What's the Big Friggin' Difference?! - Come Together

  • 82 Replies
  • 7229 Views

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

MJLover1990

  • *
  • Guest
Quote from: "DontBelieveTheHype"
Quote

The photos are totally different, I see difference in jaw, eyebrows, eyes and nose. I have a theory.. Could the photo that was used on the burial be a recent photo? Michael did look young on the smooth criminal photoshoot 3D taken from TII movie. What if the Liberian Girl photo from the burial is a NEW photo of Michael??????

I think you may be right on this!
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline MJhunny

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • Posts: 239
hold on someone on another thread has a great pic from extra footage on dvd TII
have asked them to post here :!:


sorry they are off line

link to vid  pause at 42seconds

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3raeE5RT_gk

credit to itsall4love for pointing out the pic  and lotus-sutra for the link to the video :)
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Chuyuri

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • Posts: 8
Those are pictures from the same photoshoot. One has been airbrushed (which is what was done before there was photoshop, and it's also why the "younger" picture looks a little more like a painting than a photo) and the other hasn't. If you believe the '92 conversation with Glenda, MJ even mentions that they airbrushed his face for album covers/magazines, etc.

Usually when photos are airbrushed/photoshopped, they often smooth out fine lines, perhaps fill out the brow a bit more, or smooth out the corners of the mouth (as they obviously did here). It's not unusual that any of those differences are there. Also, one picture obviously has a great deal more contrast which emphasizes shadows which could make the face look different.

As for the bonus footage picture, I don't know. It looks like an old picture to me.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Datroot

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • Posts: 1314
I just think one photo is airbrushed and the other isn't.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »


I'M A LOVER, NOT A FIGHTER

Offline jeramie

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • Posts: 10
Quote from: "Chuyuri"
Those are pictures from the same photoshoot. One has been airbrushed (which is what was done before there was photoshop, and it's also why the "younger" picture looks a little more like a painting than a photo) and the other hasn't. If you believe the '92 conversation with Glenda, MJ even mentions that they airbrushed his face for album covers/magazines, etc.

Usually when photos are airbrushed/photoshopped, they often smooth out fine lines, perhaps fill out the brow a bit more, or smooth out the corners of the mouth (as they obviously did here). It's not unusual that any of those differences are there. Also, one picture obviously has a great deal more contrast which emphasizes shadows which could make the face look different.

I agree with you 100%.  It's obvious it was photoshopped.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline itsall4love

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • Posts: 204
@MJhunny[attachment=0:v8kojf4v]SCthisisitDVD.jpg[/attachment:v8kojf4v]
I think it's from the original Smooth Criminal, so an old pic.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline itsall4love

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • Posts: 204
So I've watched the SC part from Moonwalker and found this lady: [attachment=0:3o250939]Moonwalkerstill.jpg[/attachment:3o250939]
The blouse seems to be the same like in the pic with MJ from the DVD bonus.
I'm guessing that one really IS a pic from the Bad era.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Nakiska

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • Posts: 90
Quote from: "Chuyuri"
Those are pictures from the same photoshoot. One has been airbrushed (which is what was done before there was photoshop, and it's also why the "younger" picture looks a little more like a painting than a photo) and the other hasn't. If you believe the '92 conversation with Glenda, MJ even mentions that they airbrushed his face for album covers/magazines, etc.

Usually when photos are airbrushed/photoshopped, they often smooth out fine lines, perhaps fill out the brow a bit more, or smooth out the corners of the mouth (as they obviously did here). It's not unusual that any of those differences are there. Also, one picture obviously has a great deal more contrast which emphasizes shadows which could make the face look different.

As for the bonus footage picture, I don't know. It looks like an old picture to me.
Yes. I believe you are totally right!
They are two different pictures taken from the same photoshoot. Michael slightly changed his position while taking the photo and that is why they dont match.
And I believe in the convo beteween him and Glenda so this is more confirmation for me. ;)
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline misha86

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • Posts: 508
Quote from: "Nakiska"
Quote from: "Chuyuri"
Those are pictures from the same photoshoot. One has been airbrushed (which is what was done before there was photoshop, and it's also why the "younger" picture looks a little more like a painting than a photo) and the other hasn't. If you believe the '92 conversation with Glenda, MJ even mentions that they airbrushed his face for album covers/magazines, etc.

