|
REPORT ABUSIVE REPLY
|
|
Message Subject
|
James Holmes +-_-+ 100% Fake with Photographic Proof
|
|
Poster Handle
|
Anonymous Coward |
|
Post Content
|
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 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.
|
|
|
Please verify you're human:
|
|
|
Reason for reporting:
|
