ChaoticMusings

Digger · Admin

The camera DOES lie! Before-and -after snaps show how influencers look like 'different people'

Digger · Admin

'Influencers'? Does that mean posturing on YouTube and getting paid silly money for it?

Syl · FIRM BUT FAIR.

People with influence used to be teachers, parents, elder siblings, etc, etc. Now it's some distorted image of some airhead on the internet spouting about some vacuous nothingness that has all the following.

The world has gone mad.

Digger · Admin

Syl wrote:
People with influence used to be teachers, parents, elder siblings, etc, etc. Now it's some distorted image of some airhead on the internet spouting about some vacuous nothingness that has all the following.

The world has gone mad.

They seem to have a lot of clout too... if you're a bit of a nitwit

JP · Burning up the forum

Digger wrote:
Social media feeds are filled with photographs that have been edited to showcase a neatly curated 'perfection'.
But fans of one Chinese influencer were shocked to see just how much her snaps appear to have been edited before being shared.
Social media star @Coeyyyy, who uses the Chinese-based social and e-shopping platform Xiaohongshu, or RED, looked startlingly different in the 'before and after' photos, with everything from the shape of her jawline to her body type changing.

However not all social media users were convinced of the photos' authenticity.
One argued it was more likely to be a stunt by two women pretending to be @Coeyyyy and her friend.
He noted that, although the women in both pictures were wearing the same clothes and posing in the same position, it is extremely difficult to 'shrink' an individual without distorting the background.
The same user said edited photos are usually of a lower resolution than the original, when in fact the reverse is true in this set.

The user is right manipulating pixels to that degree is gonna cause distortion issues.

-- Edited by JP on Monday 1st of June 2020 08:02:27 PM

Jobless Oddball · Boring Twat.

Syl wrote:
People with influence used to be teachers, parents, elder siblings, etc, etc. Now it's some distorted image of some airhead on the internet spouting about some vacuous nothingness that has all the following.

The world has gone mad.

Morelike under the influence!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Date: Jun 3 2:24 AM, 2020

JP wrote:
Digger wrote:
Social media feeds are filled with photographs that have been edited to showcase a neatly curated 'perfection'.
But fans of one Chinese influencer were shocked to see just how much her snaps appear to have been edited before being shared.
Social media star @Coeyyyy, who uses the Chinese-based social and e-shopping platform Xiaohongshu, or RED, looked startlingly different in the 'before and after' photos, with everything from the shape of her jawline to her body type changing.

However not all social media users were convinced of the photos' authenticity.
One argued it was more likely to be a stunt by two women pretending to be @Coeyyyy and her friend.
He noted that, although the women in both pictures were wearing the same clothes and posing in the same position, it is extremely difficult to 'shrink' an individual without distorting the background.
The same user said edited photos are usually of a lower resolution than the original, when in fact the reverse is true in this set.

The user is right manipulating pixels to that degree is gonna cause distortion issues.

-- Edited by JP on Monday 1st of June 2020 08:02:27 PM

There's a big difference between someone trying to alter a picture using their phone than a professional using state of the art computer imaging.

Have you never seen A syfy movie. Or a horror movie?

altering images professionally have been done since photography was invented

Syl · FIRM BUT FAIR.

I reckon it's definitely the same two women who have been digitally altered. There is no way two imposters could create the exact same backdrop, hairlines, clothes, jewelry in such detail imo.

JP · Burning up the forum

Anonymous wrote:
JP wrote:
Digger wrote:
Social media feeds are filled with photographs that have been edited to showcase a neatly curated 'perfection'.
But fans of one Chinese influencer were shocked to see just how much her snaps appear to have been edited before being shared.
Social media star @Coeyyyy, who uses the Chinese-based social and e-shopping platform Xiaohongshu, or RED, looked startlingly different in the 'before and after' photos, with everything from the shape of her jawline to her body type changing.

However not all social media users were convinced of the photos' authenticity.
One argued it was more likely to be a stunt by two women pretending to be @Coeyyyy and her friend.
He noted that, although the women in both pictures were wearing the same clothes and posing in the same position, it is extremely difficult to 'shrink' an individual without distorting the background.
The same user said edited photos are usually of a lower resolution than the original, when in fact the reverse is true in this set.

