Herald in World’s Worst Photoshop 93


Is this the world’s worst photoshop?

photoshop

Mr Clerkin appears to have a shrunken head. And the light cannot be shining on Mr Clerkin from top right, and on Murphy from the opposite direction.

The Herald headline is that political leaders are lining up to condemn the six anti-Labour demonstrators for being noisy. Are political leaders also lining up to condemn the total lack of journalistic ethics of the Herald?


93 thoughts on “Herald in World’s Worst Photoshop

1 2 3 4
  • lysias

    and are set to be the largest ‘third party’ in UK history

    Redmond’s Irish Nationalists won 82 seats in the January 1910 election, and 71 in the December 1910 election.

  • John Goss

    This is what a punch looks like.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NBqfuUiBpXs

    This is what a scuffle looks like.

    http://rt.com/news/ukraine-rada-brawl-language-485/

    Interesting to note that Klitschko is not involved but appears to be chewing his cud. Igor Miroshnichenko is involved and appears to later throw one of the Speaker’s pens on the floor. These are nationalists of the worse kind. In this BBC link Igor Miroshnichenko is roughing up the editor of state television for broadcasting a speech by Putin. He calls the editor a traitor and forces him sign a letter of resignation. Thugs.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-26653295

    It was shortly after the coup and appears to be before the BBC had been given its instructions. A member of Svoboda thankfully he was not returned to office.

  • David

    This is a good example of where the voice over is accompanied by video, but where what happens in the video does not support what is being said in the voice over.

  • Resident Dissident

    Mason

    The one I saw on the 10 o’clock News just recently – Clerkin was very clearly to the side of Murphy barking his little head off for all it was worth. I suspect he came face to face with Murphy when Murphy stopped – but that wasn’t on the BBC film and I never said it was.

  • Mason

    @ Resident Dissident

    Ok thanks for that.

    I am just trying to find some video footage that confirms the Herald’s picture, as I was a little concerned about it.

    I misunderstood and thought it had been shown by the BBC.

  • Resident Dissident

    Phil

    I echo the first comment beneath the Chloe Smith youtube video

    “Shouting at people and chasing them is a crap way to debate. Act like an adult and you might get a reply.”

    Some anarchists don’t really know the difference between anarchy and yobbery I’m afraid.

  • dave

    They are printing lies that attempt to divert the natural course of democratic affairs.
    They are attempting to deceive us, manipulate us, cheat us out of our rights.
    They are betraying the people of Scotland.
    There should be consequences.
    If the roles were reversed, there would be.

  • Habbabkuk (la vita è bella)

    “There should be consequences.
    If the roles were reversed, there would be.”

    ___________________

    Sound like our friend “RobG”, the Burgundy Boozer.

  • orkneylad

    Pshop is part of my job (in CGI), I’ve seen far worse especially at the Telegraph and Daily Mail. It’s always been this way, pre-psd just look at the famous Ruby/Oswald shooting image. Multiple comp fake as f##k.

  • Pan

    On a purely technical note…

    The image has not been ‘photoshopped’ – the distortion of the head is a result of very close proximity to the photographer’s ultra-wide angle lens. Such lenses are typically used by press photographers when photographing individual people inside a crowd (or small group of people huddled in a pack, as in this case).

    Lens distortion gets rapidly worse near the edges of the frame (see the face of the man wearing glasses, behind Mr Clerkin).

    Have another look at the lighting – it’s quite believable, especially as there is a high chance of ‘contamination’ from nearby, out-of-frame camera flashes.

  • Phil

    Pan

    I agree the direction of light is not the giveaway Craig claims. However, there are two clear indicators this is a composite.

    1) The wide angle lens distortion (“bending”) affects all the pic except Clerkin. I guess the Murphy pic aws taken with 18-24 lens and Clerkin with about normal (50+).

    2) No one is reacting to Clerkin. It’s as if he wasn’t there! People do react to someone screaming.

    I used to take such photos day in day out for years. It’s been a long time but I can still give a good reading for a standard iso in most lighting situations. I can still pull focus before the camera reaches my eye. I can still identify focal lengths from perspective. Such things become ingrained.

    That picture is a fake.

    Please explain your credentials that drove you to offer an irrelevant idiots guide to wide angle lenses. Being a sucker for the Labour party does not count.

  • Phil

    Sorry, I sound way too know it all in my comment above. But people who offer irrelevant and incorrect information about lens physics as if they know the subject.

    Bullshitting is second nature to party people.

  • Dave

    The biggest give-away is just that smurphy murphy isnt shitting his pants, or even focused on the dude.

