digg

Join DiggAbout

Infamous photo fakes

chicagotribune.com — A look back on some doctored photos

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • Soval, on 07/11/2008, -11/+170If pictures 2 and 3 are both by Adnan Hajj, how can Reuters "cut its ties" twice?
    • voetsjoeba, on 07/11/2008, -1/+49Consider the possibility that they discovered the photoshopping only after having received both photoshopped pictures from said person.
    • jblade, on 07/11/2008, -4/+4Adnaan Hajj was discredited not once, but twice... the media really doesn't ever learnl
      • yuanzhoulu, on 07/11/2008, -1/+10you people are stupid. they used both of his images and then later discovered they were fake.
    • peteophile44, on 07/11/2008, -0/+6Both photos ran in the same month, likely the same week or even same day. I imagine both photos went to the streets before either were discredited.
    • falstaff, on 07/11/2008, -0/+16Both pictures were from the same skirmish. Personally, I'd have fired every editor who even looked at the first one (#2 in the list) and thought that would add to the story. That would get an F in grade school art classes. Worst 'shop ever.
    • RRJackson, on 07/11/2008, -1/+14His Photoshop work was absolute crap. If you're going to fake photos for international news, at least do it convincingly. ;-)
      • faatbuddha, on 07/12/2008, -0/+8Seriously! Looks like a ten year old did it.
    • 4UIDigg, on 07/12/2008, -1/+1""If pictures 2 and 3 are both by Adnan Hajj, how can Reuters "cut its ties" twice?""

      -- dumb & dumber
    • proforce, on 07/12/2008, -1/+1http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adnan_Hajj_photograph ...
  • AlpineStars777, on 07/11/2008, -2/+269LOL at the token.
    • recruz, on 07/11/2008, -1/+23am i a bad person for wanting to digg you more than once?
    • ricksite, on 07/11/2008, -0/+12Is that Chris Tucker?
    • GuacamoleSan, on 07/11/2008, -9/+3I did not know that Martha Newsweek even happened. Dugg for that.
    • faatbuddha, on 07/12/2008, -0/+19Haha, yes. I love his face. Everyone else is cheering excitedly and he's just the background creeper.
    • blackmoth, on 07/12/2008, -2/+5When I saw it, I ***** a brick.
    • akamurph, on 07/12/2008, -4/+3I lol'ed and thought the same thing... stick in the token black dude even though he looks so out of place in that photo!
  • reisrocks, on 07/11/2008, -0/+51They should make a daily "spot the difference" column where you get to spot photoshop clone-tool ***** by ambitious journalists.

    Although some might consider it much too easy.
    • JamesJanega, on 07/11/2008, -2/+3A good idea, though I would say "overworked" journalists instead of ambitious.

      There's a separate, deeper circle of hell for journalists who cross the line and photoshop their own pictures. But anybody can lie to you. It happens just often enough that you don't catch it every time.
  • acmaurer, on 07/11/2008, -1/+49It's really sad that some feel the truth needs to be photoshopped in order to be interesting
    • yuanzhoulu, on 07/11/2008, -1/+26the last one is the most annoying. adding black people to "show diversity". what bullcrap.

      diversity is NOT necessary. it should be accepted, welcomed, and can be good, but it's by no means mandatory and should not be forced. what the hell is wrong with a town of 99.9% white people (any village of Europe), a town of 99.9% black people (any village of Ethiopia), or 99.9% Chinese people (any village of China)? as long as they get along with each other there is no need to try to force any population into having some minimum ratio of blacks to whites. that's just silly. if i want to live around people of my culture, that is not a racist thing to do as long as i don't hate on the others.
      • speedk0re, on 07/11/2008, -1/+3a town is way different than a university though. You don't have to "market" a town. Universities are businesses, and they want to make money; therefore they want to appeal to all ethnicities, so they will lie and make crap up to put more money in their pocket. It's not a racist thing, it's a greed thing thought up by some asshat in marketing.
      • yuanzhoulu, on 07/11/2008, -0/+5but any university with competition ought not to worry, as long as they are still admitting to capacity what's the issue?
      • BrewBeau, on 07/12/2008, -0/+1@yuanzhoulu

        Universities have to get accredited for certain programs based on, among several other things, the diversity of the student body and faculty.

        So, it makes sense that the University would doctor the photograph like that.
  • duggtodeath, on 07/11/2008, -2/+86When reality doesn't fit your narrow-minded world-view -- just photoshop it!
    • jblade, on 07/11/2008, -9/+1When photoshop doesn't fit your hard drive -- just compress it!
    • yuanzhoulu, on 07/11/2008, -1/+4i wish i could photoshop the real world. if you hate someone use the burn tool. cut and paste your money. draw text on people's shirts randomly. changing opacity of stuff would be the absolute best.

      i wonder what the blur tool would do though.
      • cdahlkvist, on 07/11/2008, -0/+4blur would be for the fatty you picked up at the bar when you were drunk.
      • GlitchEnzo, on 07/11/2008, -0/+1I would prefer to copy and paste my money. ;-)
      • missmorgie, on 07/11/2008, -0/+4The blur tool exists! Hellooo Happy Hour!
  • ohnoerino, on 07/11/2008, -1/+25The Martha Stewart photo is classic (and completely unrealistic)!
  • chetanthaker, on 07/11/2008, -2/+12Badly photoshopped !!
  • PolishLogic, on 07/11/2008, -2/+135Adnan Hajj isn't very good at photoshopping, nor is he any good at photography in general.

    And, #9 made me laugh out loud.
  • njones12, on 07/11/2008, -9/+5Interesting presentation! Shame on Time Magezine for what I think is unethical manipulation!
    • hokie47, on 07/11/2008, -1/+4Also the head line of "An American Tragedy" is sensationalist garbage.
    • akamurph, on 07/12/2008, -1/+3They really didn't "shop" the picture, it's the original picture just darkened.
  • HeDiggMe, on 07/11/2008, -0/+79The picture of Bush looks like a magic eye.
    • airmann90, on 07/11/2008, -0/+15It's a sailboat, if you stare at it long enough.
  • SirK, on 07/11/2008, -1/+17Dugg for UW-Madison! They made too big of a deal of this locally when it happened IMO.
    • RacerX2727, on 07/11/2008, -1/+3This came out right when I was applying to colleges, I think I still have it somewhere. After being accepted, they sent me one with a new cover, but the inside was the same....
  • nj7703, on 07/11/2008, -0/+62They forgot the Oprah TV Guide one http://www.cnet.com.au/i/g/40092347/sc011.jpg
    • dumpyhumpy, on 07/11/2008, -0/+11HA! Thats HORRIBLE!!
    • slym2k, on 07/11/2008, -5/+3You're right, that question mark is obviously photoshopped.
  • Lucas123, on 07/11/2008, -4/+9Missed this one:
    http://thebiggestsecretpict.online.fr/ufo/austria2 ...
    • bluezinc, on 07/11/2008, -1/+14That's not photoshopped, that's just retarded.
      • Lucas123, on 07/11/2008, -0/+1Hey, no one said anything about photoshopping. It's just faked, like the headline says.
  • zapperdude60, on 07/11/2008, -0/+27i wish there were bigger photos for some of them
  • doctechnical, on 07/11/2008, -0/+5Where's Condi Rice and her magical glowing eyeballs?
    • sandman979, on 07/11/2008, -0/+1Glowing as in Melange?
      • doctechnical, on 07/11/2008, -0/+1"It is by will alone that I set my mind in motion..."
  • speedk0re, on 07/11/2008, -1/+3if i see the JFK one with the band/microphone again.......
    ::looks::
    ok no puppies will die this weekend
  • FUR10N, on 07/11/2008, -5/+3why are these considered infamous?
    • bluezinc, on 07/11/2008, -1/+16because they caused a big stir when it was revealed that they were altered pictures.

