Godlike Productions - Conspiracy Forum
Users Online Now: 2,511 (Who's On?)Visitors Today: 1,572,165
Pageviews Today: 2,125,405Threads Today: 459Posts Today: 9,313
05:10 PM


Rate this Thread

Absolute BS Crap Reasonable Nice Amazing
 

James Holmes +-_-+ 100% Fake with Photographic Proof

 
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 14396340
United States
07/23/2012 02:34 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
James Holmes +-_-+ 100% Fake with Photographic Proof
Rendering is a different person looking up with big ears instead of down with small ears

1. [link to fotoforensics.com]

2. [link to metapicz.com]

Second link shows photo was time stamped in January 2012
bump
Anonymous Coward (OP)
User ID: 14396340
United States
07/23/2012 03:04 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: James Holmes +-_-+ 100% Fake with Photographic Proof
bump
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 7196153
United States
07/23/2012 03:08 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: James Holmes +-_-+ 100% Fake with Photographic Proof
bump

is there anything to this?
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 20280411
Germany
07/23/2012 03:09 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: James Holmes +-_-+ 100% Fake with Photographic Proof
no, the ICC profile, not the image data.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 20325423
Australia
07/23/2012 03:10 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: James Holmes +-_-+ 100% Fake with Photographic Proof
what's it supposed to be?
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 8055979
United States
07/23/2012 03:15 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: James Holmes +-_-+ 100% Fake with Photographic Proof
I dunno for sure...but here's what the analysis is designed to do.

Tutorial: Error Level Analysis
Error Level Analysis (ELA) identifies areas within an image that are at different compression levels. With JPEG images, the entire picture should be at roughly the same error level. If a section of the image is at a significantly different error level, then it likely indicates a digital modification.


[link to fotoforensics.com]
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 20325423
Australia
07/23/2012 03:17 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: James Holmes +-_-+ 100% Fake with Photographic Proof
I dunno for sure...but here's what the analysis is designed to do.

Tutorial: Error Level Analysis
Error Level Analysis (ELA) identifies areas within an image that are at different compression levels. With JPEG images, the entire picture should be at roughly the same error level. If a section of the image is at a significantly different error level, then it likely indicates a digital modification.


[link to fotoforensics.com]
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 8055979


In that case, you would have to find out where this image came from. It says "first video" down the bottom. So is it one frame of a video? Is it a digital photo taken of a video being played on a monitor? Is it a screen capture?

Depending how the image was made, it might have different error levels.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 8055979
United States
07/23/2012 03:19 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: James Holmes +-_-+ 100% Fake with Photographic Proof
OP posted this twice (2 diff threads) so I think he "sees" something, I'm just not sure what it is.

OP- explain what you want people to look for.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 20339123
07/23/2012 03:22 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: James Holmes +-_-+ 100% Fake with Photographic Proof
The most sensitive part of the Pentagon Field Manual concerns the passage which describes how the “internal stabilisation operations” were to be carried out in practice, hence how the Pentagon advised the European military secret services to fight what the Pentagon perceived as the “communist” or “socialist” thread. In what seems to be a description of the operations which some stay-behind armies actually carried out during the cold war, namely terrorist attacks in public places which were thereafter wrongly blamed on the communists and socialists by planting false evidence, is described by FM 30-31B like that: "There may be times when Host Country Governments show passivity or indecision in the face of communist subversion and according to the interpretation of the US secret services do not react with sufficient effectiveness. Most often such situations come about when the revolutionaries temporarily renounce the use of force and thus hope to gain an advantage, as the leaders of the host country wrongly consider the situation to be secure. US army intelligence must have the means of launching special operations which will convince Host Country Governments and public opinion of the reality of the insurgent danger."
 Quoting: [link to cryptome.info]


Field Manual 30-31b, describes these kind of underground, terrorist attackings. It is made to blame a critical political group, Similar to Anders Breivik massacre.

