Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

Galway tornado/waterfront fake

  • 01-08-2013 6:09pm
    #1
    MissPuscifer
    Registered Users Posts: 22 ✭


    Was suspicious so searched images of waterspouts... Wasn't that hard to find.


«1

Comments

  • #2
    SalteeDog
    Registered Users Posts: 450 ✭✭SalteeDog


    MissPuscifer wrote: »
    Was suspicious so searched images of waterspouts... Wasn't that hard to find.

    I suspected as much. Didn't stop the media running the story though.


  • #3
    whiteandlight
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,359 ✭✭✭whiteandlight


    I'm no expert by any stretch but those images don't look all that alike?


  • #4
    MissPuscifer
    Registered Users Posts: 22 ✭MissPuscifer


    Musicmental85 wrote: »
    I'm no expert by any stretch but those images don't look all that alike?


    It's actually just the funnel part that has been copied and blended into the picture.


  • #5
    MissPuscifer
    Registered Users Posts: 22 ✭MissPuscifer


    Easier to see in this pic. :)


  • #6
    Lumi
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,466 ✭✭✭Lumi


    The local restauranteur who created the waterspout picture has given his story to the Galway City Tribune so you can all read the story on how and why he faked it tomorrow morning.

    It's getting a great laugh all around town and yes, Mispuscifer identified the correct original image from the Great Lakes - well spotted!
    Here's a screenshot of the front page

    E04F6B71-4F03-4C76-AD27-00B5EBC5F3FC-3965-0000039427490FAF.jpg


  • Advertisement
  • #7
    Grandeeod
    Registered Users Posts: 12,071 ✭✭✭✭Grandeeod


    Lumi wrote: »
    The local restauranteur who created the waterspout picture has given his story to the Galway City Tribune so you can all read the story on how and why he faked it tomorrow morning.

    It's getting a great laugh all around town and yes, Mispuscifer identified the correct original image from the Great Lakes - well spotted!
    Here's a screenshot of the front page

    E04F6B71-4F03-4C76-AD27-00B5EBC5F3FC-3965-0000039427490FAF.jpg

    Cool! Well done to all of us brave enough to state the obvious! Mispuscifer gets the biggest pat on the back though!


  • #8
    MissPuscifer
    Registered Users Posts: 22 ✭MissPuscifer


    Thanks for the support over there guys. :) One thing I can say I hate, is the spreading of misinformation. It was ALL over Facebook... I sent RTE an email too, just complaining about it not being researched properly, but it will probably not even be noticed. :/
    I'm glad the person who made it has come forward though! Will some people still try to argue that we are wrong? Probably. :P


  • #9
    Skerries
    Registered Users Posts: 12,300 ✭✭✭✭Skerries


    you have been mentioned on Broadsheet.ie

    http://www.broadsheet.ie/2013/08/02/genuine-dublin-twister/
    Untitled Image




  • #10
    Red Nissan
    Registered Users Posts: 3,055 ✭✭✭Red Nissan


    Good, so it was an advertising stunt, I was suspicious that MissPuscifer knew it was but was unable to convince me how they knew.


  • #11
    MissPuscifer
    Registered Users Posts: 22 ✭MissPuscifer


    Red Nissan wrote: »
    Good, so it was an advertising stunt, I was suspicious that MissPuscifer knew it was but was unable to convince me how they knew.

    I knew because I could see it. I have absolutely nothing to do with the person who made this. I was only out to prove the picture wrong because it had spread so far as truth, something that annoys me greatly. Me being unable to convince you is your failing.


  • Advertisement
  • #12
    Red Nissan
    Registered Users Posts: 3,055 ✭✭✭Red Nissan


    MissPuscifer wrote: »
    Me being unable to convince you is your failing.

    The insert had a lot of JPEG artifacts around it, evidence of it being from a different DPI, web is typically only 75dpi or even less whereas original camera art is typically 300dpi, the edging shows artifacts


  • #13
    steve french
    Registered Users Posts: 161 ✭✭steve french


    Theres a picture of a real one in Shannon yesterday


  • #14
    pistolpetes11
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 7,144 Mod ✭✭✭✭pistolpetes11


    Ok now , enough about it and keep it on topic please


  • #15
    MissPuscifer
    Registered Users Posts: 22 ✭MissPuscifer


    Red Nissan wrote: »
    The insert had a lot of JPEG artifacts around it, evidence of it being from a different DPI, web is typically only 75dpi or even less whereas original camera art is typically 300dpi, the edging shows artifacts

    It really had almost nothing to do with dpi and artifacting... More that it was the EXACT same formation as the Great Lakes photo. Which was obvious from the pictures I posted.

