Obvious Fake Debunking Attempt
of Apr 13, 2003 Chapel Hill Photo

This picture that I saw on Nancy's site is the biggest fake I've seen yet. I work with Photoshop everyday for my job, and have had it open for 4-5 hours per day, for the past 3 years. This image though, I could have made when I recieved my first copy of photoshop 3 years ago. Nothing but blur, opacity, and the marquee tool. That's all it took for me to make one almost identical. Here's my image I made compared to the one you are referring to.

Girl 101 (posted on tt-watch mailing list)

 

D, want to check this image out? Doesn't quite look right to me - too much starfield showing up, dust cloud looks small, edges on cirlce look too defined and a lot of yellow and purple colour.

Steve Havas

 

I subjected her so called 5 minute copy to the same tests as Kid A's phtoa with very different results. Her photo fake does not have the same digital texture as the Kid A, nor does it show a starfield when brightness contrast is changed. In addition, when the same brighness contrast and threshold tests are done her photo fake falls apart. The fake is easily discerned. It was easy to discover it was fake. Simply use the image magnifier to blow it up to screen size. You will see that the pixels on the object are finer in detail than the starfields by about a factor of 2. Kid A on the other hand has subtle patterns and texture a simple paint smudge does not have. I clasify her as amatuer debunker 101.

D