    P.S. No, I am not RobG (whoever that is), nor do I booze. I was just speaking my mind.
    In my opinion, the strategy of being polite right now is good, especially when faced with such bullshit from the press. But for me its just strategy, not a moral restraint. Think what the fuckers are doing and what the consequesnces are. People suffer ass a result of these bastard shill jounro’s. There should be enforceable journalistic standards if you want to call it ‘news’.

  • fred

    “I agree the direction of light is not the giveaway Craig claims. However, there are two clear indicators this is a composite.”

    Take a look at this photo which looks to me to have been taken at around the same time from the same camera.

    https://cache2.asset-cache.net/gc/472121000-jim-murphy-the-leader-of-the-scottish-labour-gettyimages.jpg?v=1&c=IWSAsset&k=2&d=GkZZ8bf5zL1ZiijUmxa7QWKBSGI31zMHaMDgJCLWRVr3UlrU%2bttYbzp80PsmuLevEG9gQax%2bxaYiVYo5rCqIrQ%3d%3d

    The photographer works for getty images and I don’t think they would risk their reputation by photoshopping a photograph.

  • fred

    The blog has put an “s” on http again, the site is safe, just delete the “s” and reload the page.

  • Keith Crosby

    Odd how the other people in the shot aren’t looking towards the “altercation”. Is it a trick of the Scotch light?

  • fred

    “The photo does look phony.”

    The photo isn’t phoney. getty doesn’t photoshop their images and if anyone else did getty would sue them.

    It isn’t fake but what is really worrying is why so many people were so desperate to believe it was.

    The SNP has stopped being a political party and has become a brainwashed cult.

  • fred

    “Odd how the other people in the shot aren’t looking towards the “altercation”.”

    Yes they were.

    What’s wrong with you people?

  • Ba'al Zevul

    It’s a bloody weird pic. Not helped by Murphy’s elongated skull, which I think may actually be the case. But could this not be cropped off the edge of a ’50mm’-ish lens (assuming 35mm stock, which is almost certainly not the case as the camera will be digital and the sensor a different size) with the aperture well open (DoF is dependent on this too) and suffering from peripheral distortion? Which still says it isn’t Pshopped.

  • Ba'al Zevul

    The SNP has stopped being a Any political party and has become is a brainwashed cult.

    FIFY.

  • Phil

    Fair enough Fred that getty image does cast doubt on our claims.

    Maybe the herald image is genuine. I still doubt it. I still maintain that the curve of the lens distortion is lacking on Clekin. I can imagine the herald picture editor holding an image like gettys, the two together without shouting, in one hand and the image of Clekin shouting seconds away in the other hand. What a shame he thinks. If only…

    Either way I have involved myself in an argument I don’t give a sod about. I congratulate Clerkin if he did scream in his face.

  • Andy

    @ Fred,

    ”getty doesn’t photoshop”

    The image above is Getty?

    The Getty one I’ve seen has the guy with the green sun glasses standing between and behind Murphy and Clerkin.

  • Andy

    @Fred, the Herald photo doesn’t have a caption and isn’t attributed to anyone.
    Is it somewhere else?

  • Paula Rose

    Clerkin must have borrowed Izzard’s high heels and be standing on an Irn Bru crate.

  • Aurora

    This is sad. Other photos clearly show the two close by or face-to-face, and though the actual photo is weird (because it uses a wide-angle lens at close range) there’s no evidence of photoshopping. It looks strange because the gazes don’t intersect. That’s what happens with photos: they capture an instant while expressions and movements change in microseconds.

    What really worries me about the anti-Labour line here is it’s sheer stupidity. It’s obvious to anyone remotely sane in the UK that the next government will be formed by the SNP-Labour (and maybe the Lib-Dems trying to sneak over if the power shifts) or another Lib-Con deal. The problem is that the Tory press and establishment are working towards preventing a SNP-Labour deal at any cost, including delegitimizing a sustainable SNP-Labour majority in the Commons. We talking about a *real* possibility of a Tory-press led coup here. I say this as a Green Party supporter and no fan either of New Labour or Post-New Labour. I also support Scottish independence and thus welcome totally the SNP’s current wave of popularity, even more so due to the political activism now in the country. But the stark choices of the UK election will be those two scenarios (a Labour-Tory government to keep out the SNP? I find that completely unimaginable; it would destroy the credibility of both parties, splitting both, with a left-wing faction combining with the Greens and the right combining with UKIP; it would also make the Scottish independence completely inevitable as soon as a referendum was ‘allowed’). You should be working to keep the dialogue going with Labour, dragging them to the left, not alienating them. Senseless.

1 2 3 4

Comments are closed.