Usually when photos are airbrushed/photoshopped, they often smooth out fine lines, perhaps fill out the brow a bit more, or smooth out the corners of the mouth (as they obviously did here). It's not unusual that any of those differences are there. Also, one picture obviously has a great deal more contrast which emphasizes shadows which could make the face look different.

As for the bonus footage picture, I don't know. It looks like an old picture to me.
Yes. I believe you are totally right!
They are two different pictures taken from the same photoshoot. Michael slightly changed his position while taking the photo and that is why they dont match.
And I believe in the convo beteween him and Glenda so this is more confirmation for me. ;)
so between 1 second his hair is fuller,hes darker,he looks older,get gets a dimple in his chin and his eyebrows change :lol:
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Miss.Peppers

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • Posts: 998
Quote from: "misha86"
He does look older and with make up and touch ups 2 the pictures..maybe even botox he can look like that

And u don't have 2 tell me he is human...I know that

Alright.. keep your hair on!!

Botox isnt a miracle worker!!!!!
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
Always the Angel on My Shoulder

Offline misha86

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • Posts: 508
Quote from: "Miss.Peppers"
There is no way the "younger" version of these two pics is MJ now... i dont understand!!!!

clearing you dont even know which picture we were refering to  :roll: so catch on before you quote people and as a matter of fact dont quote me because you always have some negative ass shit to say to people when they dont agree with you...so you keep your fuckin hair on

Quote from: "Miss.Peppers"
Quote from: "misha86"
He does look older and with make up and touch ups 2 the pictures..maybe even botox he can look like that

And u don't have 2 tell me he is human...I know that

Alright.. keep your hair on!!

Botox isnt a miracle worker!!!!!
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline mjfan4ever

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • Posts: 55
Maybe they change the pic to make him look more like him self today .. he had alot of changes done over the years .the two pic of him in yellow and the one fromTII does look alot alike ..that why I said they may have done it to make him look up to date . But I pray it's a clue that he is alive .. maybe we should get the guy on youtube on this they will find out something ..lol
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
WHAT EVER HAPPENS .. DON\'T LET GO OF MY HAND !!!!

Offline mjj29081958

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • Posts: 451
Quote from: "misha86"
Quote from: "Nakiska"
Quote from: "Chuyuri"
Those are pictures from the same photoshoot. One has been airbrushed (which is what was done before there was photoshop, and it's also why the "younger" picture looks a little more like a painting than a photo) and the other hasn't. If you believe the '92 conversation with Glenda, MJ even mentions that they airbrushed his face for album covers/magazines, etc.

Usually when photos are airbrushed/photoshopped, they often smooth out fine lines, perhaps fill out the brow a bit more, or smooth out the corners of the mouth (as they obviously did here). It's not unusual that any of those differences are there. Also, one picture obviously has a great deal more contrast which emphasizes shadows which could make the face look different.

As for the bonus footage picture, I don't know. It looks like an old picture to me.
Yes. I believe you are totally right!
They are two different pictures taken from the same photoshoot. Michael slightly changed his position while taking the photo and that is why they dont match.
And I believe in the convo beteween him and Glenda so this is more confirmation for me. ;)
so between 1 second his hair is fuller,hes darker,he looks older,get gets a dimple in his chin and his eyebrows change :lol:
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
"Won't you just let me be?..."

Offline Chuyuri

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • Posts: 8
Quote from: "misha86"
so between 1 second his hair is fuller,hes darker,he looks older,get gets a dimple in his chin and his eyebrows change :lol:

mjj29081958 has already done me the favor and clarified this for me (thanks, by the way =D ) but just so I make myself clear:

The "younger" photo is *airbrushed*. So you have two factors. One, Michael moved between one picture and the next, and two, one picture has been altered. That's not mentioning the contrast issues.

