Proof of Photomanipulation

Mobertermy said:
The grass on the median strip in the photo of the cab you just posted.
Click to expand...

The grass in the purple rectangle I added here?
meridiangrass.png


How does that not agree with the thick purple line I added here to represent the grass?
meridiangrass2.png
 
BCR said:
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 :D

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

are there signs? what laws allow them to do that? I know of no law that prohibits taking any picture you please from a public highway.
They are asking for a lawsuit if they even ask you to delete pictures let alone take your Camera.

If I was a US citiizen and had nothing better to do that day I'd call their bluff :)
 
Last edited:
Quoting ignored poster who did exactly what Mobertermy asked him to do.

Oystein said:
Mobertermy said:
...
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.
Click to expand...

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.
Click to expand...

Your refusal to learn is your problem.
 
A W Smith said:
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.
Click to expand...

I can see why employees might not like being photographed but again on a public street there is no law against doing so. If they really are harassing the public then they are setting themselves up for a very embarrassing Sting from a hidden camera journalist.
 
A cleaner image of the area in question, without the transparent roads and those damn yellow lines...
 

Attachments

  • Pentagon-Bridge.jpg
    Pentagon-Bridge.jpg
    119 KB · Views: 9
Here's a better image with the site line. I got this image from an earlier post by WilliamSeger.
cab2.jpg
 
sheeplesnshills said:
are there signs? what laws allow them to do that? I know of no law that prohibits taking any picture you please from a public highway.
They are asking for a lawsuit if they even ask you to delete pictures let alone take your Camera.

If I was a US citiizen and had nothing better to do that day I'd call their bluff :)
Click to expand...

Not a bluff. It is a federal military reservation area. 'Public roads' pass through military reservations all the time, but when they do, they ain't 'public' no more.
 
A W Smith said:
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.
Click to expand...

I agree, I think they have given up on enforcement. However, we are talking about how it was then, not now. When I was at the Pentagon for the Memorial opening I took all kinds of pictures and was not hassled once.
 
No, a known 90 degree angle appears to be much less when photographed from a telephoto lens from the side.
 
Gamolon said:
The grass in the purple rectangle I added here?
[qimg]http://i238.photobucket.com/albums/ff290/gamolon/meridiangrass.png[/qimg]

How does that not agree with the thick purple line I added here to represent the grass?
[qimg]http://i238.photobucket.com/albums/ff290/gamolon/meridiangrass2.png[/qimg]
Click to expand...


Well first of all, how do poles C and D work with that line of sight.

Second, your line of sight makes it look like the cab is completely to the left of the median grass when you can tell the line of sight goes through the back window and over the median grass.
 
carlitos said:
No, a known 90 degree angle appears to be much less when photographed from a telephoto lens from the side.
Click to expand...


The thing is, when you tell me the the stove image is 90 degrees there is nothing which makes me think otherwise. That is exactly how I would expect it to look.
 
argument from incredulityWP

ETA - What has prevented you from bringing your 'evidence' to a photography teacher? Are you incarcerated or something?
 
Last edited:
Mobertermy said:
Well first of all, how do poles C and D work with that line of sight.
Click to expand...

Go to slide 7 of 29 in your presentation. I can see that pole "D" would be between pole "B" and pole "C" just as line of site would show. Draw it out and see.
 
Gamolon said:
Go to slide 7 of 29 in your presentation. I can see that pole "D" would be between pole "B" and pole "C" just as line of site would show. Draw it out and see.
Click to expand...

Why wouldn't pole B and D be nearly overlapping according to the sightline?
 
sheeplesnshills said:
Unfortunately also missing a whole loop of the cloverleaf that was there on 911
Click to expand...
.
The 9/13/2001 imagery on Google isn't to the resolution of the later images.
A composite...
Adding the stuff to the right doesn't affect the pointless discussion of which pole is where.
 

Attachments

  • Pentagon-Bridge-Composite.jpg
    Pentagon-Bridge-Composite.jpg
    131.4 KB · Views: 10
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom