bxv
Contributor
Posts: 77
|
Post by bxv on Sept 8, 2005 1:41:04 GMT
Slow fading is a con - if the subjects are similar. Thats why he was picked.
I dont think so, sorry. He warrants a "Hey, theres Liam Gallagher" at the most, certainly not PmC.
Look at your avater! Is that JPM?
|
|
|
|
Post by Perplexed on Sept 8, 2005 6:31:31 GMT
Slow fading is a con - if the subjects are similar. Thats why he was picked. I dont think so, sorry. He warrants a "Hey, theres Liam Gallagher" at the most, certainly not PmC. Look at your avater! Is that JPM? I see what you mean about Liam. Interesting. That avatar could be JPM, or, a "ringer" angle for William. After two years of squinting at a computer screen for hours at a time, my eyes are growing fatigued. |
|
neoexelor
Contributor
Shake it a Baby Now!
Posts: 35
|
Post by neoexelor on Sept 8, 2005 11:23:06 GMT
Slow fading is a con - if the subjects are similar. Thats why he was picked. I dont think so, sorry. He warrants a "Hey, theres Liam Gallagher" at the most, certainly not PmC. Look at your avater! Is that JPM? Dude, his eyes are spot on, so is his skull shape and I think his nose is too. |
|
bxv
Contributor
Posts: 77
|
Post by bxv on Sept 8, 2005 23:27:38 GMT
Slow fading is a con - if the subjects are similar. Thats why he was picked. I dont think so, sorry. He warrants a "Hey, theres Liam Gallagher" at the most, certainly not PmC. Look at your avater! Is that JPM? Dude, his eyes are spot on, so is his skull shape and I think his nose is too. Dude, no offence but you need glasses!   Just about every facial and cranial feature is different - with my eyes. |
|
|
|
Post by Perplexed on Sept 9, 2005 6:53:17 GMT
Dude, his eyes are spot on, so is his skull shape and I think his nose is too. Dude, no offence but you need glasses! Just about every facial and cranial feature is different - with my eyes. bxv, I can see what you are saying, and it really all adds up. You're probably right on the nose. Good post. Your eyes must indicate a lot to you. I notice the left and right cheeks are in a slight assymetry. When recognized, it might raise an eyebrow or two. I'm sure yours must have, the first time. Also, the hair gives way to hair. Matching hair, but hair that is the same doesn't ever seem to "match", it's just more of the same...... Matches occur between two seperate but similar things. Similar but not identical. Although nearly so. Forgive me, it's late, I must retire. |
|
|
|
Post by Perplexed on Sept 9, 2005 7:02:15 GMT
What am I trying to prove? That this is not Paul Mc Cartney. That in fact, it is photographs of two different individuals spliced together - to produce a Paul Mc Cartney. And, no it does not look "more like" anything. It's not stupid 'lensing' effect. Im not half the man I used to be..... There's a shadow matted over me............ |
|
|
|
Post by Perplexed on Sept 9, 2005 7:21:45 GMT
OK< so everybody's head has two halves, like a walnut. Two faces, but FOUR facial halves. Combinations of four elements............
plus the insertion of alternative "ochi'.
Okey-Dokey, Hokey-Pokey.
4 "keys" to the solution.
Williams left and right face part, JP's left and right face part. Use William's eyes.
Extend the cranial height/hair.
Shadows around the nose.
Narrow the lips.
Obscure the ears.
Shadow under the jaw.
A "musing" has just come over me.
Come Together Over Me. Several verses. Each one is later in time. Each one is a freeze frame of something going on with Paul at later and later intervals. Progress report. History. Description. Physical. Medical. Verses all written in the continuous present tense, 3rd person.
Except for the hook line "Come Together, right now, over me." which is first person imperative. Who is speaking then? And, to whom?
Did they obey? Do I make sense?
Am I in my right mind?
Will I just close this post and go straight to bed?
Yes. Right now. I'm over me.
|
|
bxv
Contributor
Posts: 77
|
Post by bxv on Sept 9, 2005 13:09:51 GMT
I also thought song that was pertinent Perp, I quoted it in an earlier post. Was there a studio Paul, a Paul for the record covers, a Paul for the fledgling teeny mags, a Paul for gigs? Feck, the harder I look the less I see.
|
|
|
|
Post by ReallyReallyDead on Sept 10, 2005 0:23:51 GMT
Dude, his eyes are spot on, so is his skull shape and I think his nose is too. Dude, no offence but you need glasses! Just about every facial and cranial feature is different - with my eyes. I dunno, they look good to me. |
|
bxv
Contributor
Posts: 77
|
Post by bxv on Sept 10, 2005 2:12:42 GMT
They haven't perfected the Faul technique, or they couldn't get a good match. You can see the join here. They messed up the hair to fudge the two together. You can actually see the forgers brush strokes. Two photographs stuck together - blatantly obvious. Totally out af alignment. Right jaw [his left] has been blurred to make it a bit less conspicous.  And another thing this photo is called Paris.jpg - when in fact they are standing in front of Blackpool tower, not far from L'pool.  /  |
|
|
|
Post by ReallyReallyDead on Sept 10, 2005 11:05:28 GMT
They haven't perfected the Faul technique, or they couldn't get a good match. You can see the join here. They messed up the hair to fudge the two together. You can actually see the forgers brush strokes. Two photographs stuck together - blatantly obvious. Totally out af alignment. Right jaw [his left] has been blurred to make it a bit less conspicous. I'm not sure I buy or get all of this, but I'll try to help anyway. Here are 3 strange lines I see in the picture. The lower right section looks weird.  |
|
bxv
Contributor
Posts: 77
|
Post by bxv on Sept 10, 2005 11:57:02 GMT
Its not that difficult really, it's 2 photographs badly spliced together, right down the middle. Look at the line down the center of his nose, through his mouth and down past his chin! A little work was done on the right side of face to blur it. Too sticky outy. Look where they rubbed hairstyles together. The chins dont meet.
|
|
|
|
Post by ReallyReallyDead on Sept 10, 2005 12:43:55 GMT
but why would they splice 2 photographs together?  |
|
bxv
Contributor
Posts: 77
|
Post by bxv on Sept 10, 2005 14:20:00 GMT
I think you had better ask the Tavistock Foundation and British Intelligence that question. It's possible that it was Paul in the photo initially, and when whatever happened happened, they had to hide all the evidence - even going so far as to hack all the old photos of the real Paul. I dont think it was any coincidence that there was a "fire" at the BBC which destroyed all the Beatles tapes, do you?
|
|
|
|
Post by TPIMaster on Sept 10, 2005 14:43:44 GMT
So you're saying that they spliced 2 pictures together. Which means that they would, for example, have to extract EVERY SINGLE frame from for example the A Hard Day's Night movie and edit them and make them look natural.
|
|
Dr.No
Contributor
Posts: 177
|
Post by Dr.No on Sept 10, 2005 17:19:03 GMT
They haven't perfected the Faul technique, or they couldn't get a good match. You can see the join here. They messed up the hair to fudge the two together. You can actually see the forgers brush strokes. Two photographs stuck together - blatantly obvious. Totally out af alignment. Right jaw [his left] has been blurred to make it a bit less conspicous. I'm not sure I buy or get all of this, but I'll try to help anyway. Here are 3 strange lines I see in the picture. The lower right section looks weird. those lines look like jpeg compression to me. |
|
|
|
Post by ReallyReallyDead on Sept 10, 2005 22:47:00 GMT
So you're saying that they spliced 2 pictures together. Which means that they would, for example, have to extract EVERY SINGLE frame from for example the A Hard Day's Night movie and edit them and make them look natural. True dat!  Not to mention Help!, Shea Stadium, Paris, interviews, etc. |
|
bxv
Contributor
Posts: 77
|
Post by bxv on Sept 10, 2005 23:07:54 GMT
Stand ins, doubles. 4 or 5 different interchangelable Pauls. Is the line down the CENTER of his face jpeg compression? Is the joined up hairdo's jpeg compression? Oh I see, Paul has two different faces because of jpeg compression. Is that why the chins dont meet, jpeg compression? Was the right side of his face blurred out by jpeg compression?
Re the films - only the frames that JPM appeared in would need changed, couple of hours in an editing suite. This is HIGH LEVEL forgery. I don't think resources are scarce in Her Majhesties Intelligence services. Maybe there was a team assigned to it. Maybe thats why NO TWO SHOTS OF Paul are alike.
|
|
|
|
Post by Perplexed on Sept 11, 2005 2:44:58 GMT
So you're saying that they spliced 2 pictures together. Which means that they would, for example, have to extract EVERY SINGLE frame from for example the A Hard Day's Night movie and edit them and make them look natural. True dat! Not to mention Help!, Shea Stadium, Paris, interviews, etc. Not if you've got really really good software. Maybe a more sophisticated version of this: www.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~morph/Transformer/Well, get started. You can do about a minute every two months. Hurry, you don't have all century. |
|
bxv
Contributor
Posts: 77
|
Post by bxv on Sept 11, 2005 3:31:44 GMT
Like who the **** is this clown? EAt your heart out Marlon Brando.  \  Please dont tell me it's PMC!! Dont you find this a little odd? Now the asymetry has moved from the vertical to the diagonal. Side shot. Cant you see the join again? Oh hang on it's jpeg compression, isnt it? [sarcasm] Triangle right eye!!  |
|
|
|
Post by McGarrett-Five-0 on Sept 11, 2005 4:59:27 GMT
 Forgive my line making.....first time to try it! I'm learning. Danno is better then me. BXV is exactly right. I took the photo and enlarged it. There are splices thoughout the picture and color applied over them to try and hide them. There is color applied to the hairline on his left to blend it in. If you look at his left cheek you will see a small area where the missed color. It's white. I missed lines around the eyes but if you enlarge the picture and adjust shadow and fill light all the way down you will see it. I just noticed I didn't even put lines in the nose area. It's been patched in. I had seen this picture before but never really examined it. It is totally bogus. |
|
bxv
Contributor
Posts: 77
|
Post by bxv on Sept 11, 2005 6:37:19 GMT
Thank you for that Steve. Now looking at that stupid photo of Multi-Faul again in the Russian Hat, I've just realised what caused the trauma at his right eye. They (whoever they are?) cut a trianlgular section around and through his eye and moved it to try and match the direction the other eye was looking. I reverse engineered it, I just roughly matched up the eyelid again - where it was broken.  Bogus, fake, forgery - call it what you want! |
|
|
|
Post by McGarrett-Five-0 on Sept 11, 2005 7:44:04 GMT
 Again, bxv is right on the money. I took the photo and sent over to Picasa (Is there a better one?) I enlarged the picture. You can clearly see the triangle where they pasted it in. You somewhat see it here. I haven't figured out yet how to save the enlargement,but I will! |
|
|
|
Post by ReallyReallyDead on Sept 11, 2005 10:34:49 GMT
Forgive my line making.....first time to try it! I'm learning. Danno is better then me. BXV is exactly right. I took the photo and enlarged it. There are splices thoughout the picture and color applied over them to try and hide them. There is color applied to the hairline on his left to blend it in. If you look at his left cheek you will see a small area where the missed color. It's white. I missed lines around the eyes but if you enlarge the picture and adjust shadow and fill light all the way down you will see it. I just noticed I didn't even put lines in the nose area. It's been patched in. I had seen this picture before but never really examined it. It is totally bogus. But that picture is from a vintage magazine! Why would they doctor photos before Paul's replacement???I still think this is probably just Paul's asimetrical face, and some makeup and touchups. But I'll try to keep an open mind. |
|
|
|
Post by TPIMaster on Sept 11, 2005 10:54:23 GMT
If things just can't be true, there are still people who believe it... This topic is a good example of something like that.
I won't post in this topic again since this just doesn't make sense.
"Doctoring pictures before his death = full legal bullhonkey" (in other words: complete nonsense)
|
|