    EDIT actually looking back at them again, there is hardly any noticeable artifacting so I don't even know what you are talking about.


  • #16
    Red Nissan
    Registered Users Posts: 3,055 ✭✭✭Red Nissan


    MissPuscifer wrote: »
    It really had almost nothing to do with dpi and artifacting... More that it was the EXACT same formation as the Great Lakes photo. Which was obvious from the pictures I posted.

    In the other thread I posted both and they are not an exact match.


  • #17
    MissPuscifer
    Registered Users Posts: 22 ✭MissPuscifer


    Red Nissan wrote: »
    In the other thread I posted both and they are not an exact match.

    There is a little set of tools in Photoshop, and in most other image editing programs, that can stretch/squeeze and skew images... They don't sit exactly over each other because a transformation has been applied by the faker.
    you don't have view them like that to see the similarity in shape. Can you still not see it?
    I really don't know what you are trying to prove/disprove though...

    EDIT have you seen the second image I posted? The transformation is corrected in that one.


  • #18
    Granolite
    Registered Users Posts: 199 ✭✭Granolite


    steve french wrote: »
    Theres a picture of a real one in Shannon yesterday


    Use you powers of critical analysis/thinking...it's another Photoshop 101.

    5.6kWp - SW (220 degrees) - North Sligo



  • #19
    meelick
    Registered Users Posts: 108 ✭✭meelick


    This one?

    http://www.clareherald.com/2013/07/funnel-cloud-photographed-over.html

    OK, so it's not a tornado, only a funnel cloud, but it's real. :)


  • #20
    MissPuscifer
    Registered Users Posts: 22 ✭MissPuscifer


    meelick wrote: »
    This one?

    http://www.clareherald.com/2013/07/funnel-cloud-photographed-over.html

    OK, so it's not a tornado, only a funnel cloud, but it's real. :)

    No this is the one from shannon. Tbh I thought it was a smoke cloud over photoshop, but I havent looked into it :)

    http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-wqvnRUcTJMY/UfqNNWWKnnI/AAAAAAAAbGQ/MB9_xwY48DM/s1600/999818_605770969445773_1299117802_n.jpg


  • #21
    Granolite
    Registered Users Posts: 199 ✭✭Granolite


    No the one I believe poster Steve French is referring was this one..

    https://fbcdn-sphotos-g-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/603333_10151793425141718_1945240675_n.jpg

    I don't doubt the veracity of the photo's you've linked but if you read the photo captions they were not observed yesterday. The poster above implied a ''real one'' was photographed/observed yesterday in Shannon (I presume he meant in Shannon town/business park). The photo I have linked was doing the rounds yesterday as well.

    5.6kWp - SW (220 degrees) - North Sligo



  • Advertisement
  • #22
    Lumi
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,466 ✭✭✭Lumi


    MissPuscifer wrote: »
    There is a little set of tools in Photoshop, and in most other image editing programs, that can stretch/squeeze and skew images... They don't sit exactly over each other because a transformation has been applied by the faker.

    There's an interview with the Galway restauranteur in the Indo today in which he describes exactly how he used photoshop to blend the Great Lakes funnel pic with a picture of Galway Bay

    Nice also to see that they have quoted MissPuscifer's comments on the Boards.ie Weather Forum and credited her with 'outing' the fake (scroll to the end of the linked piece)


  • #23
    sunset
    Registered Users Posts: 103 ✭✭sunset


    I wonder ..... the person claiming to have faked this is a bistro owner, Michael O'Meara, according to the Indo account. But the original facebook page posted on the boards thread gives the credits as -
    GMIT Students' Union: Picture taken out in Salthill 20 minutes ago. ‪#‎HeatWave‬ - PHOTO: David Lambe
    GMIT is the Galway and Mayo Institute of Technology. Is Mr O'Meara doing a double fake here? Who is David Lambe?


  • #24
    Lumi
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,466 ✭✭✭Lumi


    sunset wrote: »
    I wonder ..... the person claiming to have faked this is a bistro owner, Michael O'Meara, according to the Indo account. But the original facebook page posted on the boards thread gives the credits as -
    GMIT Students' Union: Picture taken out in Salthill 20 minutes ago. ‪#‎HeatWave‬ - PHOTO: David Lambe
    GMIT is the Galway and Mayo Institute of Technology. Is Mr O'Meara doing a double fake here? Who is David Lambe?

