Jump to content
IGNORED

Real or Fake Image?


Note: This thread is 3328 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

Recommended Posts

  On 1/9/2016 at 5:50 PM, CR McDivot said:

OK, perhaps "fake" is an overstatement.

Enhanced, post processed, manipulated, photo-shopped - obviously!

 

Expand  

You will virtually never see a professional (or a decent amateur) photograph which hasn't been processed.  Most photographers shoot raw, and the raw file isn't even a photo, it's just what the term says, raw data captured by the camera sensor.  The raw file doesn't even contain any of the camera settings used in capturing the image except for basic exposure and white balance.  

Unprocessed, the converted raw image is flat and uninspiring.  When you shoot directly in jpeg, the camera does the processing, but most photography hobbyists prefer to have a higher level of control over the finished product, so they shoot raw and process the "negative" on a computer.  So saying that something has been tweaked in Photoshop or Lightroom is not the condemnation that you would try to pass off.  

That said, there are many levels of post processing, and some will definitely distort reality.  I have on a few rare occasions added something to an image that wasn't in the original scene, or I will even more likely remove a distracting element that was unavoidable when taking the shot.  When I do that I don't try to pass it off as a pure photograph, but I don't have any feelings of guilt over it either.  

Photography is a mixture of science and art.  Photojournalism should always be the pure image, with nothing more than basic developing done to the raw data.  As art, photography has many more possibilities, and there is a great deal of personal freedom and interpretation between the raw image and the most extreme artistic manipulation.  

  • Upvote 1

Rick

"He who has the fastest cart will never have a bad lie."

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  On 12/23/2015 at 2:47 AM, 9wood said:

Study this photo and tell me whether it's been photo-shopped or not.

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/15/66/fa/1566faf6b06b4b709e4debbda696baa0.jpg

Expand  

hard to say and easy to think so.

cameras and video already have filters and process. the image is enhanced even before it goes through post production processes.


  On 1/9/2016 at 6:53 PM, Golfingdad said:
  On 1/9/2016 at 7:00 PM, Fourputt said:

 

...Photography is a mixture of science and art.  Photojournalism should always be the pure image, with nothing more than basic developing done to the raw data.  As art, photography has many more possibilities, and there is a great deal of personal freedom and interpretation between the raw image and the most extreme artistic manipulation.  

Expand  

The spirit of the ops question was clearly "were these giant waves really behind tiger on this green?" and it's been clearly shown that they were.

Pointing out enhancements is just nitpicking.  "Oh, you removed the red eye?  Then your picture is a fake!" :P

Expand  

Digital imagery, like all photography, is both art and science.

Were the waves there? Yep. Science / Fact

Was the image enhanced? Yep. Science / Fact

Was the image manipulated, enhanced, shopped for the sake of art?

Looks like it to me for reasons already stated.

YMMV

Only the author, or the RAW image can tell for sure.

  • Upvote 1

Craig

:wilsonstaff: - FG Tour F5
:wilsonstaff: - Fybrid 3W 15*, FY 19.5*, 4H 24*
:wilsonstaff: - FG 51 Tour Blade 4-9
:wilson: - Harmonized 50, 55, 60
Old Master - TZ Putter


  On 1/9/2016 at 6:56 PM, CR McDivot said:

Exposing Digital Forgeries Through Chromatic Aberration

Compression will introduce artifacts, it is the inconsistency that indicates tampering.

Expand  

There is no chromatic aberration as described in the paper you attached in the image of Tiger and the waves.

I only see the compression artifacts surrounding Tiger's head (also, the flag, the other person's head, the balls, the bushes, etc.)

tiger_waves.jpg.711e2fb79c7170c61f11de52

 

:ping:  :tmade:  :callaway:   :gamegolf:  :titleist:

TM White Smoke Big Fontana; Pro-V1
TM Rac 60 TT WS, MD2 56
Ping i20 irons U-4, CFS300
Callaway XR16 9 degree Fujikura Speeder 565 S
Callaway XR16 3W 15 degree Fujikura Speeder 565 S, X2Hot Pro 20 degrees S

"I'm hitting the woods just great, but I'm having a terrible time getting out of them." ~Harry Toscano

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Administrator
  On 1/9/2016 at 5:50 PM, CR McDivot said:

OK, perhaps "fake" is an overstatement.

