|
Post by byrdsmaniac on Mar 25, 2005 4:22:34 GMT
I think paul is paul and this was all just a publicity stunt. Which isnt uncommon pink floyd pulled off the enigma for their division bell album and to this day people are still talking about it. I don't know anything about the "Division Bell" enigma. Could you describe what it's all about for those of us not "in the know"? As for Paul being Paul, you're entitled to your opinion, of course, but the purpose of this site is to look at evidence that Paul was replaced, not to decide whether or not it happened.
|
|
|
Post by PaulBearer on Mar 25, 2005 5:56:13 GMT
I feel that Floydfan1028 has the wrong idea of what this forum is about and so I must unceremoniously pull the plug on him or her sorry.
|
|
|
Post by TPIMaster on Apr 1, 2005 9:54:03 GMT
Faul recording Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band from 'The Making Of Sgt. Pepper' Look at the bad job on the eyes... Is it me or does that mustache look like it's been glued on there for some reason? And then there's this: Man, you've been a naughty boy, you've your face grow TOO long.
|
|
|
Post by abbey on Apr 1, 2005 15:26:02 GMT
Excellent observation, TPIMaster. It does look like a false, glued on mustache. In an old Beatle book I have there is a picture with Bill and the mustache is false because it doesn't line up with his nose like real ones do. It had to have been a prop to cover plastic surgery scars before they were "sanded" down.
Yes, his eyes look strange in that photo, too. Bill has a double fold over his left eye that Paul never had. You don't see it often, but it is there. Will have to see if I can find photos showing what I mean.
|
|
|
Post by BeatlePaul on Apr 1, 2005 16:03:47 GMT
Faul recording Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band from 'The Making Of Sgt. Pepper' Look at the bad job on the eyes... Is it me or does that mustache look like it's been glued on there for some reason? And then there's this: Man, you've been a naughty boy, you've your face grow TOO long. taken from Sgt. Pepper at: digilander.libero.it/jamespaul/sgt_pepper_cd_booklet.htmlThe Beatles ALREADY told us almost everything. But people wouldn't see. BTW check the W/H ratio of those frames. 1.333 to 1 is the right one (PAL SECAM NTSC) 1,4667 to 1 is what I've found
|
|
|
Post by TPIMaster on Apr 1, 2005 16:31:35 GMT
Interesting.
Well, the file was 352x240, which would be 1.466666666...
|
|
|
Post by abbey on Apr 1, 2005 17:20:53 GMT
What does the W/H ratio of those frames have to do with anything ? Can you please explain why that is important ? Thanks ( I know, I'm not very good with these kind of things )
|
|
|
Post by defhermit on Apr 1, 2005 20:10:16 GMT
the height to width ratio is a good stat to use to determine where the footabe comes from... one ratio is what they use for european television (PAL), one ratio is what they use for American television... if some footage looks like the ratio is perfect to have come from european television, but another pic that seemingly comes from the same show but is a LITTLE bit off, it is possible evidence that the pic has been "squished" to make faul's face seem broader or vice versa...
|
|
|
Post by BeatlePaul on Apr 1, 2005 21:20:19 GMT
|
|
|
Post by BeatlePaul on Apr 1, 2005 21:25:02 GMT
What does the W/H ratio of those frames have to do with anything ? Can you please explain why that is important ? Thanks ( I know, I'm not very good with these kind of things ) If you find a frame captured from DVD/VHS related to an old TV footage without the W/H ratio equal to 4:3 so you have just a "stretched" picture..... "just a la Flaming Pie" It's simple.
|
|
|
Post by defhermit on Apr 1, 2005 23:41:40 GMT
okay, so you got me there... I didn't know PAL was also 4:3...
the point I was making still hold true for other things.... I'm sure there is a normal "ratio" for different type of film stock, etc... so what I was talking about holds true for that...
|
|
|
Post by TPIMaster on Aug 11, 2005 12:04:12 GMT
Sgt Pepper? Or Sherrif Pepper? Or Bungalow Bill?
|
|
|
Post by plastic paul on Aug 11, 2005 23:56:44 GMT
Great pic
|
|
|
Post by TPIMaster on Aug 25, 2005 11:41:11 GMT
|
|
|
Post by plastic paul on Aug 25, 2005 12:24:16 GMT
I can't put my finger on it but theres definitely something wrong with those eyes!
|
|
|
Post by TPIMaster on Aug 25, 2005 17:12:11 GMT
And there's something wrong with the picture aswell. It's flipped. George isn't left handed But are why there so many flipped pictures? Cause if you flip pics of Paul/Faul the face looks wrong... But pics of Faul look wrong anyways. ;D This one aswell, even though it's now correctly displayed.
|
|
|
Post by plastic paul on Aug 25, 2005 22:59:25 GMT
Damn! should have noticed that! anyways there's still something about his eyes, i think it might be that his eyelids face downwards left but his eyes are looking at george? As in his "sculpted" eyelids are clearly incorrect, he looks very drawn and his chin very "back" if u get what i mean and that ear is positioned very far back let alone the fact it it seems to almost tilt 45 degrees back.
Of course that all means jack if no-one understands what i mean!
|
|
LUCY
Contributor
Posts: 29
|
Post by LUCY on Aug 25, 2005 23:33:10 GMT
Damn! should have noticed that! anyways there's still something about his eyes, i think it might be that his eyelids face downwards left but his eyes are looking at george? As in his "sculpted" eyelids are clearly incorrect, Of course that all means jack if no-one understands what i mean! like little orphan annie eyes? "Now there's a look in your eyes Like black holes in the sky"
|
|
|
Post by mistermoonlight on Aug 17, 2006 11:02:11 GMT
His nose is sooo different from Paul's in that last one..
|
|
|
Post by unrepentant on Aug 18, 2006 22:50:08 GMT
the top photo [faul carrying the instrument] is said to be the very first photo from the SGT. pepper sessions. why is leftie paul is holding it in his right hand?
|
|
|
Post by Rojopa on Aug 19, 2006 13:31:59 GMT
Come on now! That statement about Faul carrying his guitar in his right hand is ridiculous. I am right handed, but use my left hand to carry things quite frequently. This is no clue!
|
|
|
Post by plastic paul on Aug 20, 2006 22:19:52 GMT
Rojopa I understand your point, it isn't a clue as such, but guitars are heavy pieces of equipment, I couldn't carry one in my left for very long.
|
|
|
Post by lyceum on Aug 21, 2006 11:27:29 GMT
There's no way that the person in these pictures is James Paul McCartney.
NO WAY!
|
|
lazur
Welcome new member
Posts: 8
|
Post by lazur on Oct 27, 2006 11:58:54 GMT
Paul had more than one impersonator, some of whom were already in place when he himself was still, sometimes, portraying himself, too. Between digital photography's capabilites for altering images, and the Beatles organization's penchant for playing games with images to the full ability of technology at the time, there is the potential for much confusion. I prefer to go straight from -very- early photos to current ones. Less artistic images, in regard to the camera work itself, film processing, concept, and reproduction, leaving little room for distortion. You can enjoy all the clues and theories, as -I- do, but skipping over them, straight from 1964 to 2006, is enough, as these 'Pauls' are obviously two different people, no matter what anyone wrote, sang said , denied or claimed.
|
|
lazur
Welcome new member
Posts: 8
|
Post by lazur on Oct 27, 2006 12:07:57 GMT
I do have question, though: Why would Billy go from having his ear originally connected to his jaw like this: ( / ), to a full lobe: ( U ), when Paul has a connection like this: ( _ )? Whether it's surgery, makeup, ot prosthesis, it seems more difficult to make the wrong change than the correct one. The simplest explanation would be a third person.
|
|