Read this Propaganda B.S.(and watch the black-block-pussies):
[link to pibillwarner.wordpress.com]

Private Detective Bill Warner is a member of the FBI Partner InfraGard.
Here in Europe we have INDECT.
Mr. Göbbels would be jealous to the modern possibilities of propaganda. The article is pure propaganda to blame the attack to the Occupy-Movement. Discusting!
Hail NWO!
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 20339123



OH DAMN. I am a fan of joseph goebbels. he was a genius.
and yet, my study of WWII nazi germany has helped me realize so much.
especially a LOT that has gone on within this country.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 19476074
bannedfornoreason

User ID: 7138989
United States
07/23/2012 03:26 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: James Holmes +-_-+ 100% Fake with Photographic Proof
2nd pic doens't work!
bannedfornoreason
Anonymous Coward (OP)
User ID: 14396340
United States
07/23/2012 03:31 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: James Holmes +-_-+ 100% Fake with Photographic Proof
Im working on a follow up right now
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 13537118
United States
07/23/2012 03:34 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: James Holmes +-_-+ 100% Fake with Photographic Proof
Umm the picture is clearly edited.. "ABC News Exclusive"

"First Video of Killer"

Im pretty sure the dude doesnt walk around with Logos and captions constantly floating around him.

applause2norespect
Anonymous Coward (OP)
User ID: 14396340
United States
07/23/2012 03:35 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: James Holmes +-_-+ 100% Fake with Photographic Proof
Ok. He is a photo of one of the victims. If the photo has not been manipulated, you should see pretty much the same outline and structure of the subjects in the ELA as compared to the original. The ELA allows you to see the structure of the ORIGINAL image before it has been manipulated. Compare these. The victim has pretty much the same structure but the suspect in the ABC photo doesn't. His ears are bigger in the ELA and is looking upwards and the original he has smaller ears and is looking more in the downward direction


[link to fotoforensics.com]

vs

[link to fotoforensics.com]
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 20325423
Australia
07/23/2012 03:36 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: James Holmes +-_-+ 100% Fake with Photographic Proof
Ok. He is a photo of one of the victims. If the photo has not been manipulated, you should see pretty much the same outline and structure of the subjects in the ELA as compared to the original. The ELA allows you to see the structure of the ORIGINAL image before it has been manipulated. Compare these. The victim has pretty much the same structure but the suspect in the ABC photo doesn't. His ears are bigger in the ELA and is looking upwards and the original he has smaller ears and is looking more in the downward direction


[link to fotoforensics.com]

vs

[link to fotoforensics.com]
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 14396340


one is a photo, one is a video capture. not the same thing.
Anonymous Coward (OP)
User ID: 14396340
United States
07/23/2012 03:37 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: James Holmes +-_-+ 100% Fake with Photographic Proof
The best thing to do it mouse over the first image so it goes ela-original ela-orginal and so on. You will tell its way different. Look at the facial structure in the ELA. It is totally different and hes looking atleast straight, if not upwards, as compared to downwards.
Anonymous Coward (OP)
User ID: 14396340
United States
07/23/2012 03:41 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: James Holmes +-_-+ 100% Fake with Photographic Proof
Well since it is a still image, what can explain the obvious difference in ear size and direction of face. What about the timestamp from January 2012?

Ok. He is a photo of one of the victims. If the photo has not been manipulated, you should see pretty much the same outline and structure of the subjects in the ELA as compared to the original. The ELA allows you to see the structure of the ORIGINAL image before it has been manipulated. Compare these. The victim has pretty much the same structure but the suspect in the ABC photo doesn't. His ears are bigger in the ELA and is looking upwards and the original he has smaller ears and is looking more in the downward direction


[link to fotoforensics.com]

vs

[link to fotoforensics.com]
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 14396340


one is a photo, one is a video capture. not the same thing.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 20325423
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 13537118
United States
07/23/2012 03:43 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: James Holmes +-_-+ 100% Fake with Photographic Proof
The best thing to do it mouse over the first image so it goes ela-original ela-orginal and so on. You will tell its way different. Look at the facial structure in the ELA. It is totally different and hes looking atleast straight, if not upwards, as compared to downwards.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 14396340