      All of them except the pipeline on... that one was just stupid.
      • BossKey, on 07/12/2008, -0/+1That they caused a big stir has nothing to do with being infamous, in the traditional sense. The problem is that modern media has been using "infamous" in the opposite way than intended. Saying "...the infamous Kevin Rose..." which would normally be an insult, but in this context it's meant to be a good-natured ribbing. Nowadays, people say "infamous" the same way they say "that's so sick" (meaning "that's awesome") or "that's bad" (meaning "that's so good").

        Now we have a generation that thinks "infamous" means "really famous," when the true meaning of the word is "famous for a highly negative reason."
    • sindex, on 07/11/2008, -3/+4In-famous is when you're MORE than famous. These photos aren't just famous, they're IN-famous!
      • DubBucket, on 07/12/2008, -1/+2Dugg for the 3 Amigos reference.. of which I'm sure 99% of these kids have never heard of.
      • bluezinc, on 07/12/2008, -0/+1@DubBucket

        Don't be a film snob, seriously.
        "of which I'm sure 99% of these kids have never heard of"
        There's no need for your condescension here.
    • BossKey, on 07/11/2008, -0/+5Because the dictionary definition of "infamous" is
      "well known for some bad quality or deed"
    • FUR10N, on 07/12/2008, -0/+1but these aren't that well known at all
  • tulanian12, on 07/11/2008, -6/+8Clearly photoshopped. I can tell by the pixels.
    • bluezinc, on 07/11/2008, -1/+4The shadows are all wrong.
    • Zdax, on 07/11/2008, -0/+4And from seeing quite a few shops in my time.
      • faatbuddha, on 07/12/2008, -0/+1Yeah, do people actually not realize that we CAN see the ***** up pixels?
    • spookyttws, on 07/12/2008, -0/+3Wow, that's old AND unfunny.
  • TwoKill, on 07/11/2008, -0/+7That's like the tip of the iceberg for professional photos that have been photoshopped.
  • phlux, on 07/11/2008, -2/+316Forgot this one:

    http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3229/2658316482_848 ...
  • Sippinonbir, on 07/11/2008, -0/+26There was plenty of smoke in the original, no need to add more.
    • faatbuddha, on 07/12/2008, -0/+5especially not the same clouds offset a quarter of an inch.
    • greatgatsbyII, on 07/15/2008, -0/+1That was SO poorly done.
  • mikethejohnson, on 07/11/2008, -0/+6dugg for false diversification
  • SniperZ, on 07/11/2008, -5/+87I wouldn't call the OJ mug shot a fake, its just an aesthetic choice of design to make it look darker...
    • stevensj2, on 07/11/2008, -0/+7I agree. The _entire frame_ was made darker, giving a sort of "view through telescope" effect.

      His image was not manipulated or distorted.
    • analogkid01, on 07/11/2008, -11/+2I'm not a racist, I'm just making an aesthetic choice.
      • pathouston22, on 07/11/2008, -3/+1What, turning a black man blacker makes you racist?
      • chaoswings, on 07/11/2008, -0/+8I guarantee had they altered a photo of a white man in the same manner no one would give two ***** and just accept it. But because he is black people for some reason go through everything with a fine tooth comb looking for racism where there is none.

        Another example of this was a story submitted to digg about "coded" racist terms. I use the term loosely saying a word backwards is something 5-year olds do in the schoolyard and is easily figured out.

        http://digg.com/arts_culture/Feds_seeing_increase_ ...

        The author was fine typing out reggin but he referred to ***** as the n-word because he was afraid. I would not consider him racist if he had used the word because people still know what "n-word" means and using the actual term would have been no different.

        But I suppose he had no choice since apparently simply darkening an image is considered racism. How exactly are we supposed to eradicate racism when people react like that? Never mind confronting simple words or actions that are blatantly racist all together, people can't even handle a picture without searching for political correctness.
      • blackmoth, on 07/12/2008, -0/+0You got my digg. I understand how jokes work.
    • GuacamoleSan, on 07/11/2008, -0/+26i mean the guy did kill his wife and everything
    • joobojesse, on 07/11/2008, -0/+6I agree -- if it were fake then we should also submit all of those touched-up model shots in maxim..
      • Clumber, on 07/11/2008, -0/+1Brilliant... why yes... those all those shots should indeed be submitted.... btw my email address is....

