David Josephs Posted September 9, 2015 Share Posted September 9, 2015 (edited) No need to bump Tommy... Either Greg is trying to show off what little Photoshop skills he has, someone at ROKC who does know how to manipulate images did it for him or he found it already on the internet... either way, he should know how it doesn't come close to the original at all... My bet is he knew that and posted anyway... and it was probably done by one of the minions on the island. You can even see the skewed boundaries. Well, YOU can... Bernie and Greg not so much Here you go Tommy, Greg and Bernie... now everyone is the same height and Ozzie is bigger and wider than Ferrie... Edited September 9, 2015 by David Josephs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Graves Posted September 9, 2015 Share Posted September 9, 2015 (edited) No need to bump Tommy... Either Greg is trying to show off what little Photoshop skills he has, someone at ROKC who does know how to manipulate images did it for him or he found it already on the internet... either way, he should know how it doesn't come close to the original at all... My bet is he knew that and posted anyway... and it was probably done by one of the minions on the island. You can even see the skewed boundaries. Well, YOU can... Bernie and Greg not so much No need to bump Tommy... Either Greg is trying to show off what little Photoshop skills he has, someone at ROKC who does know how to manipulate images did it for him or he found it already on the internet... either way, he should know how it doesn't come close to the original at all... My bet is he knew that and posted anyway... and it was probably done by one of the minions on the island. You can even see the skewed boundaries. Well, YOU can... Bernie and Greg not so much Dear Mr. Josephs, If Greg did it, all it does is reinforce how wrong you are. Funny you didn't mention it. Just wishing Oswald was that big? Just hoping nobody else would notice it's been photoshopped? --Tommy Edited September 9, 2015 by Thomas Graves Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg Parker Posted September 9, 2015 Share Posted September 9, 2015 My point is, it's as valid as YOUR collage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Josephs Posted September 9, 2015 Share Posted September 9, 2015 (edited) My "collage" both explained "depth of field" and how Oswald looks like his younger self. I did not skew the image to make it appear Oswald was bigger than he was... I explained it correctly - DEPTH OF FIELD. That you choose to cheat your way into a poor argument is your problem. Now one last time Greg, can you tell us the distance and focal length of the image so you can then give us a scaling factor based on the depth of field of the image - or not? Do you understand that images farther away from the camera and the higher the focal distance and doeth of field, the smaller objects in the background will appear... - or not? Here is the "collage" without the extra images yet with Ferrie and Oswald copy-pasted against each other to illustrate the concept. Try Google Greg, you might learn something. As for your dishonest attempt at an argument... I expect nothing more from you, always. Edited September 9, 2015 by David Josephs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg Parker Posted September 9, 2015 Share Posted September 9, 2015 Illustrating you don't understand photography is appreciated... Once again... distance to the camera and focal length - any clue? Yawn...! Then explain why he is still dwarfed by those stood to his right and who are the same distance away from the camera. If LHO were stood 20 or 30 feet behind the entire group you would definitely have a point. But he isn't. And if he were as big and husky as you keep having to prove (otherwise, once again H&L bites the dust) that would shine through regardless of camera angle. No camera angle will show Sly Stallone looking like Woody Allen, however much you warble on about perspective. What an irony that you of all people should be banging on about perspective. You could do with a bucket-load yourself! That's it exactly, Bernie. You can play around with the image perspective, you can create collages of images. None of that changes the fact that he is the smallest, puniest guy there. As you point out, he is not 20 or 30 feet behind everyone else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Graves Posted September 9, 2015 Share Posted September 9, 2015 No need to bump Tommy... Either Greg is trying to show off what little Photoshop skills he has, someone at ROKC who does know how to manipulate images did it for him or he found it already on the internet... either way, he should know how it doesn't come close to the original at all... My bet is he knew that and posted anyway... and it was probably done by one of the minions on the island. You can even see the skewed boundaries. Well, YOU can... Bernie and Greg not so much No need to bump Tommy... Either Greg is trying to show off what little Photoshop skills he has, someone at ROKC who does know how to manipulate images did it for him or he found it already on the internet... either way, he should know how it doesn't come close to the original at all... My bet is he knew that and posted anyway... and it was probably done by one of the minions on the island. You can even see the skewed boundaries. Well, YOU can... Bernie and Greg not so much Dear Mr. Josephs, If Greg did it, all it does is reinforce how wrong you are. Funny you didn't mention it. Just wishing Oswald was that big? Just hoping nobody else would notice it's been photoshopped? --Tommy Here's the original. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven Gaal Posted September 9, 2015 Share Posted September 9, 2015 (edited) My point is, it's as valid as YOUR collage. NO . You put up a distorted image. Mr. Joseph only transferred one section of the photo to another (WITHOUT enlargement) to show that objects closer to the camera appear bigger.,gaal ++++++++++++++++ I think you have violated the spirit (if not the letter) of Forum rules by deliberately posting false information. When Jack White's poster was talked about ,you Mr. Parker, screamed FRAUD again and again. What should we speak of you ???????????????????????????????????????????????????????. gaal Edited September 9, 2015 by Steven Gaal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Graves Posted September 9, 2015 Share Posted September 9, 2015 My point is, it's as valid as YOUR collage. NO . You put up a distorted image. Mr. Joseph only transferred one section of the photo to another (WITHOUT enlargement) to show that objects closer to the camera appear bigger.,gaal ++++++++++++++++ I think you have violated the spirit (if not the letter) of Forum rules by deliberately posting false information. When Jack White's poster was talked