Is it photoshopped?

Uploaded with ImageShack.us

Doesn't look that way to me.

I've done better work.

Looks flat.

Big time.

Spotlight sun.

Yes, it is photoshopped.

look at these fools blindly screaming photoshop, give your head a shake

i guarantee none of you can point out a single blemish in the picture

That's  because good photoshops don't have any blemishes.

look at these fools blindly screaming photoshop, give your head a shake

reported for infringing statements


i guarantee none of you can point out a single blemish in the picture

I can guarantee that you will not find a single point of the image I could not made ​​with photoshop.

Quote from: canucks#01fan on February 02, 2013, 12:17:10 PM

look at these fools blindly screaming photoshop, give your head a shake

reported for infringing statements


i guarantee none of you can point out a single blemish in the picture

I can guarantee that you will not find a single point of the image I could not made ​​with photoshop.

I would like to see you try...

I'm pretty talented with photoshop and there is no way I could create something like this from scratch.

Compositing it yes, as long as I had existing imagery (taken from space). But as that is impossible in FE you will need to create it from pretty much nothing.

I second this ^^^^ let's see it then. Unless your not telling us the truth that is.

Who said it had to be from scratch to be photoshopped? An expert can start from a vast number of images and have it end with something looking like that.

Well maby he can do it your way then. He stated he could so we have asked him to prove it. I don't see what's wrong with that?

Nor do I. However, if it was me making the statement, I would probably just find you a YouTube video of someone photoshopping something of similar difficulty. We all know that task is well within the skill set of someone, but it's a lot to ask that person to waste hours making an image for you when you'll never believe in a flat-earth anyway.

Who said it had to be from scratch to be photoshopped? An expert can start from a vast number of images and have it end with something looking like that.

But where do these vast  number of images come from? Seeing as space travel and photography from this height is impossible in FE someone would have to start from scratch.

Quote from: Pongo on February 04, 2013, 03:31:21 AM

Who said it had to be from scratch to be photoshopped? An expert can start from a vast number of images and have it end with something looking like that.

But where do these vast  number of images come from? Seeing as space travel and photography from this height is impossible in FE someone would have to start from scratch.

There are warp tools in Photoshop.  making something flat look rounded isn't hard.

I don't consider Photoshop to be as likely as a matte painting. Have you never seen Star Wars? Matte paintings abound. They are indistinguishable from reality.

I don't consider Photoshop to be as likely as a matte painting. Have you never seen Star Wars? Matte paintings abound. They are indistinguishable from reality.

Really??

They are easily distinguishable to me.
Have you seen the Cassini images? These are not matte paintings.

Also every image ever taken from space, from Apollo to the ISS, these are all paintings?

What about everything taken by hubble?

 

Quote from: Dinosaur Neil on February 04, 2013, 10:33:28 AM

I don't consider Photoshop to be as likely as a matte painting. Have you never seen Star Wars? Matte paintings abound. They are indistinguishable from reality.

Really??

They are easily distinguishable to me.
Have you seen the Cassini images? These are not matte paintings.

Also every image ever taken from space, from Apollo to the ISS, these are all paintings?

What about everything taken by hubble?

Nobody ever claimed they are all paintings. I claimed that image there is a painting.
Tell me, if a matte painting was indistinguishable from reality, how would you know you were looking at it? Your claim "they are easily distinguishable to me" is invalid, as you are unable to measure the quantity of matte paintings you don't notice.

Um, error level analysis tells me it's a good, non shopped image.  I'm an amateur, though, so I could very well be wrong.

Quote from: mexicanwave on February 05, 2013, 02:13:39 AM

Quote from: Dinosaur Neil on February 04, 2013, 10:33:28 AM

I don't consider Photoshop to be as likely as a matte painting. Have you never seen Star Wars? Matte paintings abound. They are indistinguishable from reality.

Really??

They are easily distinguishable to me.
Have you seen the Cassini images? These are not matte paintings.

Also every image ever taken from space, from Apollo to the ISS, these are all paintings?

What about everything taken by hubble?

Nobody ever claimed they are all paintings. I claimed that image there is a painting.
Tell me, if a matte painting was indistinguishable from reality, how would you know you were looking at it? Your claim "they are easily distinguishable to me" is invalid, as you are unable to measure the quantity of matte paintings you don't notice.