        MWAHAHAHA!

        Sadly, I tried watching the "Maxim's 100 most Sexy Women" or some similar title the other day... got through the 1st 20 of them (that's 100 through 80, for the non-science majors) and I realized that I only recognized ONE of them at all. Danica Patrick. More proof, I guess... that I am getting older... Better than the alternative, of course.
  • missmorgie, on 07/11/2008, -0/+79It looks like the smoke in #2 was made with the spraycan tool in MS paint. Come on, a three year old could've done that!
    • bizz0ris, on 07/11/2008, -1/+4Seriously, all of these are really bad. I don't consider myself an expert of photo manipulation but I know that even I could have done a better job on most of these. Really quite pathetic.
    • akamurph, on 07/12/2008, -0/+2dugg. I thought the same thing. ...and then thought, did this retard actually think no one would notice?
  • labizau, on 07/11/2008, -0/+27Is it just me, or are some of these pointless? Why take all that trouble to move Bush over? Does it matter that someone wanted to fix a problem with their sensor?
    • sassafras1232, on 07/12/2008, -0/+2Yeah the sensor dust one I have to say is not malicious, just incompetent. Moving the president is an issue for a few reasons. It is not an accurate representation of the scene. Since it is an (admittedly minor) historic event it should be properly documented. Also, if you consider "pure" photography as an artform then he is "cheating" by some ethical standards.
  • zika1, on 07/11/2008, -3/+20dugg for iran's poor self esteem
  • Leetamus, on 07/11/2008, -8/+0there's way better manipulated photos online... wonder why these ones were picked
    • analogkid01, on 07/11/2008, -0/+13You just...don't get it, do you?
    • BlueSkyfish, on 07/11/2008, -0/+3Because these photos are in the news, where they're supposed to be real.
  • slapded, on 07/11/2008, -0/+26that last one made me ***** bricks
  • ferreth, on 07/11/2008, -0/+5Photoshopped Martha on the front cover of Newsweek. The mind boggles at the stupidity of this actually having happened.
  • graemee, on 07/11/2008, -8/+5Not all these are fakes, the last one and the pipeline guy are not fakes - IMHO. Badly shopped, yes, but not fake news. There are a lot better contenders for fakes out there. In all, a very time dilated story and not worth the time to read it.
  • PostedOval, on 07/11/2008, -12/+2The OJ one still pisses me off. I can't believe Time did that.
  • jdisco, on 07/11/2008, -7/+1This reminds me of the picture of the troops raising the flag at Iwo Jima. That was altered to include a Mexican and Black guy. I hate when people complain about lack of diversity.
    • yacks, on 07/11/2008, -0/+2actually from what I read somewhere.. that photo is fake in a sense that it was reshot to use a better flag.
    • BossKey, on 07/11/2008, -0/+2The other infamously staged photo of recent history was the alleged crowd of Iraqi citizens pulling down the statue of Saddam, when it was really just a few US partisans aided by a US Marines vehicle, with the ordinary citizens gated out of the plaza.

      http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article28 ...
  • fcrow, on 07/11/2008, -0/+2Interesting show, some of them are realy bad and those photographers must also be banned from using Photohop ever again (or watch all episodes of I suck at Photoshop).
  • MisterEX, on 07/11/2008, -0/+1Wish some of those were a bit larger.
  • Wormfather, on 07/11/2008, -0/+14There's a joke to be made about that Wisconson photo, I just cant put my finger on it.
    • Butros, on 07/11/2008, -0/+6Black people don't usually go to Wisconsin?
    • MiniCooper2007, on 07/11/2008, -0/+6There are no black people in Wisconsin.
    • zerosaber8, on 07/11/2008, -0/+10It was in Scrubs when Turk was telling J.D how his picture got photoshopped into his College brochure twice.
  • SidiousX3, on 07/11/2008, -0/+15What about the red army raising the flag over the reichstag? The original picture showed a second soldier with two looted watches on his wrist, the altered one added more smoke in the background(much like that Israeli picture) and erased those two watches.

