Confocal Microscopy List

Re: An alarming amount of image manipulation - the plot thickens

Posted by Julio Vazquez on
URL: http://confocal-microscopy-list.275.s1.nabble.com/Re-Ana-alarming-amount-of-image-manipulation-tp592857p592872.html

Search the CONFOCAL archive at http://listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu/cgi-bin/wa?S1=confocal -
If you look carefully, you'll also notice that besides the launched/not launched rocket, the two images are not truly identical. For instance, the ratio of white/dark smoke on the rightmost rocket is different in the two pictures. Therefore, saying that one is a doctored version of the other is also incorrect. For all I can tell, they could have been taken on different days.

What is really interesting, though, is the psychology behind all this. If the point to make is that Iran is able to launch missiles, even if only three out of four can launch successfully, the point is made... why bother doctoring the picture and risking being ridiculed? Just to show they are perfect? On the other hand, If the picture is correct (not doctored), why bother trying to discredit them by incorrectly stating that it was? Are politicians just little kids playing "my daddy is better than your daddy"?

And how about all the fuss being made about the pictures, in the absence of any clear evidence as to which of the two versions is "true"? What does that tell about us? That we can choose to believe whatever version is presented to us, as long as it fits with our own preconceptions, without regard for reality?



--
Julio Vazquez, 
Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center
Seattle, WA 98109-1024

On Jul 11, 2008, at 7:08 AM, Eric Scarfone wrote:

Search the CONFOCAL archive at

Following Dale's observation
That was my impression too until I went to see the original image:

The straight line cutting the smoke at the right side of the truck on 
the low res image of the WP page is an artefact of the destructive 
comprseeion used (probably Jpeg).

Take home message, image manipulation also comes unwillingly, thus 
always go back, to original image!
Cheers
Eric



Eric Scarfone, PhD, CNRS,
Center for Hearing and communication Research
Department of Clinical Neuroscience
Karolinska Institutet

Postal Address:
CFH, M1:02
Karolinska Hospital,
SE-171 76 Stockholm, Sweden

Work:  +46 (0)8-517 79343,
Cell:  +46 (0)70 888 2352
Fax:   +46 (0)8-301876



----- Original Message -----
From: Dale Callaham <[hidden email]>
Date: Friday, July 11, 2008 3:39 pm
Subject: Re: An alarming amount of image manipulation - the plot 
thickens

Search the CONFOCAL archive at

Dear Robert and others,

I'm not sure what is going on with the images, but I think that it 
is 
likely that the image on the RIGHT has been tampered, making me 
wonder 
about the validity of either of the images. On the apparently 
"original" 
right member image there is a vertical line at the left limit of 
the 
dust/smoke of the rightmost rocket - was the second from right 
missle 
dud pasted in or was the rightmost rocket pasted in covering 2 
duds as 
only one? Is someone trying to discredit the Iranians by adding in 
the 
dud over a launch? And the smoke trail of the second-from-left 
missle in 
the 2 images does not match so that image area is also modified in 
one 
or the other image.

Dale

Robert J. Palmer Jr. wrote:
Search the CONFOCAL archive at 
Not sure if one can view this Washington Post web page without 
creating 
a free user account, but give it a shot (pardon the pun).

dyn/content/article/2008/07/10/AR2008071002709.html> 
-- 

Robert J. Palmer Jr., Ph.D.
Natl Inst Dental Craniofacial Res - Natl Insts Health
Oral Infection and Immunity Branch
Bldg 30, Room 310
30 Convent Drive
Bethesda MD 20892
ph 301-594-0025
fax 301-402-0396


Free forum by Nabble Edit this page