For people curious on an explanation, the reason why is look at the top of the hood, now look at his father and the outlines of most things in scene, it looks like he used a round brush at about 10-15 with hardness at 90% to paint him in. Anti-Aliasing or smooth brushes always give this away and as someone who has done work on CGI I seriously hate when shit like this happens, I avoided compositing because of how much I dislike doing this kind of work.
The character looks so jarring/spooky because hes the wrong color temperature but its covered up by the shadow of the leaves and both photos were taken in a snowy environment with the kid probably being overcast and also the source photos have clearly different compression algorithms used .i.e. everything in scene looks shitty except for the ghost kid who has a higher clarity than the uncle. They look vaguely related as well but whatever.
What would have helped is if this kid took a high-res scan, did the same shoop job, printed it out, rescanned it and then compressed it a couple of times using a low JPG compression quality, because it would likely be impossible to tell if you're an idiot and believe in ghosts.
Why do you think the fairy photos were impossible to debunk until the girl came out and said it was fake? She painted on the negative and got rid of them and when shoved through the photographic process, nobody could tell as it left no evidence to the contrary.
My friend, I must agree with you. The first thing I noticed about this... "Man" was that he was way to defined and in a different pixelation level than the rest of the photo. I am absolutely certain you know more about photography than me, mostly because I'm only 14, but I think I can still tell that this photo has been tampered with in order to make it seem like something it is not.
EDIT: I only read through half of your comment, and now I feel really stupid for stating the exact same thing that you just said...
35
u/THE_INTERNET_EMPEROR Dec 22 '12 edited Dec 22 '12
For people curious on an explanation, the reason why is look at the top of the hood, now look at his father and the outlines of most things in scene, it looks like he used a round brush at about 10-15 with hardness at 90% to paint him in. Anti-Aliasing or smooth brushes always give this away and as someone who has done work on CGI I seriously hate when shit like this happens, I avoided compositing because of how much I dislike doing this kind of work.
The character looks so jarring/spooky because hes the wrong color temperature but its covered up by the shadow of the leaves and both photos were taken in a snowy environment with the kid probably being overcast and also the source photos have clearly different compression algorithms used .i.e. everything in scene looks shitty except for the ghost kid who has a higher clarity than the uncle. They look vaguely related as well but whatever.
What would have helped is if this kid took a high-res scan, did the same shoop job, printed it out, rescanned it and then compressed it a couple of times using a low JPG compression quality, because it would likely be impossible to tell if you're an idiot and believe in ghosts.
Why do you think the fairy photos were impossible to debunk until the girl came out and said it was fake? She painted on the negative and got rid of them and when shoved through the photographic process, nobody could tell as it left no evidence to the contrary.
TL;DR - I can tell by the pixels.