--- John Fereira <jaf30_at_cornell.edu> wrote: > The area in the vicinity of where the kayak > is supposed to be looks a bit mottled to me. > There seems to be a slight greenish tint on > the photo only in the area around the > location of the kayak. Looking at the photo > with photoshop and zooming in to 400% and it > looks like a "smudge" tool was used. If it was doctored, shame on the person who did it. My eye was instantly drawn to that spot, perhaps because of the surviver there or perhaps because of a bad doctering job. When I look at the blown up image I would say it is suspicious, but I can't conclusively say it was doctored. It just may be that the surviver is just a more diffuse reflector than the highlights on the water. In any case the picture makes the case very poorly. As I said before, there are a lot of reasons why this is so. The eye is an amazing receptor capable of resolving many times more detail than can be displayed in a 585 X 410 pixel jpeg. Furthermore the brain can process moving images to get far more infomation than one still image from the same data stream contains. Are dye and smoke packs a good idea? Absolutely. Does this picture drive that point home? Not in my opinion. Pete Staehling Yahoo! Autos - Get free new car price quotes http://autos.yahoo.com *************************************************************************** PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List - Any opinions or suggestions expressed here are solely those of the writer(s). You must assume the entire responsibility for reliance upon them. All postings copyright the author. Submissions: PaddleWise_at_PaddleWise.net Subscriptions: PaddleWise-request_at_PaddleWise.net Website: http://www.paddlewise.net/ ***************************************************************************Received on Mon Jul 15 2002 - 05:53:44 PDT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thu Aug 21 2025 - 16:30:54 PDT