The user is right manipulating pixels to that degree is gonna cause distortion issues.

-- Edited by JP on Monday 1st of June 2020 08:02:27 PM
There's a big difference between someone trying to alter a picture using their phone than a professional using state of the art computer imaging.
Have you never seen A syfy movie. Or a horror movie?
altering images professionally have been done since photography was invented

A movie. Why are you comparing a static photograph 'stills' with a motion picture?

Date: Jun 3 5:56 PM, 2020

JP wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
JP wrote:
Digger wrote:
Social media feeds are filled with photographs that have been edited to showcase a neatly curated 'perfection'.
But fans of one Chinese influencer were shocked to see just how much her snaps appear to have been edited before being shared.
Social media star @Coeyyyy, who uses the Chinese-based social and e-shopping platform Xiaohongshu, or RED, looked startlingly different in the 'before and after' photos, with everything from the shape of her jawline to her body type changing.

However not all social media users were convinced of the photos' authenticity.
One argued it was more likely to be a stunt by two women pretending to be @Coeyyyy and her friend.
He noted that, although the women in both pictures were wearing the same clothes and posing in the same position, it is extremely difficult to 'shrink' an individual without distorting the background.
The same user said edited photos are usually of a lower resolution than the original, when in fact the reverse is true in this set.

The user is right manipulating pixels to that degree is gonna cause distortion issues.

-- Edited by JP on Monday 1st of June 2020 08:02:27 PM
There's a big difference between someone trying to alter a picture using their phone than a professional using state of the art computer imaging.
Have you never seen A syfy movie. Or a horror movie?
altering images professionally have been done since photography was invented
A movie. Why are you comparing a static photograph 'stills' with a motion picture?

It's common knowledge that a motion picture is made up of individual photographic stills.

JP · Burning up the forum

SF wrote:
JP wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
JP wrote:
Digger wrote:
Social media feeds are filled with photographs that have been edited to showcase a neatly curated 'perfection'.
But fans of one Chinese influencer were shocked to see just how much her snaps appear to have been edited before being shared.
Social media star @Coeyyyy, who uses the Chinese-based social and e-shopping platform Xiaohongshu, or RED, looked startlingly different in the 'before and after' photos, with everything from the shape of her jawline to her body type changing.

However not all social media users were convinced of the photos' authenticity.
One argued it was more likely to be a stunt by two women pretending to be @Coeyyyy and her friend.
He noted that, although the women in both pictures were wearing the same clothes and posing in the same position, it is extremely difficult to 'shrink' an individual without distorting the background.
The same user said edited photos are usually of a lower resolution than the original, when in fact the reverse is true in this set.

The user is right manipulating pixels to that degree is gonna cause distortion issues.

-- Edited by JP on Monday 1st of June 2020 08:02:27 PM
There's a big difference between someone trying to alter a picture using their phone than a professional using state of the art computer imaging.
Have you never seen A syfy movie. Or a horror movie?
altering images professionally have been done since photography was invented
A movie. Why are you comparing a static photograph 'stills' with a motion picture?
It's common knowledge that a motion picture is made up of individual photographic stills.

You're missing the point. Hopefully you've read the thread properly.

Keeping background distortion out of one solitary static heavily manipulated photo is a very hard thing to achieve.

Whereas keeping distortion out of a string of moving stills(film) is far easier to achieve.

-- Edited by JP on Wednesday 3rd of June 2020 06:47:12 PM

Digger · Admin

JP wrote:
SF wrote:
JP wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
JP wrote:
Digger wrote:
Social media feeds are filled with photographs that have been edited to showcase a neatly curated 'perfection'.
But fans of one Chinese influencer were shocked to see just how much her snaps appear to have been edited before being shared.
Social media star @Coeyyyy, who uses the Chinese-based social and e-shopping platform Xiaohongshu, or RED, looked startlingly different in the 'before and after' photos, with everything from the shape of her jawline to her body type changing.

However not all social media users were convinced of the photos' authenticity.
One argued it was more likely to be a stunt by two women pretending to be @Coeyyyy and her friend.
He noted that, although the women in both pictures were wearing the same clothes and posing in the same position, it is extremely difficult to 'shrink' an individual without distorting the background.
The same user said edited photos are usually of a lower resolution than the original, when in fact the reverse is true in this set.