Enhanced, post processed, manipulated, photo-shopped - obviously!

Expand  

Nowhere near as much as you keep saying.

Erik J. Barzeski —  I knock a ball. It goes in a gopher hole. 🏌🏼‍♂️
Director of Instruction Golf Evolution • Owner, The Sand Trap .com • AuthorLowest Score Wins
Golf Digest "Best Young Teachers in America" 2016-17 & "Best in State" 2017-20 • WNY Section PGA Teacher of the Year 2019 :edel: :true_linkswear:

Check Out: New Topics | TST Blog | Golf Terms | Instructional Content | Analyzr | LSW | Instructional Droplets

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Without access to the RAW and the EXIF of the intermediate and final original published image we are all working off of at least 3rd (more likely 5th or more) generation.

The experienced eye can only make assumptions based on this limited data.

My assumption is based on evidence of a difference in the chromatic aberrations between the wave (background layer) and the green, Tiger, hazard markers, other players (foreground layer). 

  Quote

Lateral aberration, on the other hand, can be modeled as an expansion/contraction of the color channels with respect to one another. When tampering with an image, these aberrations are often disturbed and fail to be consistent across the image.

Expand  

This lack of consistency tends to persist through multiple generations if not corrected (flattened - all pixels combined into one layer of consistent size and pallet - such as is an original non post processed digital image).

As I have stated, barring access to the original digital image all one can do is assume.

I stand by my assumption (educated guess).

YMMV

Craig

:wilsonstaff: - FG Tour F5
:wilsonstaff: - Fybrid 3W 15*, FY 19.5*, 4H 24*
:wilsonstaff: - FG 51 Tour Blade 4-9
:wilson: - Harmonized 50, 55, 60
Old Master - TZ Putter


  On 1/10/2016 at 1:31 AM, Pretzel said:

Wow, I've seen double posts before but a triple post is new to me.

Expand  

Yeah, for some reason one push of the "Submit Reply" stuttered.

Sorry!

Craig

:wilsonstaff: - FG Tour F5
:wilsonstaff: - Fybrid 3W 15*, FY 19.5*, 4H 24*
:wilsonstaff: - FG 51 Tour Blade 4-9
:wilson: - Harmonized 50, 55, 60
Old Master - TZ Putter


  • Administrator
  On 1/10/2016 at 1:24 AM, CR McDivot said:

Without access to the RAW and the EXIF of the intermediate and final original published image we are all working off of at least 3rd (more likely 5th or more) generation.

The experienced eye can only make assumptions based on this limited data.

My assumption is based on evidence of a difference in the chromatic aberrations between the wave (background layer) and the green, Tiger, hazard markers, other players (foreground layer). 

This lack of consistency tends to persist through multiple generations if not corrected (flattened - all pixels combined into one layer of consistent size and pallet - such as is an original non post processed digital image).

As I have stated, barring access to the original digital image all one can do is assume.

I stand by my assumption (educated guess).

Expand  

I think you're completely off base, and that the image is not heavily altered. I think it was enhanced for contrast and the normal types of things (cropped, highlights and shadows, etc.), but nothing else. I don't think there were layers, I don't think the image was composed from multiple images, etc.

It's an AP photo. They aren't in the habit of doing all that you suggest was necessary.

Erik J. Barzeski —  I knock a ball. It goes in a gopher hole. 🏌🏼‍♂️
Director of Instruction Golf Evolution • Owner, The Sand Trap .com • AuthorLowest Score Wins
Golf Digest "Best Young Teachers in America" 2016-17 & "Best in State" 2017-20 • WNY Section PGA Teacher of the Year 2019 :edel: :true_linkswear:

Check Out: New Topics | TST Blog | Golf Terms | Instructional Content | Analyzr | LSW | Instructional Droplets

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  On 1/10/2016 at 2:11 AM, iacas said:

I think you're completely off base, and that the image is not heavily altered. I think it was enhanced for contrast and the normal types of things (cropped, highlights and shadows, etc.), but nothing else. I don't think there were layers, I don't think the image was composed from multiple images, etc.

