JS2
For Sale 
Goo Goo G'Joob etc.
Posts: 192
|
Post by JS2 on Jan 17, 2009 15:19:14 GMT -5
 Is this JPM or Faul or tampered? Want to get a PID point of view on this. The bad quality is due to it being a screen cap from a beatles video, and despite my best attempts to make it look better (brightness, etc.), it's still that bad. I found it on a site and labeled it "Maybe Paul, or Faul?". Help me with this. |
|
JS2
For Sale
Goo Goo G'Joob etc.
Posts: 192
|
Post by JS2 on Jan 19, 2009 8:45:25 GMT -5
No love for my topic?
|
|
|
|
Post by DarkHorse on Jan 19, 2009 12:40:27 GMT -5
Hi JS2,
After seeing many photos of Paul from the early to mid 60's, that pic looks stretched to me.
|
|
|
|
Post by ph0neyprophet on Jan 19, 2009 13:47:59 GMT -5
I don't know about you guys, but the right side of McCartney's face somewhat resembles Stallone. But IDK.  |
|
|
|
Post by FP on Jan 19, 2009 17:23:23 GMT -5
Someone pasted another pic of Paul on top of this one: (sorry I couldn't find better version)  |
|
|
|
Post by DarkHorse on Jan 19, 2009 18:40:17 GMT -5
JS2,
Did you doctor the photo?
|
|
|
|
Post by plastic paul on Jan 19, 2009 19:26:12 GMT -5
That's why there was "no love for your topic", because it's clearly a doctored photo.
Do you have a source?
If not then the question must be asked, why are you showing us fake photos?
|
|
|
|
Post by Doc on Jan 19, 2009 22:44:14 GMT -5
Is this JPM or Faul or tampered? Want to get a PID point of view on this. The bad quality is due to it being a screen cap from a beatles video, and despite my best attempts to make it look better (brightness, etc.), it's still that bad. I found it on a site and labeled it "Maybe Paul, or Faul?". Help me with this. Perhaps a merger of some kind? So many percent Paul processed with so many percent Bill into one photo? I dunno. Who knows about the possibility of photo blending? |
|
|
|
Post by ph0neyprophet on Jan 19, 2009 22:59:59 GMT -5
Honestly, it reminds me of a mix of the real Paul, and the one in the Penny Lane video.. The eye's..
|
|
|
|
Post by FP on Jan 19, 2009 23:13:40 GMT -5
Honestly, it reminds me of a mix of the real Paul, and the one in the Penny Lane video.. The eye's.. Good catch, that's exactly what it is. |
|
|
|
Post by mommybird on Jan 20, 2009 8:39:08 GMT -5
He asked me this question on my forum, and I answered him honestly. I told him that the left side of his face looks strange to me. After seeing the photo from Help! that bbbchords posted, I can see that isn't the only strange thing about the photo. Paul's mouth & his nose also appear different.  In fact, it appears that it was based on that exact photo from Help ! Great catch, bbbchords !!!  |
|
|
|
Post by DarkHorse on Jan 20, 2009 12:01:13 GMT -5
Certainly the nose looks smaller.
|
|
|
|
Post by ph0neyprophet on Jan 20, 2009 13:33:50 GMT -5
Pete Best possibly? It seems like before the whole "Paul died fiasco" I noticed Paul changed drastically..
For example, "the night before" music video. Paul does look different as to when he was first on the Ed Sullivan show, but then in 1966 the real Paul was in interviews.
|
|
JS2
For Sale
Goo Goo G'Joob etc.
Posts: 192
|
Post by JS2 on Jan 20, 2009 15:16:25 GMT -5
Apologies...Just an experiment of mine, a bit stupid i know, just seeing what would happen :X
|
|
|
|
Post by FP on Jan 20, 2009 16:52:29 GMT -5
But like ph0neyprophet said, the rest of the face is that still from Penny Lane. I'm 100% sure that he's right, which is a great catch on his part. The mouth and mustache were taken out, so the smile from original pic remains. The nose, eyes, chin, and cheeks are the PL still.
|
|
|
|
Post by mommybird on Jan 20, 2009 17:40:13 GMT -5
Unbelievable ! It only goes to show you how easy it is to make a "composite" photo. Which is what SunKing has been saying from the very beginning... |
|
|
|
Post by P(D)enny La(i)ne on Jan 20, 2009 17:58:54 GMT -5
Apologies...Just an experiment of mine, a bit stupid i know, just seeing what would happen :X Apologies...Just an experiment of mine, a bit stupid i know, just seeing what would happen :X Just to clarify, are you saying that this:  is a composite of this:  and this?  And further, is JS2 saying that he/she is the one who made the composite, just to see if we'd notice? Do I have all of this right? |
|
|
|
Post by plastic paul on Jan 20, 2009 18:34:13 GMT -5
Well, I'm glad one or two saw it was clearly a fake.
Things like that are really unneeded for the people who believe and care. My personal opinion is for you to keep 'em on your own forum buddy.
|
|
JS2
For Sale
Goo Goo G'Joob etc.
Posts: 192
|
Post by JS2 on Jan 21, 2009 8:56:20 GMT -5
Unbelievable ! It only goes to show you how easy it is to make a "composite" photo. Which is what SunKing has been saying from the very beginning... What SK has also been DOING from the beginning... And anyway, it would've been obvious but for the "low quality" (Just a couple of filters). Again, i apologise. |
|
|
|
Post by mommybird on Jan 21, 2009 9:42:15 GMT -5
You can say what you like, but SK's original fades WERE TOTALLY authentic. Which is what convinced so many of us that something indeed had happened to Paul in September 1966. You're composite was very obvious to many of us. I gave you the benefit of the doubt on my forum, because I try not to think that people are purposely trying to trick me. I immediately knew that there was something wrong with your photo.  |
|
|
|
Post by pauliedied on Jan 21, 2009 9:49:22 GMT -5
You can say what you like, but SK's original fades WERE TOTALLY authentic.Which is what convinced so many of us that something indeed had happened to Paul in September 1966. You're composite was very obvious to many of us. I gave you the benefit of the doubt on my forum, because I try not to think that people are purposely trying to trick me. I immediately knew that there was something wrong with your photo. LOL! |
|
|
|
Post by skyward on Jan 21, 2009 9:52:08 GMT -5
Unbelievable ! It only goes to show you how easy it is to make a "composite" photo. Which is what SunKing has been saying from the very beginning... What SK has also been DOING from the beginning... And anyway, it would've been obvious but for the "low quality" (Just a couple of filters). Again, i apologise. Could you point out the fake SK pics? Your composite was deformed, the nose:mouth perpendicular was askew and off center. It looks as if the lower half, the jaw/chin needed to be shifted to the left a bit and slanted up to the right a few degrees. I don't know what you were expecting, what you're trying to prove, that SK is doing the same? Well, instead of the charade, just come out and make your claim and provide links or examples. |
|
|
|
Post by pauliedied on Jan 21, 2009 9:52:29 GMT -5
more like a bad joke, really  |
|
|
|
Post by pauliedied on Jan 21, 2009 9:54:45 GMT -5
SK can not be taken serious. i mean, come on:  that is a joke |
|
|
|
Post by skyward on Jan 21, 2009 10:02:00 GMT -5
SK can not be taken serious. i mean, come on: that is a joke That 'Faul' doesn't look like anyone, that is one of the stranger (more odd) pics. |
|