The user is right manipulating pixels to that degree is gonna cause distortion issues.

-- Edited by JP on Monday 1st of June 2020 08:02:27 PM
There's a big difference between someone trying to alter a picture using their phone than a professional using state of the art computer imaging.
Have you never seen A syfy movie. Or a horror movie?
altering images professionally have been done since photography was invented
A movie. Why are you comparing a static photograph 'stills' with a motion picture?
It's common knowledge that a motion picture is made up of individual photographic stills.
You're missing the point. Hopefully you've read the thread properly.
Keeping background distortion out of one solitary static heavily manipulated photo is a very hard thing to achieve.
Whereas keeping distortion out of a string of moving stills(film) is far easier to achieve.

-- Edited by JP on Wednesday 3rd of June 2020 06:47:12 PM

Take a good look at those top photos. The girl in the pink dress? Look at her legs. They are the same fat legs of the original photo. The length of her dress is different. The stool seat is not the same. You can see it's been stretched. And there are other discrepancies. I've circled a few. Differences in measurements. It's very well done, but I'm afraid it has been manipulated. It would also very difficult to get two sets of models with absolutely identical background measurements.

JP · Burning up the forum

Digger wrote:
JP wrote:
SF wrote:
JP wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
JP wrote:
Digger wrote:
Social media feeds are filled with photographs that have been edited to showcase a neatly curated 'perfection'.
But fans of one Chinese influencer were shocked to see just how much her snaps appear to have been edited before being shared.
Social media star @Coeyyyy, who uses the Chinese-based social and e-shopping platform Xiaohongshu, or RED, looked startlingly different in the 'before and after' photos, with everything from the shape of her jawline to her body type changing.

However not all social media users were convinced of the photos' authenticity.
One argued it was more likely to be a stunt by two women pretending to be @Coeyyyy and her friend.
He noted that, although the women in both pictures were wearing the same clothes and posing in the same position, it is extremely difficult to 'shrink' an individual without distorting the background.
The same user said edited photos are usually of a lower resolution than the original, when in fact the reverse is true in this set.

The user is right manipulating pixels to that degree is gonna cause distortion issues.

-- Edited by JP on Monday 1st of June 2020 08:02:27 PM
There's a big difference between someone trying to alter a picture using their phone than a professional using state of the art computer imaging.
Have you never seen A syfy movie. Or a horror movie?
altering images professionally have been done since photography was invented
A movie. Why are you comparing a static photograph 'stills' with a motion picture?
It's common knowledge that a motion picture is made up of individual photographic stills.
You're missing the point. Hopefully you've read the thread properly.
Keeping background distortion out of one solitary static heavily manipulated photo is a very hard thing to achieve.
Whereas keeping distortion out of a string of moving stills(film) is far easier to achieve.

-- Edited by JP on Wednesday 3rd of June 2020 06:47:12 PM
Take a good look at those top photos. The girl in the pink dress? Look at her legs. They are the same fat legs of the original photo. The length of her dress is different. The stool seat is not the same. You can see it's been stretched. And there are other discrepancies. I've circled a few. Differences in measurements. It's very well done, but I'm afraid it has been manipulated. It would also very difficult to get two sets of models with absolutely identical background measurements.

The stool is a good one. Really quite noticeable that one. And goes the same for the wall.

It is a good job. But as they say. Close, but no cigar.

Date: Jun 4 6:09 PM, 2020

JP wrote:
SF wrote:
It's common knowledge that a motion picture is made up of individual photographic stills.
You're missing the point. Hopefully you've read the thread properly.
Keeping background distortion out of one solitary static heavily manipulated photo is a very hard thing to achieve.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm afraid you're going to have to set me straight on that one - which point do you mean? Do you mean the point is that the skinny pic can't be a doctored pic because there's no background distortion? Or am I still missing the point?

JP · Burning up the forum

SF wrote:
JP wrote:
SF wrote:
It's common knowledge that a motion picture is made up of individual photographic stills.
You're missing the point. Hopefully you've read the thread properly.
Keeping background distortion out of one solitary static heavily manipulated photo is a very hard thing to achieve.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm afraid you're going to have to set me straight on that one - which point do you mean? Do you mean the point is that the skinny pic can't be a doctored pic because there's no background distortion? Or am I still missing the point?

