Strawberry Fields Video Eyes Close Up

[FlamingPie]

matchbox said:

It's kind of sad that any time there is a good match that there are always the obligitory comments of how one of the photos looks stretched or compressed. It's beginning to sound more like a reflex reaction than an observation.

I know, it's turned into "yeah, the face matches up, but if you compared the body, it wouldn't."

[revolver]

Flaming said:

Okay, picture 1 not streched and the ears were not cut off.
And guess what? I was able to match it with THE SAME PIC.



What Kazu did was darken the pic, so it would match the lighting of the "Faul" pic more. Am I right Kazu?

I'd still like to see the original source photo of Faul from that fade to verify it wasn't altered in some way.

[Morph]

It's amazing what's revealed by saving the Paul/Faul crossfades to your HD and zooming in. Most obvious to me is that the eye openings move around and change shape. The corners of a persons eyes never move, no matter what the expression. But apparently Paul, if he's the same person as Faul, has a most unique talent: contorting his eyes while remaining completely expresionless.

Faul gives the appearance of looking like Paul, nothing more. Not a single Paul/Faul crossfade has matched on all counts.

[DarkHorse]

Flaming said:

I know, it's turned into "yeah, the face matches up, but if you compared the body, it wouldn't."

It's turned into that? I don't think so. Well I've been saying that from DAY ONE. My posts discussing that are on the All the Truth board from awhile back saying that the fades on Kazu's site are matched up cleverly by making Paul's head larger in comparison to Faul's head size.

And of course getting the right angle is important to match them up. It's a science you know.

[Red Lion]

Flaming said:

^ Kazu's comparison.

No matter how these Paul/Faul fades are manipulated, there are always aspects that dont match. The top of the head in this one is WAY out of whack.

[FlamingPie]

RedLion said:

No matter how these Paul/Faul fades are manipulated, there are always aspects that dont match. The top of the head in this one is WAY out of whack.

Hair.

[revolver]

I think this is the source photo along with the fade version adjusted for equal height from top of head to chin:



The left ear wasn't as pronounced, so part of Paul's ear is showing behind Faul. Something appears a little off in the fade version. The face looks wider and rounder than the original. It appears to be stretched slightly in the horizontal direction.

[FlamingPie]

Revolver said:

I think this is the source photo along with the fade version adjusted for equal height from top of head to chin:



The left ear wasn't as pronounced, so part of Paul's ear is showing behind Faul. Something appears a little off in the fade version. The face just looks wider and rounder for some reason.

Well I can't speak for Kazu; those are his pics.

But the source pic, how do we know that's the reliable one?

[matchbox]

Hmmm...



I'll have to check this out against other post '67 pics to see which one is off.

[matchbox]

I think that kazu's photo has the correct ratio.

The third pic I added was taken from slightly to the right of the other one, but is adequate to determine facial length.

[eyesbleed]

SuzyQ said:

Hi, all. I've been a member here for quite awhile, but have never posted. I've noticed FP et. al. go round and round trying to prove their cases using visual info on its own merit. Don't forget, tho, that the visuals are only part of the whole body of evidence. The vocals are equally if not more convincing. Together, the visual discrepancies coupled with the vocal changes make a great case.

Thanks Suzy Q. As I said in my first response to FP's excellent fade. I don't think they get why their fade attempts aren't enough to sway anybody.
And I don't have the time or the desire to go over EVERYTHING again.

There's a very good reason why the PIA camp doesn't have dozens of perfectly seemless fades of this "same guy"

[revolver]

matchbox said:

Hmmm...



I'll have to check this out against other post '67 pics to see which one is off.

I would trust the left one. It came from a Life magazine cover in which the other Beatles look to be in proper proportion.

[matchbox]

Just for the record, I've never seen any fades that were perfect even if everyone agrees that it was the same guy.

A perfect fade would require the same lens, angle, distance, film type along with the subject remaining consistant in terms of weight.

I do find it interesting that a while back the PID/PWR camp was expounding on the major differences between Paul and the mythical Faul. But recently very small differences are being gone over very closely because of some very close comparisons being made.

I call that progress. ;D

[eyesbleed]

Flaming said:

Since when does the neck have to match up?

I guess the neck isn't a good thing to compare, but still.
Faul has a longer neck to go with the longer face & his taller build.

