| » Forum Index » Image doctor » Topic: Photoshop altered or not? |
|
Posted on 14/10/05 1:11:19 PM |
|
jwhite
Collage Critter Posts: 274 Reply  |
Photoshop altered or not?
I can quite put my finger on it, but the below image looks "photoshoped" to me. The lighting & shadowing on the crocs head, lack of water ripple in front of the croc and the transition between water and the croc. What do you see? Does the photo appear to be altered? Was the crocs head added? Most of the users on this board have a much better "eye for detail" than I do. Thanks! http://www.pbase.com/mngatorguy/image/50686484.jpg |
Posted on 14/10/05 1:21:52 PM |
|
maiden
Golden Gif Gagster Posts: 471 Reply  |
Re: Photoshop altered or not?
Seems genuine to me, it may have been photoshopped but if it has they've done a good enough job to be convincing. I think we tend to look too hard at pictures and see photomontages when they aren't not every image is going to be so easily defined by shadows & highlights and even colours can look strange and unnatural. One example is the moon landing pictures there seems to be too many shadows for a single light source and they appear to be pointing in different directions but there was a website (I forget where now) which showed you that this was perfectly possible under certain circumstances. _________________ mad as a badger and twice as furry |
Posted on 14/10/05 1:38:18 PM |
|
trinityofone
Guest Reply |
Re: Photoshop altered or not?
There's one thing that strikes me as odd about this image and I'm not sure about anyone else but if I had a crocodile attached to my back-side, I'd be slightly less placid than that! _________________ A happy-go-lucky chap, always dressed in black |
Posted on 14/10/05 2:28:56 PM |
|
Steve Caplin
Administrator Posts: 6846 Reply  |
Re: Photoshop altered or not?
Very hard to tell. The obvious distance from the animals to the rocks suggests that this wasn't shot with a telephoto lens, which means the photographer must have been either in a boat or swimming- in which case, he shows great fortitude not to have made a run for it! But I agree with David - shouldn't that bisn (or whatever) be looking a little more surprised? |
Posted on 14/10/05 2:49:14 PM |
|
jwhite
Collage Critter Posts: 274 Reply |
Re: Photoshop altered or not?
Thanks Rebecca, David and Steve for your replies and insight. I think perhaps Rebecca is right, I was looking for a photomontage and saw what I wanted to see. Crocs usually prey upon the young, old, stupid or sick. I would assume that this animal is ill or perhaps the photographer just happened to captured the image just before the prey realized its predicament. The animal being bit on the bum is a wildebeest (Connochaetes taurinus) and the croc is a Nile crocodile (Crocodylus niloticus). |
Posted on 14/10/05 3:06:01 PM |
|
jwhite
Collage Critter Posts: 274 Reply |
:
: |
Posted on 14/10/05 3:10:13 PM |
|
Steve Caplin
Administrator Posts: 6846 Reply |
Re: Photoshop altered or not?
And I can just spot a tiny parasite (nomenclaturus madeupus) inside its ear, too. |
Posted on 14/10/05 3:48:59 PM |
|
jwhite
Collage Critter Posts: 274 Reply |
Re: Photoshop altered or not?
Actually, Steve when giving the scientific name of an animal the Genus is always capitalized. Sorry about being so nit-picky but I figure turn-about is fair play.  |
Posted on 16/10/05 8:35:18 PM |
|
mguyer
Incisive Incisor Posts: 799 Reply  |
Re: Photoshop altered or not?
doesn't look llike photshop to me   |
Posted on 17/10/05 5:19:38 PM |
|
Lexus
Persistent Pixellator Posts: 623 Reply  |
Re: Photoshop altered or not?
the croc seems too lit up, if you get me _________________ Quote From Family Guy: 2 Plus 2 is Foourrr, 2 Plus 2 is Foourrr, 2 Plus 2 is Foourrr. |