The picture currently on the front page of www.cnn.com shows a picture of Pres. and Mrs. Bush boarding a plane, and it looks really fake. Is it a photo shop job or another kind of fake? Why would they do that if it is a fake?
I’m not sure how to link to the picture itself, maybe this is it http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/europe/02/20/bush.europe/index.html
It does look pretty low-grade.
Here is a direct link to the picture for reference.
The angle and lighting do indeed look quite weird. But there are approximately ten billion photographs of the President and First Lady boarding AF1, so I hardly think there would be any need to fake one.
I doubt that it is and I can see a situation where an undoctored photo would look exactly as this one does. A long telephoto shot with a direct flash that is almost on axis at that distance can give this harsh, flat look that would look equally at home on The Onion.
Looks like a normal picture to me, taken at night with an awful lot of light (floodlights and a bright flash perhaps) - I assume that when Air Force One is unloading at an airport the security folks have it pretty well lit up.
If you think about there is no motive for faking the photograph. There would be grounds for suspicion if the photo was of, say, Bush and an official from France appearing to reach an agreement on an issue. In any case, we might find out the origin of this photo by comparing it with similar photos of Bush boarding Air Force One, if they exist. Presidential photographers might have an answer and also Presidential libraries.
I agree that it’s a little odd-looking, but I think Padeye’s right that the cropped look of President and Mrs. Bush is the result of the lighting. And, as has been said, what earthly motivation would there be for faking such a picture?
exact same thing occured to me when I first saw it, but why would it be fake?
Theres another thread here somewhere asking the same question.
I think I know why it looks fake. The blue in the background is upper half of Air Force One. My brain first thought it was the sky.
Well, given your name, it makes sense.
:smack:
I did NOT catch that when I wrote it.
Good call!
It’s real. Here’s a better MSNBC pic. The blueish-lavenderish shirt and coat are identical.
I’m just so glad that I wasn’t the only one that thought so…
That CNN photo does look a little like one of the P’shopped pics from The Onion. They always have that characteristic overly-contrasty look.
But I’m sure it’s not a fake…that just makes no sense.
the photo looks out of character for a multitude of reasons. offhand,
a) its obvious the photographer used a long lens
b) you can discern that the photog. did not use a flash because they presumably have a very nice camera yet the photo is not sharp. also evidence of a long lens
c) there is a very bright light on the door near the president
d) there are other photographers simultaneously taking photos who are using a flash.
d) they are wearing all black
e) it was dark outside.
Lies! Bush faked the entire European trip - it was entirely shot on a Hollywood sound stage! I have proof! Proof, I tell you!
The composition of the picture also reminds me of Photoshopped pictures. I think the lighting and contrast is the major thing – the edges look really sharp, and Photoshopped pictures necessarily have sharp edges. But Photoshopped pictures also very often show the subject above waist level – they rarely show their entire body, at least. The pose itself also seems very photographic, as if it were taken from a publicity shot and superimposed on an Air Force One background.
But I don’t think it’s retouched – I’m just saying those are some extra reasons why I think it might seem retouched. Each of the subjects has shadow from at least two and maybe three or four different light sources. While it’s possible to simulate shadow with Photoshop, it certainly wouldn’t be easy (or necessary) to simulate three or four shadows.
Whaaa? Since when are long lenses not sharp? And how does using a “very nice camera” mean that they did not use a flash. Photojournalists often use a fresnel lens attachment to get narrow angle/long range flash for situations like this. I think that kind of flash is a possibility because of the flat, on-axis look of the lighting.