G

does anyone know where this picture was from?

Started by Guest, February 19, 2011, 01:42:27 AM

Previous topic - Next topic
The first post content
does anyone know where this was from? is it a camera trick?

http://images4.fanpop.com/image/photos/ ... 21-914.jpg

  Link

cassiope

February 20, 2011, 09:41:18 PM #15 Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Guest

Completely agree photoshopped. It is the same person, one side is darker that's all. And I agree just look as good to me either way  ;)


Guest

February 21, 2011, 08:42:38 PM #16 Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Guest
Quote from: ~Souza~

Photoshop. The contrast on the right MJ is way higher. It's well done, the color looks very natural, but it's a photoshop. The double doesn't resemble him that much, i.e. identical, and has different ears. These two have the same ears so are in my opinion the same person.

The lighter one looks smaller than the other one. How can you tell that it is photoshopped?

~Souza~

February 22, 2011, 07:04:26 AM #17 Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Guest
Quote from: "Guest 2"

Quote from: "~Souza~"

Photoshop. The contrast on the right MJ is way higher. It's well done, the color looks very natural, but it's a photoshop. The double doesn't resemble him that much, i.e. identical, and has different ears. These two have the same ears so are in my opinion the same person.

The lighter one looks smaller than the other one. How can you tell that it is photoshopped?

Like I explained, by the contrast.


PureLove

February 22, 2011, 11:19:07 AM #18 Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Guest

It's a simple photoshop. It's Michael on both sides. People are definitely having an MJ double paranoia.


MissG

February 22, 2011, 11:45:36 AM #19 Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Guest
Quote from: "PureLove"

It's a simple photoshop. It's Michael on both sides. People are definitely having an MJ double paranoia.

It is the second time I read that you refer to people believing in doubles as "having a MJ double paranoia"

Well, there are people here who are open to investigate the doubles theory and you are labeling them.

Paranoia has a very specific meaning in psychiatry and I don´t think you are awared of it witnessing how you used it.

MJ had decoys, doubles and impersonators, his image was in constant change. These are my arguments to be open to  MJ double theory. Now, what are yours beside "People are definitely having an MJ double paranoia"?

("Minkin güerveeeee")
Michael pls come back


"Why a four-year-old child could understand this hoax. Run out and find me a four-year-old child. I can't make head nor tail out of it"

PureLove

February 22, 2011, 08:06:29 PM #20 Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Guest
Quote from: "Gema"

Quote from: "PureLove"

It's a simple photoshop. It's Michael on both sides. People are definitely having an MJ double paranoia.

It is the second time I read that you refer to people believing in doubles as "having a MJ double paranoia"

Well, there are people here who are open to investigate the doubles theory and you are labeling them.

Paranoia has a very specific meaning in psychiatry and I don´t think you are awared of it witnessing how you used it.

MJ had decoys, doubles and impersonators, his image was in constant change. These are my arguments to be open to  MJ double theory. Now, what are yours beside "People are definitely having an MJ double paranoia"?


And this is the second time you're jumping on me my "fellow hoaxer." I explained my reasons on the other post. You go and read there. I do know that he has doubles but not every MJ you see is a double. You are exaggerating it.


MissG

February 23, 2011, 04:47:12 AM #21 Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Guest
Quote from: "PureLove"

Quote from: "Gema"

Quote from: "PureLove"

It's a simple photoshop. It's Michael on both sides. People are definitely having an MJ double paranoia.

It is the second time I read that you refer to people believing in doubles as "having a MJ double paranoia"

Well, there are people here who are open to investigate the doubles theory and you are labeling them.

Paranoia has a very specific meaning in psychiatry and I don´t think you are awared of it witnessing how you used it.

MJ had decoys, doubles and impersonators, his image was in constant change. These are my arguments to be open to  MJ double theory. Now, what are yours beside "People are definitely having an MJ double paranoia"?


And this is the second time you're jumping on me my "fellow hoaxer." I explained my reasons on the other post. You go and read there. I do know that he has doubles but not every MJ you see is a double. You are exaggerating it.

I just replied to you on the other post. YOU GO and read there.
("Minkin güerveeeee")
Michael pls come back


"Why a four-year-old child could understand this hoax. Run out and find me a four-year-old child. I can't make head nor tail out of it"

~Souza~

February 23, 2011, 01:57:28 PM #22 Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Guest

I agree that it is not very nice to call people paranoia. Although I am sure this is a photoshop too, people should be allowed to discuss doubles and MJ in possible disguises, without being called paranoia.


PureLove

February 23, 2011, 05:17:19 PM #23 Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Guest
Quote from: "~Souza~"

I agree that it is not very nice to call people paranoia. Although I am sure this is a photoshop too, people should be allowed to discuss doubles and MJ in possible disguises, without being called paranoia.


I already apologized for using the wrong word Souza. And I didn't say people have paranoia, I wrote people are having an MJ double paranoia. I think all of you could get the difference btw them. Anyways, this is just a simple photoshop as I wrote before.

Similar topics (5)