Saying "they are easily distinguishable to me" was my response to your ridiculous claims that matte paintings in star wars are indistinguishable from reality.

"Have you never seen Star Wars? Matte paintings abound. They are indistinguishable from reality."

Um, error level analysis tells me it's a good, non shopped image.  I'm an amateur, though, so I could very well be wrong.

Wow, I was doing that!
http://fotoforensics.com/analysis.php?id=2b5dfa08ee2996065293225509014699abd9d6e9.22044
Anyway, blue/red distortion shows use of Adobe software (not kidding). Interesting that it only appears on the bottomside part...
Also, the moon shouldn't be so sharp. There should be a bit more of a scale, not a pixel jump. So ShopD'

PS: It doesn't mean it has been deformed. Even more, it shows it isn't. But it has been treated with photoshop (probably leveled so the moon would be visible, balloon cams often get moist at worst times)

Quote from: Dinosaur Neil on February 05, 2013, 11:01:55 AM

Quote from: mexicanwave on February 05, 2013, 02:13:39 AM

Quote from: Dinosaur Neil on February 04, 2013, 10:33:28 AM

I don't consider Photoshop to be as likely as a matte painting. Have you never seen Star Wars? Matte paintings abound. They are indistinguishable from reality.

Really??

They are easily distinguishable to me.
Have you seen the Cassini images? These are not matte paintings.

Also every image ever taken from space, from Apollo to the ISS, these are all paintings?

What about everything taken by hubble?

Nobody ever claimed they are all paintings. I claimed that image there is a painting.
Tell me, if a matte painting was indistinguishable from reality, how would you know you were looking at it? Your claim "they are easily distinguishable to me" is invalid, as you are unable to measure the quantity of matte paintings you don't notice.

Saying "they are easily distinguishable to me" was my response to your ridiculous claims that matte paintings in star wars are indistinguishable from reality.

"Have you never seen Star Wars? Matte paintings abound. They are indistinguishable from reality."

And YOU are saying that every time a matte painting appears on screen during a Star Wars film, you spot it. You fail to understand my response to you - how do you know there aren't matte paintings you didn't spot? Do you know the actual number of paintings used in production and then make a tally of how many you spotted, and compare them? No. So it is impossible for you to tell if you looked at a matte painting and didn't think it was one. Because you'd look at the scene and go "that doesn't look like a matte painting so it can't be one." If X is the number of matte paintings in the film, and Y is the number of matte paintings you have spotted, then you are unable to determine whether X=Y because you don't know the value of X.

Quote from: mexicanwave on February 06, 2013, 08:11:38 AM

Quote from: Dinosaur Neil on February 05, 2013, 11:01:55 AM

Quote from: mexicanwave on February 05, 2013, 02:13:39 AM

Quote from: Dinosaur Neil on February 04, 2013, 10:33:28 AM

I don't consider Photoshop to be as likely as a matte painting. Have you never seen Star Wars? Matte paintings abound. They are indistinguishable from reality.

Really??

They are easily distinguishable to me.
Have you seen the Cassini images? These are not matte paintings.

Also every image ever taken from space, from Apollo to the ISS, these are all paintings?

What about everything taken by hubble?

Nobody ever claimed they are all paintings. I claimed that image there is a painting.
Tell me, if a matte painting was indistinguishable from reality, how would you know you were looking at it? Your claim "they are easily distinguishable to me" is invalid, as you are unable to measure the quantity of matte paintings you don't notice.

Saying "they are easily distinguishable to me" was my response to your ridiculous claims that matte paintings in star wars are indistinguishable from reality.

"Have you never seen Star Wars? Matte paintings abound. They are indistinguishable from reality."

And YOU are saying that every time a matte painting appears on screen during a Star Wars film, you spot it. You fail to understand my response to you - how do you know there aren't matte paintings you didn't spot? Do you know the actual number of paintings used in production and then make a tally of how many you spotted, and compare them? No. So it is impossible for you to tell if you looked at a matte painting and didn't think it was one. Because you'd look at the scene and go "that doesn't look like a matte painting so it can't be one." If X is the number of matte paintings in the film, and Y is the number of matte paintings you have spotted, then you are unable to determine whether X=Y because you don't know the value of X.

But that makes logical sense! And logic isn't allowed here, so you're clearly wrong and should just leave.