• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Is this picture PhotoShopped?

Looks like an example of aging the subject to assist in identification.

So yes, I would agree it looks shopped.
 
Looking at the photo, the head from above the eyebrows may have been computer generated to remove headgear of some description, or it looks a little off because of cropping the background around the hair perimeter. Of course, I'm only guessing and have no idea what he looks like for real.
 
Looks perfectly normal to me.

Why would the pic be photoshopped anyway? To hinder the public from learning how he actually looks like? Because no embassy anywhere had his passport photo and USA was too modest to use the pic of just some unknown guy off the street of Afghanistan? Because on planet X, all photos are photoshopped?
 
Last edited:
The picture is photoshopped indeed. In top right corner. Unless the camera inserts text to the photos.
 
Some faces are more symmetrical than others. To give you an idea, here's what a mirrored image of his face would look like, both his left and his right side. I think his right side is his best side.





Ok, I'm not that great at it, and didn't take too many time. But it's just to give you an idea. They look quite different from each other don't they? Well, I mean different enough at least.
But why would they do that anyway? Besides the fact they would most likely get caught, I don't see the use of mirroring one half of his face on the other.
 
It's not symmetrical. The features on his left are lower than the features on his right. Also, they have scissors there in the Middle East.
 
For the sake of argument, could the picture be photoshopped purely to give an accurate depiction of what the perp actually looks like assuming there are no "mug shots" of him in the first place?
 
Lowpro said:
For the sake of argument, could the picture be photoshopped purely to give an accurate depiction of what the perp actually looks like assuming there are no "mug shots" of him in the first place?
Click to expand...

The article had another picture with several photos of him on it. I couldn't enlarge that pic though. I thought it odd because it is marked as an "official" goverment photo.
 
The light on his face looks like the kind of light that would usually be found inside in a fairly small room, but the background behind him looks well lit and wide open, as if he's outside. That does make it look generally "wrong" to me, so I can see what causes the question. However, that oddity doesn't require computer editing; it can be produced by either a bright nearby light source or reflector outside (often used to compensate for shadows) or a bright-colored and well-lit backdrop inside.
 
alfaniner said:
There are even a few comments alluding to it.
Click to expand...
Sorry for the tangent, but this is a pet peeve of mine. An allusion is an indirect reference to something. These comments don't allude to it; they refer to it directly.
 
LTC8K6 said:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fazul_Abdullah_Mohammed
The Google-Fu is weak in this thread...
Click to expand...
That should have been on the photo or in the article itself. There used to be a standard like that.

JoeTheJuggler said:
Sorry for the tangent, but this is a pet peeve of mine. An allusion is an indirect reference to something. These comments don't allude to it; they refer to it directly.
Click to expand...

Very well. Words are very important to me and I will try to remember that.
 
alfaniner said:
That should have been on the photo or in the article itself. There used to be a standard like that.
Click to expand...
I agree. When I clicked on the images in the slide show, I got a broken link. Maybe there was a caption somewhere that disclosed that which was lost due to a technical problem.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom