Talk:Image manipulation

Liquify
Need a second opinion on this one. If you check the tripod leg in the background, it's bent ever so slightly to the right. Evidence of tampering? Perhaps, but it's subtle and not the most egregious example - the PSD blog has some pretty appalling one where they've done it on backgrounds with parallel lines, big fucking mistake. But PROTIP: If you're going to liquify your subject to change their shape, isolate you freaking background first, or at least reset it with the reconstruct tool afterwards. ADK ...I'll orate your hostel! 11:43, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I'd like to help but am not a member. Тy talk 13:04, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Ah, seems to have been a crossed wire, this image, although it's more zoomed in. ADK ...I'll complement your eel! 23:28, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Ah, i see it now, thankee kinldly. Тy talk 01:43, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Another amazingly ridiculous one ADK ...I'll xerox your octohedron! 12:34, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Interesting architecture there. Тy talk 12:46, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

On the Moon Section
Is the moon section supporting or refuting the conspiracies. Should it be removed? 00:17, 24 November 2016 (UTC)


 * I believe I wrote most of that so perhaps I should answer. It is neither supporting or refuting, but merely reporting. If you follow the link to Ken Johnston you'll see that there's more than a dash of absurdity in what the gentleman claims. As for the second paragraph here, nix it if you like but I thought it would be helpful. Ithaca8 (talk) 00:45, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
 * How about this?:
 * NASA manipulation of Apollo photography is a recurring theme of NASA haters and enthusiasts of Lunar anomalies. In particular, allegations from former NASA contractor Ken Johnston that he personally saw technicians doctoring the Hasselblad images shot by the astronauts have been taken up and publicized by haters such as Richard Hoagland and Mike Bara. The images were modified for media outlets, however, this was done to remove impurities in the high quality images; visual noise and impurities are not unusual and are even common in modern photos.


 * 01:15, 24 November 2016 (UTC)


 * Not bad, thanks for the effort. I'd prefer this 3rd sentence:
 * The images were modified for media release, by retouching sparkle in the totally black areas of lunar sky. Normal photographic practice avoids areas of solid black because they are so difficult to render accurately.

Those holocaust photoshop jobs
I wasn't quite sure where to put this, but I guess this'll do.

So I guess many of you have seen those edited pictures of Germans and Jews in the last war, with e.g. bodies of dead Jews being shopped out of existence and then claiming the reverse to be true (example). I personally would greatly appreciate if anyone with intricate knowledge about said matter could try tracking down what the origin of the fakes is and possibly address the matter in an article suitable for it. I remember that the lower-most picture of the collage I linked was once analyzed by a professional photography artist and he concluded that 1) the middle guy's trousers look way too straight on the left side to be unaltered and 2) the middle guy's hands are mirror images of each other – stuff like that could also be worth including. --85.76.143.190 (talk) 22:03, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Anyone interested? --85.76.103.191 (talk) 12:05, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
 * I hadn't seen this before, but I don't exactly hang out at Holocaust denial forums. My understanding is that much of the actual Nazi propaganda on the concentration camps was not one of image manipulation, but one of trying to control the narrative (a technique still seen today). Stalin was a well known image manipulator as described in the article, of course.
 * The problem with the above gallery is that, as the link indicates, it seems to come from the world of 4Chan. There's a lot of "who knows" with that sort of stuff. Some posts about the pictures, furthermore (like this Reddit post), indicates that some of this is possibly modern photo manipulation by Holocaust deniers. I also see in reverse searches threads (like this one) describing the picture as Soviet fakes used to make Germans seem worse than they were (this is actually the most common description of these photos). I can't confirm that. The sources that are reporting that are blogs and whatnot. This isn't something like "Raising a Flag over the Reichstag" which is a photograph that is well cited in multiple sources as doctored. A few of the image manipulations to me are so ridiculous that they are basically shitpost level.
 * Via Bing's image search (you can actually sort by date there) it looks like that one of these images (the one that removed someone going into an oven) might have come from a web project called "Revisionist Photos", where some person deliberately Photoshopped some Holocaust images to "show through art that attempts to rewrite the history of the Holocaust are not just pointless, but horribly cruel". Er... ok. Basically if you look at this person's root site, this person was a shitposter circa 2006, and this site doesn't seem to be referenced in too many other sources. So "your mileage may vary". It's difficult to track the origins of shitpost memes, especially if a few of them are this old. (For all we know, the origin might have really been a in-terrible-taste SomethingAwful Photoshop contest...) PanGalacticGargleBlaster (talk) 15:34, 12 January 2022 (UTC)