If you look CLOSELY, the cleft in his chin is still there in the airbrushed picture. It's more prominent in the non-airbrushed picture because the contrast ratio is higher which emphasizes shadows. His hair looks fuller for the same reason-- contrast brings out the darker aspects of a photo (which is also why his skin looks darker), and because his hair is black, the contrast brought it out.

The rest of the differences are airbrushing.

Guys, there is *no possible way* for someone to take a new picture that looks *that* similar 20 years after the fact. Some of you are pointing out a couple of easily explainable differences, but I can spot *curls of hair* that are in precisely the same position in both pictures (even some flyaways, and you just can't reproduce that-- ever). I see wrinkles in his clothes that are in precisely the same position. What you're suggesting (that he took a new picture trying to replicate one taken over 20 years ago) is impossible. There's details in those photos that simply can't be duplicated, even if you try.

I know you guys want to see clues...but this isn't one.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline francisca81

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • Posts: 194
Quote from: "Chuyuri"
Quote from: "misha86"
so between 1 second his hair is fuller,hes darker,he looks older,get gets a dimple in his chin and his eyebrows change :lol:

mjj29081958 has already done me the favor and clarified this for me (thanks, by the way =D ) but just so I make myself clear:

The "younger" photo is *airbrushed*. So you have two factors. One, Michael moved between one picture and the next, and two, one picture has been altered. That's not mentioning the contrast issues.

If you look CLOSELY, the cleft in his chin is still there in the airbrushed picture. It's more prominent in the non-airbrushed picture because the contrast ratio is higher which emphasizes shadows. His hair looks fuller for the same reason-- contrast brings out the darker aspects of a photo (which is also why his skin looks darker), and because his hair is black, the contrast brought it out.

The rest of the differences are airbrushing.

Guys, there is *no possible way* for someone to take a new picture that looks *that* similar 20 years after the fact. Some of you are pointing out a couple of easily explainable differences, but I can spot *curls of hair* that are in precisely the same position in both pictures (even some flyaways, and you just can't reproduce that-- ever). I see wrinkles in his clothes that are in precisely the same position. What you're suggesting (that he took a new picture trying to replicate one taken over 20 years ago) is impossible. There's details in those photos that simply can't be duplicated, even if you try.

I know you guys want to see clues...but this isn't one.

well, i didn't see it as a clue or something, i just see it as a possibility, that some pics have been made again, but with the age of 50.. :)
if it's not the case, it's totally fine by me! ;)  
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline misha86

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • Posts: 508
Quote from: "Chuyuri"
Quote from: "misha86"
so between 1 second his hair is fuller,hes darker,he looks older,get gets a dimple in his chin and his eyebrows change :lol:

mjj29081958 has already done me the favor and clarified this for me (thanks, by the way =D ) but just so I make myself clear:

The "younger" photo is *airbrushed*. So you have two factors. One, Michael moved between one picture and the next, and two, one picture has been altered. That's not mentioning the contrast issues.

If you look CLOSELY, the cleft in his chin is still there in the airbrushed picture. It's more prominent in the non-airbrushed picture because the contrast ratio is higher which emphasizes shadows. His hair looks fuller for the same reason-- contrast brings out the darker aspects of a photo (which is also why his skin looks darker), and because his hair is black, the contrast brought it out.

The rest of the differences are airbrushing.

Guys, there is *no possible way* for someone to take a new picture that looks *that* similar 20 years after the fact. Some of you are pointing out a couple of easily explainable differences, but I can spot *curls of hair* that are in precisely the same position in both pictures (even some flyaways, and you just can't reproduce that-- ever). I see wrinkles in his clothes that are in precisely the same position. What you're suggesting (that he took a new picture trying to replicate one taken over 20 years ago) is impossible. There's details in those photos that simply can't be duplicated, even if you try.