How long are you guys gonna keep tryin'?
Several people have pointed out the subtle problems with yer fades, yet y'all seem to refuse to acknowledge them..

This should be SO easy if it were only one single person the last 40+yrs.

[eyesbleed]

matchbox said:

I do find it interesting that a while back the PID/PWR camp was expounding on the major differences between Paul and the mythical Faul. But recently very small differences are being gone over very closely because of some very close comparisons being made.

I call that progress. ;D

I call that wasting time, goin' 'round & 'round over something that isn't that important in the first place.
A replacement is supposed to strongly resemble the original.
Back to the thread on celebrity impersonators again!

There are time periods when Faul is prety damned close. Other times when he's WAY off. I find it absurd that you guys would think all these guys are one.

Maybe when this turns back into a PWR PID forum again we can get back to some sort of progress instead of this redundancy.

[revolver]

I think we can trust that the photo of Faul from the Life cover is closer to how he actually looked back then. The B/W photo on the right also looks somewhat compressed. I believe this was done during the SP era to make the public transition from Paul to Faul look more seamless than it actually was.

[matchbox]

eyesbleed said:

Maybe when this turns back into a PWR PID forum again we can get back to some sort of progress instead of this redundancy.

I don't believe that I'm hindering anyone from showing examples that support their case.

[xpt626]

eyesbleed said:

I call that wasting time, goin' 'round & 'round over something that isn't that important in the first place.
A replacement is supposed to strongly resemble the original.
Back to the thread on celebrity impersonators again!

There are time periods when Faul is prety damned close. Other times when he's WAY off. I find it absurd that you guys would think all these guys are one.

Maybe when this turns back into a PWR PID forum again we can get back to some sort of progress instead of this redundancy.

sorry, guys, Eyesbleed is right on this one. "Fades" and their reliability have been discussed to death.

Fades don't matter to me...I believe my lyin' eyes ;D

[JoJo]

Back a few pages ago, we were talking about the fold above the left eye.

Morph said:

Faul's lid fold, when his eyes are relaxed, starts from the outside and shoots straight over the eye towards the brow. Another less-prominent fold starts on the inside and almost intersects the first fold. But what really stands out is that the first fold goes past the endpoint of the second fold...it's kind of a "t" intersection. I've looked at several photos, and it's a recurring detail. Faul has a habit of raising his brow quite a bit, diminishing this effect.

I made an animated gif of a few frames from Hey Jude, (source unknown, but not especially different from the Anthology release, just a different take, there were many) and one from Anthology's version of Paperback Writer.

Hey Jude is on the left, PW on the right.





A still from the Hey Jude Source:



A still from the PB writer source:



Comments anyone?

[DarkHorse]

What's obvious to me is how different these two people look. I really don't understand how someone can think they are the same person after thorough examination. That is what stood out to me while looking at the eyes. Bill is Bill and Paul is Paul.

Good gif's Jojo.

[JoJo]

Got cognitive dissonance?

[FlamingPie]

JoJo said:

I see the same eye.

And is "Faul's" eye brown and Paul's eye green? ;D

[JoJo]

I see the same eye.

You do?? Amazing!!

And is "Faul's" eye brown and Paul's eye green? ;D

This isn't really a "color" argument, so don't try muddying the waters. Besides, I thought as long as you boosted the reds or something, the green eyes of "faul", as you put it, became brown.. Are Faul's eyes green, brown or hazel? Are Paul's eyes green or brown or what? Do I need to post 10 stills from Help? A hundred? What??

[FlamingPie]

JoJo said:

You do?? Amazing!!



This isn't really a "color" argument, so don't try muddying the waters. Besides, I thought as long as you boosted the reds or something, the green eyes of "faul", as you put it, became brown.. Are Faul's eyes green, brown or hazel? Are Paul's eyes green or brown or what? Do I need to post 10 stills from Help? A hundred? What??

Yeah, I was just pointing out that you can't really say his eyes are this and his eyes are that. There are too many variables that can change eye color, or "appear" to change eye color.

[DarkHorse]

Flaming said:

Yeah, I was just pointing out that you can't really say his eyes are this and his eyes are that. There are too many variables that can change eye color, or "appear" to change eye color.

The eyes do look similar when they are examined by themselves but the overall face looks so much different to me it doesn't even matter.