And this is based off of a compressed screen capture of a compressed video from a compressed video?
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 20325423
Australia
07/23/2012 03:45 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: James Holmes +-_-+ 100% Fake with Photographic Proof
Well since it is a still image, what can explain the obvious difference in ear size and direction of face. What about the timestamp from January 2012?
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 14396340


Where did you get the images? One looks like a photo taken of a woman, one looks like a screen capture of a video played on teevee. If the images are very different, of course there will be differences when you compare them.
Anonymous Coward (OP)
User ID: 14396340
United States
07/23/2012 03:46 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: James Holmes +-_-+ 100% Fake with Photographic Proof
Im not discounting you guys. Maybe you are right. But what caught me the most was the timestamp. Here is another from that video. This time it says it was created with Adobe Photoshop timestamped February 2012

[link to metapicz.com]
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 20280411
Germany
07/23/2012 03:47 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: James Holmes +-_-+ 100% Fake with Photographic Proof
the icc profile is timestamped jan2012, thats the embedded color profile not the imsge data
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 20280411
Germany
07/23/2012 03:48 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: James Holmes +-_-+ 100% Fake with Photographic Proof
sorry feb2012
Anonymous Coward (OP)
User ID: 14396340
United States
07/23/2012 03:48 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: James Holmes +-_-+ 100% Fake with Photographic Proof
ABC News

Well since it is a still image, what can explain the obvious difference in ear size and direction of face. What about the timestamp from January 2012?
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 14396340


Where did you get the images? One looks like a photo taken of a woman, one looks like a screen capture of a video played on teevee. If the images are very different, of course there will be differences when you compare them.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 20325423


Well since it is a still image, what can explain the obvious difference in ear size and direction of face. What about the timestamp from January 2012?
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 14396340


Where did you get the images? One looks like a photo taken of a woman, one looks like a screen capture of a video played on teevee. If the images are very different, of course there will be differences when you compare them.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 20325423
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 13537118
United States
07/23/2012 03:50 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: James Holmes +-_-+ 100% Fake with Photographic Proof
Explain why the boarders of the captions, are also bigger in the ELA version of the picture where you are stating his ears being bigger?

Did ABC rip this off of a fox telecast?
Anonymous Coward (OP)
User ID: 14396340
United States
07/23/2012 03:51 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: James Holmes +-_-+ 100% Fake with Photographic Proof
sorry feb2012
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 20280411


What does that mean. That was supposed to be from years ago according to the media when he was at camp. What could explain anything with the recent date without assuming wrongdoing by media?
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 20325423
Australia
07/23/2012 03:53 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: James Holmes +-_-+ 100% Fake with Photographic Proof
try doing some other images, of photos of Holmes, and screen captures of videos of somebody else
Anonymous Coward (OP)
User ID: 14396340
United States
07/23/2012 04:00 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: James Holmes +-_-+ 100% Fake with Photographic Proof
kinda weird. i dunno if this is algorithmic but I was looking for the first image of holmes that popped up after the shooting and if you search google images for "james holmes" on 7.20.2012 you get a guy that almost matches his description. Probably nothing but odd none the less

[link to www.google.com]
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 1549277
United States
07/23/2012 04:19 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: James Holmes +-_-+ 100% Fake with Photographic Proof
if its television type video, each individual frame of video is actually 2 images by design. a frame is composed of 2 fields. lets call them field a and field b. field a will be composed of all the odd numbered lines of the image (1,3,5,etc), field b will be composed of(you guessed it) all the even numbered lines (2,4,6, etc). the lines are composed by a rastor scanning across, left to right, with each pixel being excited to luminence of a level determined by voltage level, and hue determined by amplitude. when the rastor reaches the end of line 1, it then skips to line 3, repeating until field a is complete, then jumps back to the top to begin field b on line 2. there are 60 field refreshes per second, giving a total of 30 complete frames per second. ok, now lets say the first frame of the video has just completed. as the rastor begins the second frame, field a, which begins on line 1 again, the previous frame is still on screen. with each individual pixel refreshing along the line to the new signal determined luminence, and hue. any captured image from such a system will show variance of compression, as the brightness of different pixels varies not only by the level determined by the signal, but also by how much luminence and hue remains of the latent image being over written. assuming the capture happens in mid refresh of any single field, you actually have 3 levels of latency (frame 1, field a will be dimmest and most degraded, frame 1 field b will be brighter and less degraded, and frame 2 field a will be brightest and sharpest, as it is currently refreshing). the degraded latent image can vary greatly from the original rastor generated levels. all compression schemes also add "noise" to the image, as compression averages color and brightness for larger than pixel areas. that's why tiffs are sharper than jpegs, and jpegs are sharper than gifs. gifs have the greatest image compression, and tiffs the least of the 3. convert from one compression format to another, and more "noise" is added. so, if you capture a television type frame as a tiff, then convert to jpeg, the final image is going to show the hallmarks of manipulation when analyzed by forensic programs. even the unconverted tiff would show hallmarks, though not as blatantly, just from the latent image degradation, even if the video is showing a still image.
Anonymous Coward (OP)
User ID: 14396340
United States
07/23/2012 04:23 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: James Holmes +-_-+ 100% Fake with Photographic Proof
thank you