I know you guys want to see clues...but this isn't one.
ok well tell that to jay'z and mariah carey who both remade there album covered from over the years for comercials and mariahs new album..the pictures look exactly like they did when they were first taken

and that doesnt make sense for the non airbrushed picture to have a better quality than the airbrushed picture...why would the "younger" air brushed picture look 20 years old?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Dancing_Machine

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • Posts: 826
Quote from: "Chuyuri"
Those are pictures from the same photoshoot. One has been airbrushed (which is what was done before there was photoshop, and it's also why the "younger" picture looks a little more like a painting than a photo) and the other hasn't. If you believe the '92 conversation with Glenda, MJ even mentions that they airbrushed his face for album covers/magazines, etc.

Usually when photos are airbrushed/photoshopped, they often smooth out fine lines, perhaps fill out the brow a bit more, or smooth out the corners of the mouth (as they obviously did here). It's not unusual that any of those differences are there. Also, one picture obviously has a great deal more contrast which emphasizes shadows which could make the face look different.

As for the bonus footage picture, I don't know. It looks like an old picture to me.

But why would they use an unairbrushed photo for the funeral instead of the original cover photo??
That doesn't make any sense.

I'm not sure if it's the recent Michael on that picture. But if it is, it's just another clue.
Maybe it's the recent Michael on the unairbrushed photo but they photoshopped it a little so not everybody would notice only for  his real fans and believers of the hoax. ;)
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Let\'s not forget...

Offline O-drey-O

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • Posts: 243
Quote from: "Dancing_Machine"
But why would they use an unairbrushed photo for the funeral instead of the original cover photo??
That doesn't make any sense.

I'm not sure if it's the recent Michael on that picture. But if it is, it's just another clue.
Maybe it's the recent Michael on the unairbrushed photo but they photoshopped it a little so not everybody would notice only for  his real fans and believers of the hoax. ;)

I agree. Why wouldn't they use the same picture as Liberian girl in the 1980s? Why did they show this one instead? Because we haven't found out why there was the liberian girl pic instead of a recent one for the funeral yet. That's why this thread makes sense to me because it would be actually a recent picture of Michael..
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
dd64300@hotmail.com


[size=110]"Lie run sprints, but the truth runs marathons"[/size]

Offline Dancing_Machine

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • Posts: 826
Quote from: "O-drey-O"
Quote from: "Dancing_Machine"
But why would they use an unairbrushed photo for the funeral instead of the original cover photo??
That doesn't make any sense.

I'm not sure if it's the recent Michael on that picture. But if it is, it's just another clue.
Maybe it's the recent Michael on the unairbrushed photo but they photoshopped it a little so not everybody would notice only for  his real fans and believers of the hoax. ;)

I agree. Why wouldn't they use the same picture as Liberian girl in the 1980s? Why did they show this one instead? Because we haven't found out why there was the liberian girl pic instead of a recent one for the funeral yet. That's why this thread makes sense to me because it would be actually a recent picture of Michael..

Yes there had to be a reason to use this one and not the original one. But what is that reason?  :?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Let\'s not forget...

Offline Chuyuri

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • Posts: 8
Quote from: "misha86"
Quote from: "Chuyuri"
Quote from: "misha86"
so between 1 second his hair is fuller,hes darker,he looks older,get gets a dimple in his chin and his eyebrows change :lol:

mjj29081958 has already done me the favor and clarified this for me (thanks, by the way =D ) but just so I make myself clear:

The "younger" photo is *airbrushed*. So you have two factors. One, Michael moved between one picture and the next, and two, one picture has been altered. That's not mentioning the contrast issues.

If you look CLOSELY, the cleft in his chin is still there in the airbrushed picture. It's more prominent in the non-airbrushed picture because the contrast ratio is higher which emphasizes shadows. His hair looks fuller for the same reason-- contrast brings out the darker aspects of a photo (which is also why his skin looks darker), and because his hair is black, the contrast brought it out.

The rest of the differences are airbrushing.

Guys, there is *no possible way* for someone to take a new picture that looks *that* similar 20 years after the fact. Some of you are pointing out a couple of easily explainable differences, but I can spot *curls of hair* that are in precisely the same position in both pictures (even some flyaways, and you just can't reproduce that-- ever). I see wrinkles in his clothes that are in precisely the same position. What you're suggesting (that he took a new picture trying to replicate one taken over 20 years ago) is impossible. There's details in those photos that simply can't be duplicated, even if you try.

