* Wednesday C&C "No Theme" Thread #849 / Revived #069 on 2024 07 24 *

link

Kumsal
Members 425 posts

July 27, 2024, 7:52 p.m. July 27, 2024, 7:52 p.m.
link

@DanHasLeftForum has written:

A group of people playing what I think is Mahjong in a park in Shanghai.

"WHAT IS GOING ON HERE !"

The curious man with the cigarette in his hand gives this photo a special touch.
Well seen and photographed.
link

Kumsal
Members 425 posts

July 27, 2024, 8:23 p.m. July 27, 2024, 8:23 p.m.
link

@DanHasLeftForum has written:

@Kumsal has written:

@RoelHendrickx has written:

@DanHasLeftForum has written:

@Kumsal has written:

@minniev has written:

@Sagittarius has written:

Time together

What a wonderful moment! I am of two minds about the resulting image. In one mind, I am bothered visually by the blurred hand of the baby. In my more creative mind, however, I am enchanted by the way his blurred hand encircles his mother's eye, and her bland expression about the whole affair. Lovely animal family.

minniev, I beg you!
There is no such family.
We don't always have to be so diplomatic.
My opinion: simply very bad photomontage.

I have no reason to believe your opinion that it is some kind of composite of multiple images is accurate.

Can you point out any artefacts or other aspects of the image that lead you to your opinion that it is some kind of montage or composite?

From my point of view opinions that do not have any information to support them carry very little weight.

Without the polemics, I also don’t see why this would be a montage and I am curious why Kumsal would think it is.

I don't know where to start... * The hammock and the gorillas, the proportions are wrong. No gorilla can fit in such a small hammock. * The size of the baby doesn't match the size of the mother. * The baby's right hand is totally blurred and becomes a strange shape. * Below the hammock, the landscape becomes strangely blurred compared to above. * Then there is the green leaf in the mother gorilla's hand; where does it grow from? * The sharpness of the hammock is not related to the sharpness of the subjects. A few centimeters further, the mother gorilla's fur is barely sharp.
Should I list more?

None of that proves it is a composite because they can be explained by the effects of motion blur, DOF, lens distortion and maybe some post processing if it's not a sooc jpeg.

The green leaf in the mother's hand has a small stem attached to it that could legitimately be growing from the trunk the hand is wrapped around. There is nothing in the image that proves it was not there when the photo was taken.

You are entitled to an opinion like anyone else but that is all it is, your opinion and nothing more.

You yourself posted that it is only your opinion and so not an established fact because you still haven't posted anything that proves your opinion that it is a composite is accurate.

I've done enough photomontages myself to just learn.
Then I lost interest because it didn't help my photography.
If you have a trained eye, you'll immediately notice that the light reflection in the gorillas' eyes is wrong (different directions).
These are small things that add up, but let's leave it at that...
At the end of the day, I have to believe the photographer when he says so.
link

DanHasLeftForum
Members 4254 posts

July 27, 2024, 8:33 p.m. July 27, 2024, 8:33 p.m.
link

@Kumsal has written:

@DanHasLeftForum has written:

@Kumsal has written:

@RoelHendrickx has written:

@DanHasLeftForum has written:

@Kumsal has written:

@minniev has written:

@Sagittarius has written:

Time together

What a wonderful moment! I am of two minds about the resulting image. In one mind, I am bothered visually by the blurred hand of the baby. In my more creative mind, however, I am enchanted by the way his blurred hand encircles his mother's eye, and her bland expression about the whole affair. Lovely animal family.

minniev, I beg you!
There is no such family.
We don't always have to be so diplomatic.
My opinion: simply very bad photomontage.

I have no reason to believe your opinion that it is some kind of composite of multiple images is accurate.

Can you point out any artefacts or other aspects of the image that lead you to your opinion that it is some kind of montage or composite?

From my point of view opinions that do not have any information to support them carry very little weight.

Without the polemics, I also don’t see why this would be a montage and I am curious why Kumsal would think it is.

I don't know where to start... * The hammock and the gorillas, the proportions are wrong. No gorilla can fit in such a small hammock. * The size of the baby doesn't match the size of the mother. * The baby's right hand is totally blurred and becomes a strange shape. * Below the hammock, the landscape becomes strangely blurred compared to above. * Then there is the green leaf in the mother gorilla's hand; where does it grow from? * The sharpness of the hammock is not related to the sharpness of the subjects. A few centimeters further, the mother gorilla's fur is barely sharp.
Should I list more?

None of that proves it is a composite because they can be explained by the effects of motion blur, DOF, lens distortion and maybe some post processing if it's not a sooc jpeg.

The green leaf in the mother's hand has a small stem attached to it that could legitimately be growing from the trunk the hand is wrapped around. There is nothing in the image that proves it was not there when the photo was taken.

You are entitled to an opinion like anyone else but that is all it is, your opinion and nothing more.

You yourself posted that it is only your opinion and so not an established fact because you still haven't posted anything that proves your opinion that it is a composite is accurate.

I've done enough photomontages myself to just learn.
Then I lost interest because it didn't help my photography.
If you have a trained eye, you'll immediately notice that the light reflection in the gorillas' eyes is wrong (different directions).
These are small things that add up, but let's leave it at that...
At the end of the day, I have to believe the photographer when he says so.

You yourself said that it was your opinion that it is a composite.

I am not convinced the reflection is wrong.

If you truly believe the photographer as you claim then you are admitting your reasons for assuming the image is a composite are wrong because the photographer says it is not a composite.
link

Kumsal
Members 425 posts

July 27, 2024, 8:37 p.m. July 27, 2024, 8:37 p.m.
link

@DanHasLeftForum has written:

@Kumsal has written:

@DanHasLeftForum has written:

@Kumsal has written:

@RoelHendrickx has written:

@DanHasLeftForum has written:

@Kumsal has written:

@minniev has written:

@Sagittarius has written:

Time together

What a wonderful moment! I am of two minds about the resulting image. In one mind, I am bothered visually by the blurred hand of the baby. In my more creative mind, however, I am enchanted by the way his blurred hand encircles his mother's eye, and her bland expression about the whole affair. Lovely animal family.

minniev, I beg you!
There is no such family.
We don't always have to be so diplomatic.
My opinion: simply very bad photomontage.

I have no reason to believe your opinion that it is some kind of composite of multiple images is accurate.

Can you point out any artefacts or other aspects of the image that lead you to your opinion that it is some kind of montage or composite?

From my point of view opinions that do not have any information to support them carry very little weight.

Without the polemics, I also don’t see why this would be a montage and I am curious why Kumsal would think it is.

I don't know where to start... * The hammock and the gorillas, the proportions are wrong. No gorilla can fit in such a small hammock. * The size of the baby doesn't match the size of the mother. * The baby's right hand is totally blurred and becomes a strange shape. * Below the hammock, the landscape becomes strangely blurred compared to above. * Then there is the green leaf in the mother gorilla's hand; where does it grow from? * The sharpness of the hammock is not related to the sharpness of the subjects. A few centimeters further, the mother gorilla's fur is barely sharp.
Should I list more?

None of that proves it is a composite because they can be explained by the effects of motion blur, DOF, lens distortion and maybe some post processing if it's not a sooc jpeg.

The green leaf in the mother's hand has a small stem attached to it that could legitimately be growing from the trunk the hand is wrapped around. There is nothing in the image that proves it was not there when the photo was taken.

You are entitled to an opinion like anyone else but that is all it is, your opinion and nothing more.

You yourself posted that it is only your opinion and so not an established fact because you still haven't posted anything that proves your opinion that it is a composite is accurate.

I've done enough photomontages myself to just learn.
Then I lost interest because it didn't help my photography.
If you have a trained eye, you'll immediately notice that the light reflection in the gorillas' eyes is wrong (different directions).
These are small things that add up, but let's leave it at that...
At the end of the day, I have to believe the photographer when he says so.

You yourself said that it was your opinion that it is a composite.

I am not convinced the reflection is wrong.

Sorry, but if you can't see what was done to this photo, I can't explain anything to you.
Is the blur at the bottom of the photo from the lens, or was it added in the photoshop?
What do you think?
link

DanHasLeftForum
Members 4254 posts

July 27, 2024, 8:43 p.m. July 27, 2024, 8:43 p.m.
link

@Kumsal has written:

@DanHasLeftForum has written:

@Kumsal has written:

@DanHasLeftForum has written:

@Kumsal has written:

@RoelHendrickx has written:

@DanHasLeftForum has written:

@Kumsal has written:

@minniev has written:

@Sagittarius has written:

Time together

What a wonderful moment! I am of two minds about the resulting image. In one mind, I am bothered visually by the blurred hand of the baby. In my more creative mind, however, I am enchanted by the way his blurred hand encircles his mother's eye, and her bland expression about the whole affair. Lovely animal family.

minniev, I beg you!
There is no such family.
We don't always have to be so diplomatic.
My opinion: simply very bad photomontage.

I have no reason to believe your opinion that it is some kind of composite of multiple images is accurate.