if its television type video, each individual frame of video is actually 2 images by design. a frame is composed of 2 fields. lets call them field a and field b. field a will be composed of all the odd numbered lines of the image (1,3,5,etc), field b will be composed of(you guessed it) all the even numbered lines (2,4,6, etc). the lines are composed by a rastor scanning across, left to right, with each pixel being excited to luminence of a level determined by voltage level, and hue determined by amplitude. when the rastor reaches the end of line 1, it then skips to line 3, repeating until field a is complete, then jumps back to the top to begin field b on line 2. there are 60 field refreshes per second, giving a total of 30 complete frames per second. ok, now lets say the first frame of the video has just completed. as the rastor begins the second frame, field a, which begins on line 1 again, the previous frame is still on screen. with each individual pixel refreshing along the line to the new signal determined luminence, and hue. any captured image from such a system will show variance of compression, as the brightness of different pixels varies not only by the level determined by the signal, but also by how much luminence and hue remains of the latent image being over written. assuming the capture happens in mid refresh of any single field, you actually have 3 levels of latency (frame 1, field a will be dimmest and most degraded, frame 1 field b will be brighter and less degraded, and frame 2 field a will be brightest and sharpest, as it is currently refreshing). the degraded latent image can vary greatly from the original rastor generated levels. all compression schemes also add "noise" to the image, as compression averages color and brightness for larger than pixel areas. that's why tiffs are sharper than jpegs, and jpegs are sharper than gifs. gifs have the greatest image compression, and tiffs the least of the 3. convert from one compression format to another, and more "noise" is added. so, if you capture a television type frame as a tiff, then convert to jpeg, the final image is going to show the hallmarks of manipulation when analyzed by forensic programs. even the unconverted tiff would show hallmarks, though not as blatantly, just from the latent image degradation, even if the video is showing a still image.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1549277
Anonymous Coward (OP)
User ID: 14396340
United States
07/23/2012 04:25 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: James Holmes +-_-+ 100% Fake with Photographic Proof
b could you also explain the dates of the colors in meta data? Like why would it even contain january or february of this year when those images are years old.
thank you

if its television type video, each individual frame of video is actually 2 images by design. a frame is composed of 2 fields. lets call them field a and field b. field a will be composed of all the odd numbered lines of the image (1,3,5,etc), field b will be composed of(you guessed it) all the even numbered lines (2,4,6, etc). the lines are composed by a rastor scanning across, left to right, with each pixel being excited to luminence of a level determined by voltage level, and hue determined by amplitude. when the rastor reaches the end of line 1, it then skips to line 3, repeating until field a is complete, then jumps back to the top to begin field b on line 2. there are 60 field refreshes per second, giving a total of 30 complete frames per second. ok, now lets say the first frame of the video has just completed. as the rastor begins the second frame, field a, which begins on line 1 again, the previous frame is still on screen. with each individual pixel refreshing along the line to the new signal determined luminence, and hue. any captured image from such a system will show variance of compression, as the brightness of different pixels varies not only by the level determined by the signal, but also by how much luminence and hue remains of the latent image being over written. assuming the capture happens in mid refresh of any single field, you actually have 3 levels of latency (frame 1, field a will be dimmest and most degraded, frame 1 field b will be brighter and less degraded, and frame 2 field a will be brightest and sharpest, as it is currently refreshing). the degraded latent image can vary greatly from the original rastor generated levels. all compression schemes also add "noise" to the image, as compression averages color and brightness for larger than pixel areas. that's why tiffs are sharper than jpegs, and jpegs are sharper than gifs. gifs have the greatest image compression, and tiffs the least of the 3. convert from one compression format to another, and more "noise" is added. so, if you capture a television type frame as a tiff, then convert to jpeg, the final image is going to show the hallmarks of manipulation when analyzed by forensic programs. even the unconverted tiff would show hallmarks, though not as blatantly, just from the latent image degradation, even if the video is showing a still image.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1549277