Two reasons. Why distortion is easier to hide in film.

A series of 'stills' being shown at 24 FPS(frames per second), 30, 50, 60, or even 120 nowadays. Your eyes won't be able to pick up on distortion as easily within a film. Compared to a solitary static photo!

That's one of the reasons why the anon can't fairly compare movie editing to solitary static photo editing. It's far harder to successfully heavily manipulate a solitary static photo and deceive the onlooker.

The other reason in film as mentioned the load is being spread across a series of images. That can also help mitigate distortion. Something you can't do with one solitary static photo.

Hope that helps!

-- Edited by JP on Thursday 4th of June 2020 08:56:25 PM

Date: Jun 4 9:13 PM, 2020

JP wrote:
SF wrote:
JP wrote:
SF wrote:
It's common knowledge that a motion picture is made up of individual photographic stills.
You're missing the point. Hopefully you've read the thread properly.
Keeping background distortion out of one solitary static heavily manipulated photo is a very hard thing to achieve.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm afraid you're going to have to set me straight on that one - which point do you mean? Do you mean the point is that the skinny pic can't be a doctored pic because there's no background distortion? Or am I still missing the point?
Two reasons. Why distortion is easier to hide in film.
A series of 'stills' being shown at 24 FPS(frames per second), 30, 50, 60, or even 120 nowadays. Your eyes won't be able to pick up on distortion as easily within a film. Compared to a solitary static photo!
That's one of the reasons why the anon can't fairly compare movie editing to solitary static photo editing. It's far harder to successfully heavily manipulate a solitary static photo and deceive the onlooker.
The other reason in film as mentioned the load is being spread across a series of images. That can also help mitigate distortion. Something you can't do with one solitary static photo.
Hope that helps!

-- Edited by JP on Thursday 4th of June 2020 08:56:25 PM

OK thanks I get that. But what does it have to do with the skinny pic being faked. It is faked, isn't it?

Date: Jun 4 9:32 PM, 2020

Has anybody heard of deep fake technology? A person on video can be processed and then made to say anything with lips synchronized to the new speech. Newspapers have been playing around with images for a long time.

Syl · FIRM BUT FAIR.

Anonymous wrote:
Has anybody heard of deep fake technology? A person on video can be processed and then made to say anything with lips synchronized to the new speech. Newspapers have been playing around with images for a long time.

I have seen some video's where this has been done, it can manipulate people into believing anyone can say anything.Ingenious and dangerous.

JP · Burning up the forum

Anonymous wrote:
JP wrote:
SF wrote:
JP wrote:
SF wrote:
It's common knowledge that a motion picture is made up of individual photographic stills.
You're missing the point. Hopefully you've read the thread properly.
Keeping background distortion out of one solitary static heavily manipulated photo is a very hard thing to achieve.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm afraid you're going to have to set me straight on that one - which point do you mean? Do you mean the point is that the skinny pic can't be a doctored pic because there's no background distortion? Or am I still missing the point?
Two reasons. Why distortion is easier to hide in film.
A series of 'stills' being shown at 24 FPS(frames per second), 30, 50, 60, or even 120 nowadays. Your eyes won't be able to pick up on distortion as easily within a film. Compared to a solitary static photo!
That's one of the reasons why the anon can't fairly compare movie editing to solitary static photo editing. It's far harder to successfully heavily manipulate a solitary static photo and deceive the onlooker.
The other reason in film as mentioned the load is being spread across a series of images. That can also help mitigate distortion. Something you can't do with one solitary static photo.
Hope that helps!

-- Edited by JP on Thursday 4th of June 2020 08:56:25 PM
OK thanks I get that. But what does it have to do with the skinny pic being faked. It is faked, isn't it?

Read the thread post by post.

You might get that as well then.

-- Edited by JP on Friday 5th of June 2020 12:50:26 AM

JP · Burning up the forum

Anonymous wrote:
Has anybody heard of deep fake technology? A person on video can be processed and then made to say anything with lips synchronized to the new speech. Newspapers have been playing around with images for a long time.

Always have a personal recording of everything you say in life.

I have a voice recorder close by at all times.