PDA

View Full Version : Detecting Photgraphic Fakes In The Time of Computers



Peter Lemkin
11-16-2008, 05:06 PM
I was just reading a technical article on this subject and there ARE experts who can [with a high level of certainty] detect fakes - new [computer generated] and old [using computer algorithms]. We are increasingly faced with doubtful photos. A complex and technical subject. Attached are some references on the subject for those who want to explore this.

Jack White
11-16-2008, 08:54 PM
Thanks, Peter...I just emailed them some questions.

Jack

Peter Lemkin
11-16-2008, 09:58 PM
I thought you'd might appreciate that Jack. Their techniques are very computer intensive and not for amateurs, but I think they may well be the types who'd be able to do the work on important photos pro bono, just as an academic exercise, and being good citizens. The article was in the June, 08 Scientific American. The upshot of it was that the new software available can create fakes that fool the eye, but not another computer - with the right analysis software. They also, in their article, mentioned a few things that can be seen as fakes with the 'naked eye', if you know what to look for. Two I remember were light source differences and eye reflection angles. There were others. More importantly they claim that a jpeg or tiff file do contain proof of forgery, but only a special program they specialize in can find that evidence. It is an increasingly important issue and may well apply to digitized images of originally optical/film images, as well.

Charles Drago
11-17-2008, 02:22 PM
Jack,

What is your take on the work of Tom Wilson?

Peter Lemkin
11-17-2008, 04:32 PM
I'll let Jack respond and then I'll add my 'piece' on Wilson - as few have as much info on his methods - nor have tried as much to make it public [now that he is deceased]. Which reminds me...time to send out another [of many] emails to try to move this along. Perhaps some on the Forum would like to help generate 'polite pressure' to those who have control over Wilson's work at this time. I'll let you know when and where.....

David Guyatt
11-17-2008, 04:43 PM
I think this is going to be an increasingly important subject in the years to come. My belief is that CGI and film morphing are going to be used to shape pubic opinion in such areas as news footage etc.

The below sequence of pictures (lifted from Wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morphing) are of interest. Please take a look and then tell me which one is the Austrian Nazi as I'm easily confused?

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/1b/Bush-Arnie-morph.jpg/300px-Bush-Arnie-morph.jpg

Charles Drago
11-17-2008, 05:30 PM
I'm glad you responded, Peter. Of course you know I'm aware of your connections to the Wilson matter, and I URGE you to keep pursuing it.

For those readers who are not aware of the material under discussion: Hang in there, and we'll deal with the inherent complexities carefully.

If I may cut to the chase: If photo analyst Tom Wilson's methods are sound, we have irrefutable photographic evidence of conspiracy.

If they are not sound, the larger and proven case for conspiracy remains undiminished.

Charles Drago
11-17-2008, 05:32 PM
The one in the middle, David, looks like Senator Norm Coleman.

The one on the rights suffers from Waldheimer's Disease: That's when you get old and forget you were a Nazi.

Peter Lemkin
11-17-2008, 06:33 PM
I'm glad you responded, Peter. Of course you know I'm aware of your connections to the Wilson matter, and I URGE you to keep pursuing it.

For those readers who are not aware of the material under discussion: Hang in there, and we'll deal with the inherent complexities carefully.

If I may cut to the chase: If photo analyst Tom Wilson's methods are sound, we have irrefutable photographic evidence of conspiracy.

If they are not sound, the larger and proven case for conspiracy remains undiminished.

To me, Tom Wilson died under somewhat questionable circumstances,a nd few know he had met with a high-level FBI [in his naivte] and given that man his proofs of conspiracy in the JFK assassination - they are now denied by the FBI, but it can be proven they were given to them! A nearly complete set of his materials were with Dr. Wecht [they are now confiscated, due to the trumped-up charges against Wecht]. I'll have more to say soon.... One last point. Tom Wilson was admitted repeatedly and never denied being an expert witness [using his techniques] on other forensic cases [not related to 'national security cases'] with Dr. Wecht and others.

Jack White
11-17-2008, 09:10 PM
Jack,

What is your take on the work of Tom Wilson?

I was one of the few researchers who understood Tom's work, and he often told me that I was the only "researcher" that he trusted, along with Cyril Wecht.