    And the plenty of altered photos that the soviet union has done... http://www.englishrussia.com/?p=710
    • dkapuchino, on 07/11/2008, -0/+1* It was a lebanese picture, trying to intesify damage caused by Israel.
    • SidiousX3, on 07/11/2008, -0/+0I know, was just stating the general topic of the picture...
    • SidiousX3, on 07/12/2008, -0/+0Yeah pretty crazy, and like, pre WW2 era ***** too.
  • gitrplaya4u, on 07/11/2008, -0/+17Number 2 is terribly done. Seriously, look at the tallest plumes; the pattern is unmistakeable. It looks like bad video game smoke.
  • hotlatte, on 07/11/2008, -2/+4Don't forget these photos:

    http://www.oregonbigfoot.com/patterson.php
  • SmellyFingers, on 07/11/2008, -0/+38Dugg for grinning black dude's head.
    • krnldmp, on 07/11/2008, -0/+4That's done with the addanigba photoshop tool.
  • evanct, on 07/11/2008, -0/+18http://www.theonion.com/content/node/38641
    • labizau, on 07/11/2008, -0/+2It freaks me out when The Onion is prophetic.
      • evanct, on 07/11/2008, -0/+2actually that onion article was written several years after the actual photshopped black guy pic in the submission.
      • labizau, on 07/11/2008, -0/+1Now that I look, you're right - sort of. Onion article was December of 2000, actual UW story broke in September of 2000. Now it seems like The Onion pulled a Law & Order and ripped it from the headlines.
  • ELCad, on 07/11/2008, -0/+1They left out the one from Kent State and some others too.
    Here's the digg link:
    http://digg.com/design/Re_imaging_History_Altered_ ...
  • sandman979, on 07/11/2008, -1/+4This is missing the most important fake pictures ever!!!! The ones supposedly showing Iraq nuclear and biological weapons. Haha I bet many of you didn't remember those. Those pics were quickly buried, can't blame you. Of course they were later proven fake, partly costing France's support on war.
  • Samadhi007, on 07/11/2008, -1/+7I go to UW Madison and that last picture with the student photoshopped into the cheering fans was one of the first things I heard about when I came to campus. There was an interview with the student who was photoshopped in and he basically said that he wasn't aware of it until someone mentioned that he was on the cover of the undergraduate booklet. He said he had never been to any football games and didn't understand why they would fabricate something like that.
  • loolz, on 07/11/2008, -2/+22A new Iran launch. Not so sure about this one.

    http://i35.tinypic.com/15g8pdv.jpg
  • northernmonkee, on 07/11/2008, -0/+14If you like this sort of thing, then have a look at http://photoshopdisasters.blogspot.com/.

    Note... This is not my site nor would I consider it blogspam, I just visit regularly to see what comedy Photoshop mishaps have been going on recently.
    • charm803, on 07/11/2008, -0/+1Gotta love Christina's "wonky" fingers........
  • benthose, on 07/11/2008, -2/+1Donnie saves the day.
  • HaSatan, on 07/11/2008, -0/+17In unrelated news Adobe announced it would be adding a new filter to CS4 Photoshop, "Add Black Guy". Adobe did not comment if this filter would keep the controversial "Darkness" and "Menacing" option sliders.
  • benthose, on 07/11/2008, -2/+1Donnie saves the day !
  • tim710, on 07/11/2008, -6/+4This is an infamous photo fake too:

    10)
    http://www.strangecosmos.com/images/content/103756 ...

    not 'shopped though...
  • lateralus, on 07/11/2008, -0/+1The Oscar De La Hoya photoshop didn't make it?
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 70 of 70 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.