    The picture appeared on the Oscars Seafood Bistro page first at 13.29pm
    It was posted on the GMITSU page later at 13.50pm

    I reckon David Lambe is as real as the waterspout :pac:


  • #25
    Red Nissan
    Registered Users Posts: 3,055 ✭✭✭Red Nissan


    MissPuscifer wrote: »
    It really had almost nothing to do with dpi and artifacting...

    It actually does, the link to the interview says the manipulator deliberately reduced the quality of the insert to make it undetectable.

    He produced the artifacts in that process and that was what I saw which convinced me it was fake.

    He went to considerable lengths to fake this, he knows a fair bit about PS and many other images could equally have been used as the insert, he changed it a lot. I was not convinced by the mere similarity of the images.


  • #26
    Red Nissan
    Registered Users Posts: 3,055 ✭✭✭Red Nissan


    Lumi wrote: »
    The picture appeared on the Oscars Seafood Bistro page first at 13.29pm
    It was posted on the GMITSU page later at 13.50pm

    I reckon David Lambe is as real as the waterspout :pac:

    Interesting. Wherever I read a comment I don't know, but, it was posters crediting David with integrity that made the picture initially accepted.


  • #27
    MissPuscifer
    Registered Users Posts: 22 ✭MissPuscifer


    Red Nissan wrote: »
    It actually does, the link to the interview says the manipulator deliberately reduced the quality of the insert to make it undetectable.

    He produced the artifacts in that process and that was what I saw which convinced me it was fake.

    He went to considerable lengths to fake this, he knows a fair bit about PS and many other images could equally have been used as the insert, he changed it a lot. I was not convinced by the mere similarity of the images.


    If he made it so it was undetectable then how did you detect it? Show me your evidence this time.. Where is the artifacting that you picked up on?

    Yes the resolution is reduced but not just around the fake bit, the whole picture was.

    He did not change it much at all... It was stuck in, skewed and blended.

    Im pretty sure he even said it in one of these links posted that it was a picture of the great lakes that he used.

    Still not sure what your angle is, sir.


  • #28
    Grandeeod
    Registered Users Posts: 12,071 ✭✭✭✭Grandeeod


    Red Nissan wrote: »
    It actually does, the link to the interview says the manipulator deliberately reduced the quality of the insert to make it undetectable.

    He produced the artifacts in that process and that was what I saw which convinced me it was fake.

    He went to considerable lengths to fake this, he knows a fair bit about PS and many other images could equally have been used as the insert, he changed it a lot. I was not convinced by the mere similarity of the images.

    With all due respect, if you looked at both images, it was pretty obvious that he had lifted part of one and inserted it into the other. No big job and it doesn't take long on PS. I really can't see how you can continue to claim that any great lengths were went to in order to create the fake photo.

    Going back to last night, you were having a go at us about claiming it was a fake because you thought one of us knew it was a fake. Its a fake. The originator has confessed and explained it. Lets move on.


  • #29
    Red Nissan
    Registered Users Posts: 3,055 ✭✭✭Red Nissan


    Grandeeod wrote: »
    Going back to last night, you were having a go at us about claiming it was a fake because you thought one of us knew it was a fake. Its a fake. The originator has confessed and explained it. Lets move on.

    That about sums it up. Concur.


  • #30
    MissPuscifer
    Registered Users Posts: 22 ✭MissPuscifer


    Red Nissan wrote: »
    That about sums it up. Concur.

    Will you be replying to me, sir? Or is that your step out of the conversation?


  • Advertisement
  • #31
    Red Nissan
    Registered Users Posts: 3,055 ✭✭✭Red Nissan


    MissPuscifer wrote: »
    Will you be replying to me, sir? Or is that your step out of the conversation?

    You know something, you got all your answers last night, I asked a question that you were unable to answer. Before I saw the interview I posted a reply, the interview supports my statements.

    You could not convince me last night and you called it my failing, well today it is your failing if you can't see what is in the file that you sent.

    I could see manipulation but I had no way of knowing who did it, you? Either deliberately or accidentally in re-saving the file.

    We now know there are several files in the wild. I only looked at the one you sent. I believed that you might have been the wife, sister, daughter or girl friend of the file poster and you knew it was a fake and you knew which insert was used ~ you failed to convince me that your Photoshop knowledge led to the discovery of the duplicity.

    I have to go out about nine for an errand.


Advertisement