about ,you Mr. Parker, screamed FRAUD again and again. What should we speak of you ???????????????????????????????????????????????????????. gaal Greg was in effect arguing your case for you, photographically speaking. You should be grateful. After all, Greg didn't make Oswald look smaller than he really was. He made him look larger than he really was. --Tommy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Josephs Posted September 9, 2015 Share Posted September 9, 2015 (edited) Look at the bottom Steve... Greg has left the discussion as most creatures who fear the light tend to do when the switch is hit... Scamper scamper little greg.... find a way to turn these lemons into lemonade Edited September 9, 2015 by David Josephs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Josephs Posted September 9, 2015 Share Posted September 9, 2015 (edited) My point is, it's as valid as YOUR collage. NO . You put up a distorted image. Mr. Joseph only transferred one section of the photo to another (WITHOUT enlargement) to show that objects closer to the camera appear bigger.,gaal ++++++++++++++++ I think you have violated the spirit (if not the letter) of Forum rules by deliberately posting false information. When Jack White's poster was talked about ,you Mr. Parker, screamed FRAUD again and again. What should we speak of you ???????????????????????????????????????????????????????. gaal Greg was in effect arguing your case for you, photographically speaking. You should be grateful. After all, Greg didn't make Oswald look smaller than he really was. He made him look larger than he really was. --Tommy So you are aware that it was Greg who tried to decieve us with that skewed image? Do you not understand how depth of field and perspective works either? Sad. Do you not see that the quadrilaterals at the back are smaller than at the front? Gee... MAGIC, right? How can they all be the same size yet look so different in size in the same image... Edited September 9, 2015 by David Josephs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg Parker Posted September 9, 2015 Share Posted September 9, 2015 (edited) Look at the bottom Steve... Greg has left the discussion as most creatures who fear the light tend to do when the switch is hit... Scamper scamper little greg.... find a way to turn these lemons into lemonade Oh boy, you are one screwed up, scared little boy. I last posted about a half hour ago. You're the one who scampers for days and weeks. Edited September 9, 2015 by Greg Parker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg Parker Posted September 9, 2015 Share Posted September 9, 2015 My point is, it's as valid as YOUR collage. NO . You put up a distorted image. Mr. Joseph only transferred one section of the photo to another (WITHOUT enlargement) to show that objects closer to the camera appear bigger.,gaal ++++++++++++++++ I think you have violated the spirit (if not the letter) of Forum rules by deliberately posting false information. When Jack White's poster was talked about ,you Mr. Parker, screamed FRAUD again and again. What should we speak of you ???????????????????????????????????????????????????????. gaal Greg was in effect arguing your case for you, photographically speaking. You should be grateful. After all, Greg didn't make Oswald look smaller than he really was. He made him look larger than he really was. --Tommy So you are aware that it was Greg who tried to decieve us with that skewed image? Do you not understand how depth of field and perspective works either? Sad. Do you not see that the quadrilaterals at the back are smaller than at the front? Gee... MAGIC, right? How can they all be the same size yet look so different in size in the same image... How far behind everyone else do you claim Oswald is standing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Josephs Posted September 9, 2015 Share Posted September 9, 2015 (edited) That you bore us all to death with one poor argument after another which requires me at least to leave for a little bit soas not to deal with your poisonous BS - AND that you are waiting and watching for me - is just the way it is. You've deceived others by posted an altered image after you already posted the actual one... and the post of the fake image has no text... hmmm You cant seem to understand how perspective works so you will post ANYTHING and EVERYTHING but your admitting you are clueless when it comes to photographic analysis - almost if not as bad as your document analysis. That you need to resort to Lamson-like trickery just to make a point which you couldn't to begin with is just, so, YOU. So I understand you don't get photography - that you've made obvious. But you can read about how perspective works, right - you still know how to do research... You get the basic concept that distance and focal length will distort the sizes and shapes of objects in different parts of the image.... I posted the example above. Is changing the subject and doing the same song and dance all we're ever going to be getting from you anymore? Edited September 9, 2015 by David Josephs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Josephs Posted September 9, 2015 Share Posted September 9, 2015 How far behind everyone else do you claim Oswald is standing? I'm not claiming anything. I am informing you that the image in which you claim Oswald is but some tiny little guy is due to perspective and focal distances. That when you copy from one part of the image and move to another - either closer to the camera or farther away - the size comparison becomes even more obvious. Since I am not a photogrammetry expert, and that is the only way to tell distances in a 2d representation of 3d space, we cannot know where he is standing in relation to Ferrie until much more is known about the photo. We do know he is farther away. We do know that if this image was taken with a 35mm lens the distances would be much different than a 150mm lens from farther away. We also know that the camera is much closer to the left side of the image than the right, which also distorts the distances. You simply picked the wrong image with which to try and prove your argument and then acted the fool when told so.... Now, instead of being a man... you have to play the disgruntled fool. whatever Greg... you're so transparent you might as well not even be there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Graves Posted September 9, 2015 Share Posted September 9, 2015 (edited) My point is, it's as valid as YOUR collage. [...] Greg was in effect arguing your case for you, Steven. Photographically speaking. You should be grateful. After all, Greg didn't make Oswald look smaller than he really was. He made him look larger than he really was. --Tommy bumped for Mr. Josephs Edited September 9, 2015 by Thomas Graves Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts