| |
|
Article: <5eckn0$kad@dfw-ixnews8.ix.netcom.com>
From: saquo@ix.netcom.com(Nancy )
Subject: Tholen Caught DOCTORING Hale-Bopp Images! - 1
Date: 18 Feb 1997 16:17:36 GMT
Check out what this web site has to say! A professional has caught Tholen in the act! Confirms something the Zetas have been saying all along!
..........
http://www.pe.net/~minnie/drath.html
I am not the average citizen. I am an Artist well-versed in digital mediae, as the computer is used in almost all of my imagery, and have a rather intimate knowledge of rendering capabilities and tendancies. ... What I would like to address here are the two images labelled as "REAL" and "FRAUD," both showing very similar images of HB before a cluster of bright stars, more in the background. ... Both images were touted as being from the same source photo by the debunkers, on the following criterion:
1] THEY ARE EACH EQUAL IN PIXEL SIZE.
What they mean by this is roughly a mystery, but I have come up with three possible interpretations. First, that there is somehow an actual difference in the size of their pixels, which is in itself a joke. Second, that their vertical and horizontal size is the same in pixels, which would be irrelevant because any image can be scaled or cropped to any size. They are, in fact, the same size: both 250 pixels by 190. Third, that the size translation for printing is the same. Forexample, a picture is defined as having 72 pixels per inch. That would make the PRINTED pixel size 1/72nd of an inch. As well, if it had a size of 120ppi, the pixel size would be 1/120th of an inch. Simple enough, but also irrelevant because MANY imaging programs can adjust this measurement and it has NO BEARING on the origin of the picture - unless you consider that most of these images are in GIF format, which HAS NO SPECIFICATIONS FOR PRINTER SETTINGS ANYWAYS. In other words, 3 points, all moot.
[snip]
D.A.Rath
doctordave@llv.com