Can you point out any artefacts or other aspects of the image that lead you to your opinion that it is some kind of montage or composite?

From my point of view opinions that do not have any information to support them carry very little weight.

Without the polemics, I also don’t see why this would be a montage and I am curious why Kumsal would think it is.

I don't know where to start... * The hammock and the gorillas, the proportions are wrong. No gorilla can fit in such a small hammock. * The size of the baby doesn't match the size of the mother. * The baby's right hand is totally blurred and becomes a strange shape. * Below the hammock, the landscape becomes strangely blurred compared to above. * Then there is the green leaf in the mother gorilla's hand; where does it grow from? * The sharpness of the hammock is not related to the sharpness of the subjects. A few centimeters further, the mother gorilla's fur is barely sharp.
Should I list more?

None of that proves it is a composite because they can be explained by the effects of motion blur, DOF, lens distortion and maybe some post processing if it's not a sooc jpeg.

The green leaf in the mother's hand has a small stem attached to it that could legitimately be growing from the trunk the hand is wrapped around. There is nothing in the image that proves it was not there when the photo was taken.

You are entitled to an opinion like anyone else but that is all it is, your opinion and nothing more.

You yourself posted that it is only your opinion and so not an established fact because you still haven't posted anything that proves your opinion that it is a composite is accurate.

I've done enough photomontages myself to just learn.
Then I lost interest because it didn't help my photography.
If you have a trained eye, you'll immediately notice that the light reflection in the gorillas' eyes is wrong (different directions).
These are small things that add up, but let's leave it at that...
At the end of the day, I have to believe the photographer when he says so.

You yourself said that it was your opinion that it is a composite.

I am not convinced the reflection is wrong.

Sorry, but if you can't see what was done to this photo, I can't explain anything to you.
Is the blur at the bottom of the photo from the lens, or was it added in the phoshop?
What do you think?

You can add blur to an image without making it a composite or montage.

If you truly believe the photographer as you claim then you are admitting your reasons for assuming the image is a composite are wrong because the photographer says it is not a composite.

You can't have it both ways by saying you believe the photographer when they say it is not a composite and then continue to say it is in your opinion.
link

Kumsal
Members 425 posts

July 27, 2024, 8:47 p.m. July 27, 2024, 8:47 p.m.
link

@DanHasLeftForum has written:

@Kumsal has written:

@DanHasLeftForum has written:

@Kumsal has written:

@RoelHendrickx has written:

@DanHasLeftForum has written:

@Kumsal has written:

@minniev has written:

@Sagittarius has written:

Time together

What a wonderful moment! I am of two minds about the resulting image. In one mind, I am bothered visually by the blurred hand of the baby. In my more creative mind, however, I am enchanted by the way his blurred hand encircles his mother's eye, and her bland expression about the whole affair. Lovely animal family.

minniev, I beg you!
There is no such family.
We don't always have to be so diplomatic.
My opinion: simply very bad photomontage.

I have no reason to believe your opinion that it is some kind of composite of multiple images is accurate.

Can you point out any artefacts or other aspects of the image that lead you to your opinion that it is some kind of montage or composite?

From my point of view opinions that do not have any information to support them carry very little weight.

Without the polemics, I also don’t see why this would be a montage and I am curious why Kumsal would think it is.

I don't know where to start... * The hammock and the gorillas, the proportions are wrong. No gorilla can fit in such a small hammock. * The size of the baby doesn't match the size of the mother. * The baby's right hand is totally blurred and becomes a strange shape. * Below the hammock, the landscape becomes strangely blurred compared to above. * Then there is the green leaf in the mother gorilla's hand; where does it grow from? * The sharpness of the hammock is not related to the sharpness of the subjects. A few centimeters further, the mother gorilla's fur is barely sharp.
Should I list more?

None of that proves it is a composite because they can be explained by the effects of motion blur, DOF, lens distortion and maybe some post processing if it's not a sooc jpeg.

The green leaf in the mother's hand has a small stem attached to it that could legitimately be growing from the trunk the hand is wrapped around. There is nothing in the image that proves it was not there when the photo was taken.

You are entitled to an opinion like anyone else but that is all it is, your opinion and nothing more.

You yourself posted that it is only your opinion and so not an established fact because you still haven't posted anything that proves your opinion that it is a composite is accurate.

I've done enough photomontages myself to just learn.
Then I lost interest because it didn't help my photography.
If you have a trained eye, you'll immediately notice that the light reflection in the gorillas' eyes is wrong (different directions).
These are small things that add up, but let's leave it at that...
At the end of the day, I have to believe the photographer when he says so.

You yourself said that it was your opinion that it is a composite.

I am not convinced the reflection is wrong.

If you truly believe the photographer as you claim then you are admitting your reasons for assuming the image is a composite are wrong because the photographer says it is not a composite.

I'm not admitting anything, stop playing with words!
The photo is fake, I just wanted to end the pointless discussions.
I see that this is a godsend for you!
That's probably your reason for being here!
link

DanHasLeftForum
Members 4254 posts

July 27, 2024, 8:50 p.m. July 27, 2024, 8:50 p.m.
link

@Kumsal has written:

@DanHasLeftForum has written:

You can add blur to an image without making it a composite or montage.

If you truly believe the photographer as you claim then you are admitting your reasons for assuming the image is a composite are wrong because the photographer says it is not a composite.

I'm not admitting anything, stop playing with words!
The photo is fake, I just wanted to end the pointless discussions.
I see that this is a godsend for you!
That's probably your reason for being here!

I'm not playing with words.

Earlier you said:

@Kumsal has written:

At the end of the day, I have to believe the photographer when he says so.

The photographer said it is not a composite.

By believing the photographer you are saying what he said about his image not being a composite is true.
link

Kumsal
Members 425 posts

July 27, 2024, 8:55 p.m. July 27, 2024, 8:55 p.m.
link

@DanHasLeftForum has written:

@Kumsal has written:

@DanHasLeftForum has written:

You can add blur to an image without making it a composite or montage.

If you truly believe the photographer as you claim then you are admitting your reasons for assuming the image is a composite are wrong because the photographer says it is not a composite.

I'm not admitting anything, stop playing with words!
The photo is fake, I just wanted to end the pointless discussions.
I see that this is a godsend for you!
That's probably your reason for being here!

I'm not playing with words.

Earlier you said:

@Kumsal has written:

At the end of the day, I have to believe the photographer when he says so.

The photographer said it is not a composite.

This is your playground, right?
Rarely do I meet someone who gets excited by such discussions!
You are now on my blacklist!
link

DanHasLeftForum
Members 4254 posts

July 27, 2024, 8:58 p.m. July 27, 2024, 8:58 p.m.
link

@Kumsal has written:

@DanHasLeftForum has written:

@Kumsal has written:

@DanHasLeftForum has written:

You can add blur to an image without making it a composite or montage.

If you truly believe the photographer as you claim then you are admitting your reasons for assuming the image is a composite are wrong because the photographer says it is not a composite.

I'm not admitting anything, stop playing with words!
The photo is fake, I just wanted to end the pointless discussions.
I see that this is a godsend for you!
That's probably your reason for being here!

I'm not playing with words.

Earlier you said:

@Kumsal has written:

At the end of the day, I have to believe the photographer when he says so.

The photographer said it is not a composite.

By believing the photographer you are saying what he said about his image not being a composite is true.

This is your playground, right?
Rarely do I meet someone who gets excited by such discussions!
You are now on my blacklist!

So which of my sentences in any of my posts are you claiming are not true?
link

Kumsal
Members 425 posts

July 27, 2024, 9:01 p.m. July 27, 2024, 9:01 p.m.
link

@DanHasLeftForum has written:

@Kumsal has written:

@DanHasLeftForum has written:

@Kumsal has written:

@DanHasLeftForum has written:

You can add blur to an image without making it a composite or montage.

If you truly believe the photographer as you claim then you are admitting your reasons for assuming the image is a composite are wrong because the photographer says it is not a composite.

I'm not admitting anything, stop playing with words!
The photo is fake, I just wanted to end the pointless discussions.
I see that this is a godsend for you!
That's probably your reason for being here!

I'm not playing with words.

Earlier you said:

@Kumsal has written:

At the end of the day, I have to believe the photographer when he says so.

The photographer said it is not a composite.

This is your playground, right?
Rarely do I meet someone who gets excited by such discussions!
You are now on my blacklist!

So which of my sentences in any of my posts are you claiming are not true?

It's over, no more discussions with you.
link

DanHasLeftForum
Members 4254 posts

July 27, 2024, 9:05 p.m. July 27, 2024, 9:05 p.m.
link

@Kumsal has written:

It's over, no more discussions with you.

You already said that but you still come back.

You seem to make things up when you get caught out struggling to cope with people's opinions that differ from yours.

In your opinion Sagittarius' image is a composite. Several people so far have disagreed with your opinion.

But then you said you believe Sagittarius when he said it is not a composite.
link

DanHasLeftForum
Members 4254 posts

July 27, 2024, 9:24 p.m. July 27, 2024, 9:24 p.m.
link

@Kumsal has written:

Sorry, but if you can't see what was done to this photo, I can't explain anything to you.