 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 14396340
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 1549277
United States
07/23/2012 04:52 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: James Holmes +-_-+ 100% Fake with Photographic Proof
b could you also explain the dates of the colors in meta data? Like why would it even contain january or february of this year when those images are years old.
thank you

if its television type video, each individual frame of video is actually 2 images by design. a frame is composed of 2 fields. lets call them field a and field b. field a will be composed of all the odd numbered lines of the image (1,3,5,etc), field b will be composed of(you guessed it) all the even numbered lines (2,4,6, etc). the lines are composed by a rastor scanning across, left to right, with each pixel being excited to luminence of a level determined by voltage level, and hue determined by amplitude. when the rastor reaches the end of line 1, it then skips to line 3, repeating until field a is complete, then jumps back to the top to begin field b on line 2. there are 60 field refreshes per second, giving a total of 30 complete frames per second. ok, now lets say the first frame of the video has just completed. as the rastor begins the second frame, field a, which begins on line 1 again, the previous frame is still on screen. with each individual pixel refreshing along the line to the new signal determined luminence, and hue. any captured image from such a system will show variance of compression, as the brightness of different pixels varies not only by the level determined by the signal, but also by how much luminence and hue remains of the latent image being over written. assuming the capture happens in mid refresh of any single field, you actually have 3 levels of latency (frame 1, field a will be dimmest and most degraded, frame 1 field b will be brighter and less degraded, and frame 2 field a will be brightest and sharpest, as it is currently refreshing). the degraded latent image can vary greatly from the original rastor generated levels. all compression schemes also add "noise" to the image, as compression averages color and brightness for larger than pixel areas. that's why tiffs are sharper than jpegs, and jpegs are sharper than gifs. gifs have the greatest image compression, and tiffs the least of the 3. convert from one compression format to another, and more "noise" is added. so, if you capture a television type frame as a tiff, then convert to jpeg, the final image is going to show the hallmarks of manipulation when analyzed by forensic programs. even the unconverted tiff would show hallmarks, though not as blatantly, just from the latent image degradation, even if the video is showing a still image.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1549277

 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 14396340

 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 14396340


the metadata is related to the current still image, not the original video shot. basically what you have here is a captured still from a vid, which was then rebroadcast on vid, though i think this is absconded as a still with the art dept additions. so you have several levels of compression, along with possibly compounded latency. im going to guess somebody captured the still from the original vid back in february (like mom doing it for a "bouncing baby boy through the years" kind of thing, or "joker jimmy" for some scholastic purpose)and the bottom feeders of abc got their grubby paws on it, then broadcast it as "killer as a brilliant geek kid" illustration for a story. the orig metadata of the capture will still be there(as evidenced by the reference to apple in originating equipment). basically, whoever posted this as some kind of "proof" of some conspiracy originally has no clue, or is pissing on your leg and telling you its a warm spring rain.
David J
User ID: 6542625
United States
07/27/2012 04:27 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: James Holmes +-_-+ 100% Fake with Photographic Proof
I truly thought that those were two different people, until I used photoshop to overlay the images, one on top of the other. I made the top one 50% transparent and now there is no doubt in my mind that those two images are of the same person. I don’t know if this link will work, but I posted the image I made on Facebook.

[link to www.facebook.com (secure)]

News








We're dropping truth bombs like it's the end of days!