I know you guys want to see clues...but this isn't one.
ok well tell that to jay'z and mariah carey who both remade there album covered from over the years for comercials and mariahs new album..the pictures look exactly like they did when they were first taken

and that doesnt make sense for the non airbrushed picture to have a better quality than the airbrushed picture...why would the "younger" air brushed picture look 20 years old?

Sure, they look "exactly" the same. That's because they're from the same PHOTOSHOOT.

A photoshoot is not just one picture, or even just a collection of pictures in different poses, it's several pictures of each pose. Now, I haven't seen Jay Z or Mariah Carey's album covers, but I can guarantee you that they didn't have FLYAWAYS in the exact same position on both covers. IT CANNOT. BE DONE. EVER.

And I explained why the airbrushed picture looks older. BEFORE there was photoshop, there was AIRBRUSHING. Airbrushing makes pictures look more like paintings (like this one). Which is why it looks *older*. But they were taken within seconds of each other.

I've already explained this as many times and as many ways as I can think of. If some of you still don't get it, whatever. Waste your time trying to find something that isn't there, I won't waste mine anymore.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline misha86

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • Posts: 508
Also when I say older I mean the one where mike looks older not the original phoyo with him lighter


You still don't make sense..why would they thin out his hair instead of fill it out like in the older photo? And obviously there not the same because we jus listed the differences....and he can have the same clothes and fly aways because they added them 2 the older photo 2 make them look the same..yes the body and flyaways are the same but the face is not..
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline badloving

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • Posts: 143
i don't think it's recent michael in the photos (except for the one fron TII, of course)...i can clearly see a difference of age betweent the 2 smooth criminal pictures (but in both he looks gorgeous, of course)
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

[size=85]...since you went away, Don\'t you know
I sit around with my head hanging down,
And I wonder...who\'s loving you!?[/size]
[/i]

Offline Shamone Jackson

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • Posts: 379
Hmm. Very interesting. I knew their had to be a reason why they kept pimping the Liberian Girl pic. :)
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Chuyuri

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • Posts: 8
Quote from: "misha86"
Also when I say older I mean the one where mike looks older not the original phoyo with him lighter


You still don't make sense..why would they thin out his hair instead of fill it out like in the older photo? And obviously there not the same because we jus listed the differences....and he can have the same clothes and fly aways because they added them 2 the older photo 2 make them look the same..yes the body and flyaways are the same but the face is not..

They didn't thin out his hair. His hair looks different because of the CONTRAST RATIO. I've said it time and again.

I'm not making sense? You change your explanation every time I point out that it's impossible for the two pictures to be 20 years apart. You're the one who's not making any sense.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline misha86

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • Posts: 508
Quote from: "Chuyuri"
Quote from: "misha86"
Also when I say older I mean the one where mike looks older not the original phoyo with him lighter


You still don't make sense..why would they thin out his hair instead of fill it out like in the older photo? And obviously there not the same because we jus listed the differences....and he can have the same clothes and fly aways because they added them 2 the older photo 2 make them look the same..yes the body and flyaways are the same but the face is not..

They didn't thin out his hair. His hair looks different because of the CONTRAST RATIO. I've said it time and again.

I'm not making sense? You change your explanation every time I point out that it's impossible for the two pictures to be 20 years apart. You're the one who's not making any sense.
So ur saying that when they airbrushed the picture it made his hair look thinner from the contrast ratio? And I haven't changed my explanation....that is a new picture of mike...I have seen plenty of pictures of mike from the 80s and never has he had lines on his face and looked that old. Your the one not making sense and you still haven't explained why at he funeral they would use an untouched photo from 20years..as a matter of fact where would they get the untouched picture from......so what's more logical mike redid this picture so that we could notice,esp since liberian girl and come together are major factors of the hoax

Or they decided to use an unedited photo of mike for no reason at all
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

 

SimplePortal 2.3.6 © 2008-2014, SimplePortal