Whenever I see something like "I can't explain...." when anyone is trying to convince me that their opinion is accurate that tells me that their opinion is not accurate.

All of the points you mentioned about why in your opinion the image is a fake can be explained by the effects of DOF, motion blur, lens distortion and post processing without making the final image a montage or composite.
link

Kumsal
Members 425 posts

July 27, 2024, 9:24 p.m. July 27, 2024, 9:24 p.m.
link

@DanHasLeftForum has written:

@Kumsal has written:

It's over, no more discussions with you.

You already said that but you still come back.

You seem to make things up when you get caught out struggling to cope with people's opinions that differ from yours.

In your opinion Sagittarius' image is a composite. Several people so far have disagreed with your opinion.

But then you said you believe Sagittarius when he said it is not a composite.

Your method is: discuss things until others give up and agree with you.
I'm not wasting my time with you anymore, find someone else to talk to.
link

DanHasLeftForum
Members 4254 posts

July 27, 2024, 9:31 p.m. July 27, 2024, 9:31 p.m.
link

@Kumsal has written:

@DanHasLeftForum has written:

@Kumsal has written:

It's over, no more discussions with you.

You already said that but you still come back.

You seem to make things up when you get caught out struggling to cope with people's opinions that differ from yours.

In your opinion Sagittarius' image is a composite. Several people so far have disagreed with your opinion.

But then you said you believe Sagittarius when he said it is not a composite.

Your method is: discuss things until others give up and agree with you.
I'm not wasting my time with you anymore, find someone else to talk to.

That is the 3rd time now you said I am either on your blacklist or you are done discussing anything with me. You are proving my point that you struggle to cope with other people's opinions when they differ to yours.

I am not trying to convince you that Sagittarius' image is not a fake because I posted on more than one occasion that you are entitled to your opinion.

But you seem to struggle with people's opinions that the image is not a fake.

All of the points you mentioned about why in your opinion the image is a fake can be explained by the effects of DOF, motion blur, lens distortion and post processing without making the final image a montage or composite which is why imo the image is not a fake.
link

Kumsal
Members 425 posts

July 27, 2024, 9:55 p.m. July 27, 2024, 9:55 p.m.
link

@DanHasLeftForum has written:

@Kumsal has written:

@DanHasLeftForum has written:

@Kumsal has written:

It's over, no more discussions with you.

You already said that but you still come back.

You seem to make things up when you get caught out struggling to cope with people's opinions that differ from yours.

In your opinion Sagittarius' image is a composite. Several people so far have disagreed with your opinion.

But then you said you believe Sagittarius when he said it is not a composite.

Your method is: discuss things until others give up and agree with you.
I'm not wasting my time with you anymore, find someone else to talk to.

That is the 3rd time now you said I am either on your blacklist or you are done discussing anything with me. You are proving my point that you struggle to cope with other people's opinions when they differ to yours.

I am not trying to convince you that Sagittarius' image is not a fake because I posted on more than one occasion that you are entitled to your opinion.

But you seem to struggle with people's opinions that the image is not a fake.

All of the points you mentioned about why in your opinion the image is a fake can be explained by the effects of DOF, motion blur, lens distortion and post processing without making the final image a montage or composite which is why imo the image is not a fake.

🤣🤣🤣
Believe me, it's over.
I will never answer you again!
link

DanHasLeftForum
Members 4254 posts

July 27, 2024, 10:04 p.m. July 27, 2024, 10:04 p.m.
link

@Kumsal has written:

🤣🤣🤣
Believe me, it's over.
I will never answer you again!

That's ok. You have already proved my point many times over 😀
link

Bryan
Members 1320 posts

July 27, 2024, 10:46 p.m. July 27, 2024, 10:46 p.m.
link

@Sagittarius has written:

@Bryan has written:

We need a new home...

What do you mean?

It is supposed to be C&C, not A&A - Argument and Abuse...

davidwien likes this.

favorite 1
link

Sagittarius
Members 727 posts

July 27, 2024, 11:11 p.m. July 27, 2024, 11:11 p.m.
link

@Bryan has written:

@Sagittarius has written:

@Bryan has written:

We need a new home...

What do you mean?

It is supposed to be C&C, not A&A - Argument and Abuse...

So in your opinion
If one is accused of something he/she did not do, we should not defend ourselves?
If we do not agree with C&C we can not object or at least explain?
And finally why do you think that a new home (whatever it is) will prevent you from A&A as you call it?

DanHasLeftForum likes this.

favorite 1