|
|
Post by FlamingPie on Mar 7, 2004 14:55:49 GMT -5
Here's one that the great LarryC did, taken from page 104 and 249 of the Beatles Anthology book:  |
|
|
|
Post by revolver on Mar 7, 2004 15:53:54 GMT -5
It's pretty obvious to me that Faul's face is longer and narower. His eyes and nose, mouth and chin all move down to a lower position. Plus he just looks like a different person.
|
|
|
|
Post by eyesbleed on Mar 7, 2004 16:05:16 GMT -5
Ya I'm usually much more impressed with the great LarryC's work.
This one looks more like a PID fade to me.
|
|
|
|
Post by FlamingPie on Mar 7, 2004 16:13:23 GMT -5
*sigh* Later Paul's head is slightly lower than the other pic. His face looks narower because he lost weight.
|
|
|
|
Post by revolver on Mar 7, 2004 16:17:22 GMT -5
*sigh* Later Paul's head is slightly lower than the other pic. His face looks narower because he lost weight. He was already thin in the first shot. Losing weight doesn't cause one's chin and nose to elongate. |
|
|
|
Post by FlamingPie on Mar 7, 2004 16:25:28 GMT -5
Everything "elongates" because his face is at a lower angle.
I would have to disagree with that statment. I belive he was slightly chubby in the first shot, then lost a massive amount of weight.
|
|
|
|
Post by revolver on Mar 7, 2004 16:28:55 GMT -5
Everything "elongates" because his face is at a lower angle. I would have to disagree with that statment. I belive he was slightly chubby in the first shot, then lost a massive amount of weight. Again, how does losing weight make one's nose get bigger and longer? Losing weight and/or plastic surgery both make the nose smaller not larger. |
|
|
|
Post by FlamingPie on Mar 7, 2004 16:32:16 GMT -5
Everything "elongates" because his face is at a lower angle. |
|
|
|
Post by revolver on Mar 7, 2004 16:34:22 GMT -5
Everything "elongates" because his face is at a lower angle. Now you are stretching. The noses of both photos are shot from the same angle AFAICT. Faul's nose isn't just longer, it's wider. Explain that by camera angle. |
|
|
|
Post by SimMHoward on Mar 7, 2004 17:59:26 GMT -5
I agree that this picture looks a bit more like PID than PIA, but its obvious that they did a better job finding "Faul" than we are led to believe
|
|
|
|
Post by FlamingPie on Mar 7, 2004 18:09:52 GMT -5
What do you mean by that? |
|
|
|
Post by revolver on Mar 7, 2004 20:20:16 GMT -5
What do you mean by that? I meant you are stretching to make a point with little to back it up. No one has yet explained how "Paul's" nose got bigger in less than a year's time. That fade was supposed to be PIA evidence. |
|
|
|
Post by LarryC on Mar 7, 2004 20:50:49 GMT -5
Yea, but just look at how well that rubble ear lines up... ;D
The Sgt Pepper pic he's looking down further which will make everything look different, and the camera angle is not on the same azmuth to his face...but I'm not trying to defend anything...just another example of how a fade proves nothing. You can even see his forehead tilting forward in this fade. The upper lip is stretching a little like his nose is itching...all sorts of junk.
|
|
|
|
Post by revolver on Mar 8, 2004 19:37:20 GMT -5
Yea, but just look at how well that rubble ear lines up... ;D The Sgt Pepper pic he's looking down further which will make everything look different, and the camera angle is not on the same azmuth to his face...but I'm not trying to defend anything...just another example of how a fade proves nothing. You can even see his forehead tilting forward in this fade. The upper lip is stretching a little like his nose is itching...all sorts of junk. I'm afraid that amount of elongation and nose/chin enlargment can't be so easily explained by a slight difference in camera angle. This seems to be a case of PIAers seeing what they want to believe rather than what's really there. Factor in the multiple voiceprints on the Faul tracks and the evidence is pretty compelling to me that PWR. |
|
|
|
Post by FlamingPie on Mar 8, 2004 20:04:32 GMT -5
Fair enough.
|
|