It's an AP photo. They aren't in the habit of doing all that you suggest was necessary.

Expand  

As stated YMMV

As for AP - stuff happens, but at least in the case below they did right...

AP-severs-ties-with-photographer-who-altered-work

Craig

:wilsonstaff: - FG Tour F5
:wilsonstaff: - Fybrid 3W 15*, FY 19.5*, 4H 24*
:wilsonstaff: - FG 51 Tour Blade 4-9
:wilson: - Harmonized 50, 55, 60
Old Master - TZ Putter


  On 1/10/2016 at 2:11 AM, iacas said:

I think you're completely off base, and that the image is not heavily altered. I think it was enhanced for contrast and the normal types of things (cropped, highlights and shadows, etc.), but nothing else. I don't think there were layers, I don't think the image was composed from multiple images, etc.

It's an AP photo. They aren't in the habit of doing all that you suggest was necessary.

Expand  

As stated YMMV

As for AP - stuff happens, but at least in the case below they did right...

AP-severs-ties-with-photographer-who-altered-work

Craig

:wilsonstaff: - FG Tour F5
:wilsonstaff: - Fybrid 3W 15*, FY 19.5*, 4H 24*
:wilsonstaff: - FG 51 Tour Blade 4-9
:wilson: - Harmonized 50, 55, 60
Old Master - TZ Putter


  • Administrator
  On 1/10/2016 at 2:25 AM, CR McDivot said:

As stated YMMV

As for AP - stuff happens, but at least in the case below they did right...

AP-severs-ties-with-photographer-who-altered-work

Expand  

That stands out because it is rare.

I think you're wrong. There's nothing unusual about that photo.

Erik J. Barzeski —  I knock a ball. It goes in a gopher hole. 🏌🏼‍♂️
Director of Instruction Golf Evolution • Owner, The Sand Trap .com • AuthorLowest Score Wins
Golf Digest "Best Young Teachers in America" 2016-17 & "Best in State" 2017-20 • WNY Section PGA Teacher of the Year 2019 :edel: :true_linkswear:

Check Out: New Topics | TST Blog | Golf Terms | Instructional Content | Analyzr | LSW | Instructional Droplets

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

There is a difference in the "artifacts" of the waves vs the foreground. But that doesn't mean it's fake - as in the size of waves were modified.

This looks to be an image from a professional photographer. The raw image was likely over-processed with an unsharp mask (which is to say the sharpness of the "edges" were enhanced while any parts of the image that were soft would remain soft - and this could include individual pixels). The foreground would naturally be sharper because there is less or no movement compared to that of a wave - not to mention the depth of field and atmospheric perspective of it being so far in the background.

Combine that with the resolution being knocked way down, compressed and possibly processed even further for the web. All of that will screw up the pixels in any image.

That doesn't mean the photo isn't faked, only that most of us wouldn't be able tell by just by looking at the pixels of an internet jpg.

 

 

(Or I could just be full of crap.)

Jon

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  On 1/10/2016 at 1:24 AM, CR McDivot said:

Without access to the RAW and the EXIF of the intermediate and final original published image we are all working off of at least 3rd (more likely 5th or more) generation.

The experienced eye can only make assumptions based on this limited data.

My assumption is based on evidence of a difference in the chromatic aberrations between the wave (background layer) and the green, Tiger, hazard markers, other players (foreground layer). 

This lack of consistency tends to persist through multiple generations if not corrected (flattened - all pixels combined into one layer of consistent size and pallet - such as is an original non post processed digital image).

As I have stated, barring access to the original digital image all one can do is assume.

I stand by my assumption (educated guess).

YMMV

Expand  

True that we can't absolutely confirm things, but the aberrations you are referring to in this image are very much like the ones caused by the transitions in JPEG compression. It's kind of got that distinct "overshoot" region.  The lighting and color look pretty consistent, and our collective eyes are pretty good at detecting minor variations.

As you stated there is no absolute way of proving anything, but it's not really obvious as you first posted.

