Michael Hogan Posted December 28, 2009 Share Posted December 28, 2009 This morning the website TMZ posted "a never-before published photograph which appears to show John F. Kennedy on a boat filled with naked women -- it's a photo that could have altered world events." TMZ enlisted the services of a forensic photo expert, Professor Jeff Sedlik, who seemed to vouch for the authenticity of the photo. In addition, the site claimed two Kennedy biographers believed that it was Kennedy in the photo. The forensic expert appeared to have excellent credentials. http://www.tmz.com/2009/12/28/president-jo...e_tmzcom_inline A few hours later, TMZ received an email which forced them to reconsider their thinking. http://www.tmz.com/2009/12/28/john-f-kenne...oat-nude-women/ There's a lesson here somewhere about trusting the opinions of photo experts, self-described or otherwise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terry Adams Posted December 28, 2009 Share Posted December 28, 2009 (edited) Michael, I looked at the picture before reading the rest of your post. I was "convinced" that it was JFK. It just goes to show that we can't necessarily believe our eyes. It shows how things like this, purposeful or not, an example being the Discovery Channel debacles can cause opinions to be framed in a particular direction that can be completely off the mark. This is a perfect illustration of just such a situation. Edited December 28, 2009 by Terry Adams Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dean Hagerman Posted December 28, 2009 Share Posted December 28, 2009 I think its fake Look at the womans tan lines from a low cut bathing 2 piece suit I dont think those were around in the 1950s Anyone remember? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Ecker Posted December 28, 2009 Share Posted December 28, 2009 When I looked at the photo here, I immediately knew that I had seen it before. What I recognized was the odd posture of the girl jumping into the water. I didn't know where I had seen her before till I read the link about the Playboy spread. I don't know if I bought that issue of Playboy, but if I did it was just to read the articles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Crane Posted December 28, 2009 Share Posted December 28, 2009 To me it looks as if the head is photoshopped and just a little too big. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hogan Posted December 28, 2009 Author Share Posted December 28, 2009 TMZ has confirmed that the picture is not what was first purported. As one of the leading tabloid-style internet sites, they are normally quite careful in their vetting processes. The rest of the story involves Professor Jeff Sedlik, who lists his credentials here: http://www.photographyexpertwitness.com/ And here: http://www.hgexperts.com/expert-witness.asp?id=39672 There is an accompanying video with the TMZ article where Sedlik explains how he arrived at his conclusions. He is careful to couch his language in non-absolutes, but he does his best to build a convincing case for authenticity. In light of the actual provenance of the photo, he comes across as looking quite clumsy. Listening to Sedlik, I can't help but think of all the black and white photos that were taken in Dealey Plaza and elsewhere, and the endless discussions of what they all meant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now