Jump to content
Existing user? Sign In

Sign In



Sign Up

Recommended Posts

If this is photoshopped, the artist who did it did a remarkable job.  Any of the usual signs of a photoshop fake aren't present.  The stream refraction, motion blur, and lighting direction is all accurate to the rest of the photo.  The wet sand on the ground follows the ground curves accurately, doesn't have a consistent radius on the edges, and the amount of darkness isn't completely uniform.  There is some noise in the image that matches what you would expect from a Bayer pattern censor, and that noise remains consistent across the wet sand and stream areas, without any shift in brightness, pattern alignment, or scale.  The subpixel blending around the edges of the pee elements and other contrast edges in the image is also accurate and consistent.

It still could have been faked.  But, if so, it was very well done, with careful attention paid to any of the signs that would immediately identify it as a fake.  Most photoshop artists trying to fake a pee photo wouldn't spend so much attention to things like sub-pixel blending and types of image grain, as someone is only going to notice this if they are specifically looking for signs that the image was manipulated.

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...