To answer your question, Tom discovered MANY REMARKABLE THINGS, but he was a "lone operator" and not trusting nor inclined to work with others, so I believe he in some instances misinterpreted his findings. Not being a researcher, he was rather naive about some aspects of the investigation. Not believing that the Justice Department could have been involved (Hoover, FBI), he was hoping to use his discoveries to get the Justice Department to reopen the investigation.

He had a brilliant scientific mind, but as a newcomer to JFK research, some of his approaches were flawed. He should have worked with other trusted
researchers...for instance George Michael or PD Scott.

His most important discovery is UNKNOWN. Through Ted Kennedy, he was
granted access to the MOST SECRET FILES in the Archives, where he was able to VIEW THE ORIGINAL AUTOPSY PHOTOS BEFORE THEY WERE ALTERED. He was not allowed to copy them or make notes, but I presume that among his effects he left a description of the event.

I hope that this knowledge was not involved in his untimely demise.

Jack

Magda Hassan
11-18-2008, 12:54 AM
I think this is going to be an increasingly important subject in the years to come. My belief is that CGI and film morphing are going to be used to shape pubic opinion in such areas as news footage etc.

The below sequence of pictures (lifted from Wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morphing) are of interest. Please take a look and then tell me which one is the Austrian Nazi as I'm easily confused?

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/1b/Bush-Arnie-morph.jpg/300px-Bush-Arnie-morph.jpg
That is a trick question David. They are all Nazis :mad:

Charles Drago
11-18-2008, 02:51 AM
Thank you, Jack.

I'm aware of Wilson's claim that he was given access by EMK to what we might term the "Smoking Gun Collection" of the JFK assassination -- or at least to one of them. Since all I have is his word on this, I remain highly skeptical.

Perhaps you were in the breakout room at the Dallas conference (ASC? Lancer?) where Wilson gave what I believe was an impromptu presentation and I tried my best to press him into going public with everything he had.

The man seemed consumed by some sort of inner conflict. His discomfort might easily have been interpreted as a manifestation of disingenuousness or frustration. Wilson resisted my best efforts -- no big deal, I guess -- at getting him to show and tell all.

And then he died.

Of course we attended Wilson's major presentation at an ASC conference a few years before the Lancer appearance. The images he shared that night have never left my consciousness. I believe there's a bootleg video extant of that evening's program.

And there's the MWKK installment in which Wilson shows us just a tiny sampling of what he had.

Here is what for me is the bottom line: The process either works or it doesn't. Wilson's results either can be replicated under controlled conditions, or they can't.

It seems to me that the first step is to estabish the validity of the process by scientific testing on non-controversial photographic materials.

Then, if I've got this right, even a second- or third-generation copy of an original JFK photo would give up its secrets to a validated Wilson-esque examination.

Has this been done?

If not, why not?

Jack White
11-18-2008, 03:36 AM
Thank you, Jack.

I'm aware of Wilson's claim that he was given access by EMK to what we might term the "Smoking Gun Collection" of the JFK assassination -- or at least to one of them. Since all I have is his word on this, I remain highly skeptical.

Perhaps you were in the breakout room at the Dallas conference (ASC? Lancer?) where Wilson gave what I believe was an impromptu presentation and I tried my best to press him into going public with everything he had.

The man seemed consumed by some sort of inner conflict. His discomfort might easily have been interpreted as a manifestation of disingenuousness or frustration. Wilson resisted my best efforts -- no big deal, I guess -- at getting him to show and tell all.

And then he died.

Of course we attended Wilson's major presentation at an ASC conference a few years before the Lancer appearance. The images he shared that night have never left my consciousness. I believe there's a bootleg video extant of that evening's program.

And there's the MWKK installment in which Wilson shows us just a tiny sampling of what he had.

Here is what for me is the bottom line: The process either works or it doesn't. Wilson's results either can be replicated under controlled conditions, or they can't.

It seems to me that the first step is to estabish the validity of the process by scientific testing on non-controversial photographic materials.

Then, if I've got this right, even a second- or third-generation copy of an original JFK photo would give up its secrets to a validated Wilson-esque examination.

Has this been done?

If not, why not?

