grows and grows - mods ask people to be civil.
7. Truther still convinced he's right even after multiple posters have explained everything in detail and shown he's conclusively wrong.

I don't see what the big deal is; we all get things wrong on occasion. Having the maturity to admit it allows us to learn.

mobertermy - just draw lines of sight for each photo you have picking landmarks/poles that are in line with the cab on a 2D map such as google earth. This will "triangulate" the cab and show it's true position. Simples.

 

[BCR]

I don't see what the big deal is; we all get things wrong on occasion. Having the maturity to admit it allows us to learn.

mobertermy - just draw lines of sight for each photo you have picking landmarks/poles that are in line with the cab on a 2D map such as google earth. This will "triangulate" the cab and show it's true position. Simples.

When I first started working with the Doubletree videos (I have the full set that was sent to Judicial Watch by the FBI on DVD) I found a 'flying object' passing in between the Pentagon and DT about 10 minutes before impact. I started doing some triangulation based on the reference objects in the video, but sadly I used the wrong tree and came up with a fairly fast speed for it. I did not know a lot back in those days, but based on some eyewitness accounts I presumed that it was possibly AAL77 looping around (remember those old flight paths that had it doing the loop and coming down the Potomac?). It only took me a few days to figure out that the tree I used was the wrong one ... boy, was that ever embarrassing

Turns out it was a helicopter. I have since identified it conclusively as one coming out of Andrews AFB and that eyewitnesses described to CNN when their reporter first showed up at the scene that morning. But it did prompt me to go to the scene and take better measurements (that is where the video I just linked came from) and develop a better reference set.

So yeah, we have all been on a learning curve and we have all been mistaken from time-to-time. The important thing is just to learn from the errors and move on putting the lessons learned to good use in later endeavors.

 

[Gamolon]

You wouldn't happen to have any pictures taken from the Navy Annex parking lot would you?

The correct labeling for your slide 13 of 29 in your presentation should look like this.

Which would then match your overhead view here, slide 10 of 29.

Which would make this the correct labeling of slide 16 of 29 showing TA3 and not TA2. TA3 STILL being to the left of the cab when looking perpendicular to the center concrete median.

 

[I Ratant]

C'mon.
Splain to me what any of this garf about light poles and traffic arm contributes to or demonstrates a conspiracy to hide something at all?

 

[Mobertermy]

I just don't get it. See that grass to the left of the cab. We know that is on the bridge between TA3 and 4. We know pole B is on the far side of the bridge. How does that work with the line of sight when we line up the windshield of the cab with teh median strip with the grass on it...so we know we are looking across the bridge, and yet Pole B ends up to the right of the median strip.

 

[Gamolon]

Which makes this photo of the correctly labeled TA3...

Perfectly feasible by showing the red "line of site" line from the correct pole "B" postion, passing just to the left of the TA3 gate arm and over the left (right from the photo view direction) corner of the cab trunk.

 

[Gamolon]

I just don't get it. See that grass to the left of the cab. We know that is on the bridge between TA3 and 4. We know pole B is on the far side of the bridge. How does that work with the line of sight when we line up the windshield of the cab with teh median strip with the grass on it...so we know we are looking across the bridge, and yet Pole B ends up to the right of the median strip.

What grass? Can you mark up a photo please.

 

[A W Smith]

Wrong. That is there now, but even after the AF Memorial was erected taking pictures can result in you being surrounded by police officers who will at their discretion either make you delete your photos or confiscate your camera. That happened to me and it has happened to many others.

I was lucky. When the DPS officer saw my law enforcement credentials and after some discussion with his supervisor with me sitting in the back of his car, he let me keep my photos. After that his only real concern was where my gun was. I explained that I had left it locked in my truck. We parted ways on friendly terms, but I still had to be very 'covert' in taking my photographs. That was either in late 2007 or early 2008.

Like I said, they may have loosened the restrictions now because of the Memorial, but we are not talking about now, we are talking 2001 and the restrictions were very much in place then. And yes, I was on a 'public sidewalk' on Columbia Pike when the powers that be descended upon me

More: Yes, they informed me that I could take no more photographs in the Pentagon/Navy Annex ... subject to confiscation and arrest.

With today's smart phone technology, the policy is almost unenforceable. I can take videos with my droid and have them uploaded before the device can be confiscated and the media deleted. Even if they snatched it out of my hand and smashed it on site, a JPEG still would already be on the interwebs. They have not even caused Google street view to delete scenes. Which oddly enough Google did voluntarily when they captured a kid showing off in front of the Google car on his bicycle and crashing. The security issue may be capturing staff or personnel with your camera, NATGEO aired a series of 911 documentary's over the weekend, In one scene a pedestrian was walking west up Columbia pike in front of the navy annex and blocked his face from the camera with a newspaper.