:ping:  :tmade:  :callaway:   :gamegolf:  :titleist:

TM White Smoke Big Fontana; Pro-V1
TM Rac 60 TT WS, MD2 56
Ping i20 irons U-4, CFS300
Callaway XR16 9 degree Fujikura Speeder 565 S
Callaway XR16 3W 15 degree Fujikura Speeder 565 S, X2Hot Pro 20 degrees S

"I'm hitting the woods just great, but I'm having a terrible time getting out of them." ~Harry Toscano

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

The image is definitely edited but we'll never know how much, it's all just speculation.

The lack of EXIF data likely means one of three things

  1. It's at least a 3rd or 4th generation edit and the EXIF data was lost during the conversion or save process
  2. The photographer has personal information in the EXIF and did not release the image with EXIF data (which is not uncommon for free lance photographers and amateurs)
  3. AP purchased the image and didn't want to reveal their source.

Joe Paradiso

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Administrator
  On 1/10/2016 at 9:45 PM, CR McDivot said:

FotoForensics Analysis

Expand  

That doesn't appear to demonstrate anything except to illustrate how JPEG compression works around high-contrast areas.

You have yet to demonstrate in any real way how the image is fake.

Erik J. Barzeski —  I knock a ball. It goes in a gopher hole. 🏌🏼‍♂️
Director of Instruction Golf Evolution • Owner, The Sand Trap .com • AuthorLowest Score Wins
Golf Digest "Best Young Teachers in America" 2016-17 & "Best in State" 2017-20 • WNY Section PGA Teacher of the Year 2019 :edel: :true_linkswear:

Check Out: New Topics | TST Blog | Golf Terms | Instructional Content | Analyzr | LSW | Instructional Droplets

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Administrator

FWIW, this image isn't "Photoshopped" beyond the typical means.

30107_403310207170_837152170_4162178_8243663_n.jpg

Erik J. Barzeski —  I knock a ball. It goes in a gopher hole. 🏌🏼‍♂️
Director of Instruction Golf Evolution • Owner, The Sand Trap .com • AuthorLowest Score Wins
Golf Digest "Best Young Teachers in America" 2016-17 & "Best in State" 2017-20 • WNY Section PGA Teacher of the Year 2019 :edel: :true_linkswear:

Check Out: New Topics | TST Blog | Golf Terms | Instructional Content | Analyzr | LSW | Instructional Droplets

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Note: This thread is 3328 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • TST Partners

    PlayBetter
    TourStriker PlaneMate
    Golfer's Journal
    ShotScope
    The Stack System
    FitForGolf
    FlightScope Mevo
    Direct: Mevo, Mevo+, and Pro Package.

    Coupon Codes (save 10-20%): "IACAS" for Mevo/Stack/FitForGolf, "IACASPLUS" for Mevo+/Pro Package, and "THESANDTRAP" for ShotScope. 15% off TourStriker (no code).
  • Posts

    • Day 215: just some mirror work. Worked on earlier wrist hinge in the backswing. 
    • Top two choices: Hide & Seek: Wallet With Hidden Pocket | Bellroy This billfold’s classic good looks and slim profile hide a clever secret – a concealed section inside that keeps extra bills, cards or coins out of sight. Ridge Wallet - Forged Carbon The strong, slim, and sustainable ridge wallet is now available as forged carbon wallet. The anodized aluminum plating lets you enjoy a scratch-resistant surface. Distant third: Amazon.com   This was one I considered for a bit too: Amazon.com
    • Day 142 - 2025-02-19 Had 45 minutes after some GEARS lessons and before a junior. Got some good work in.
    • He wasn't a bad guy. And he was just trying to get out there and get some fresh air and exercise. He ended up liking the new cane a lot, because in addition to not making pock marks on the greens, it also stood up by itself. He didn't have to hand it to somebody to hold while he hit his shot. Or lean it against the cart. It would just stand up by itself. ... Kind of like those stand up putters. ... 🤣
    • Sounds like you guys came up with a great solution.  
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Welcome to TST! Signing up is free, and you'll see fewer ads and can talk with fellow golf enthusiasts! By using TST, you agree to our Terms of Use, our Privacy Policy, and our Guidelines.

The popup will be closed in 10 seconds...