Please do not be skeptical of Tom's major discovery in the Archives.
He spoke to me privately about it for more than an hour, but swore me
to secrecy about it. He went into elaborate detail about how he contacted
Teddy K and Teddy wrote him a letter of access to Burke Marshall, who
wrote him a letter addressed to the head of the National Archives to
be shown the "secret collection" which Teddy knew existed. He said
these letters and his discovery would be part of his "lawsuit against the
government". He described to me in great detail what he found and his
study of it....how he was searched before and after entering the archives
room where he was handed an envelope containing the original unretouched
autopsy photos, and all the in-betweens and paperwork for doing the
retouching, and how he had recorded his recollections immediately
afterward for his evidence collection, and distributed three copies to safe
places, one of which presumably was Cyril Wecht. Though Tom was a
very secretive person, I am 100% convinced of his veracity on this
matter.

His computer methods were perfectly logical to me and can be replicated
by anyone, he told me, using only off-the-shelf software. Presumably his
files, now controlled by his widow and son, describe his process in detail.

I believe that his Dallas attorney may be one of the other persons who
has copies of all his files, but is powerless to act without permission of
the heirs.

Jack
























6

Peter Lemkin
11-18-2008, 06:25 AM
While I was not privy to the the information from Wilson about the pristine and mollested autopsy photos, he repeatedly told me he had all of the standard and some not-publicly seen materials with which to work. Many were excited by his original lecture presentation and photos poured-in for analysis. I too sent one - and I guess most here know the story. His techniques are a modification of some used in industry and by the scientific community [for other things entirely]. As Jack said, he was very secretive and too naive for his own good. I too don't think anything sinister should be read into this - he felt [naively] he could be a one man army against those who pulled-off the hoax [perhaps not realizing how powerful they STILL were]. He left several nearly complete depositories of his work - I know the location of three - there are a few others. I have worked for some years to get permission to open one to responsible researchers. So far inertia or fear or I-don't-know-what has made it not yet happen. This discussion above has made me this morning fire off another set of emails and letters - I'll keep the Forum informed. Once we have the set of materials we will see if he also described his exact technique. I know if only generally - but what I know makes sense. I know there are matched sets of photos [or portions of photos] - the original; other photos that show the same feature' and then a whole series of his computer enhanced / computer disected images. A very savvy computer person could, given these and the general description of the process I [and others] have, back-engineer the process and test it. As I said, Wecht knows [but at the moment can not discuss the details of] that Wilson, using the exact same methods was many times approved in Court as an expert witness on the veracity and information within forensic photos - on other cases. That alone speaks volumes. There are two factors at play. One is if his technique could find information not available to the eye and by other means, and second if he applied rational interpretations to what new things he found. In my mind the answer to the first is yes; to the second we will have to see the materials to judge. Actually, this research I started the thread off with from Dartmouth is different - but I see no reason a computer can't be used to look for both at the same time. That said, most images Tom looked at were made on photograhic emulsion, and not computer images - but not all. His claims on being able to prove the official version false in Court were sincere - his method of attack was that of Don Quixote - without even his trusty attendant. Jack was one of the very few who were given any information about what he had found. Wecht was another. I know of a [I]few others. To most, Tom simply said 'wait until my Court case' - which was easily dismissed from Court before it ever saw the light of day...... Now it is our job to carry forth his work and its results. Sadly, it has languished all this time.

Charles Drago
11-18-2008, 12:57 PM
Jack, Peter,

To quote Fox Mulder: "I want to believe."

And I do accept at face value the sincerity of your representations of what Wilson told you.

If such an ultra-secret repository of JFK evidence is a reality, certain questions arise.

1. Why would the conspirators permit this threat to exist? Their reach extends to the deepest recesses of government -- hell, they are the "government" in the broader sense, and one is hard-pressed to believe that the materials would exceed their collective grasp.

2. Whose agendas are served by the preservation of such evidence? The fact that the interim materials documenting the forgery process are said to be intact profoundly complicates the equation; this gives rise to the wild speculations that the conspirators are being blackmailed and/or kept at bay by the threat of exposure. (The latter hypothesis seems to be rendered moot by the passing of JFK Jr.)

3. Why would EMK permit Wilson to see it?

4. Who else has seen it?

5. Isn't it far more likely that this tale is tall -- and reminiscent of the claim by the French researcher Reymond that he had access to the "real" Z-film, prompting David Mantik to be suckered into a trip to Europe to see footage that never was forthcoming (or at least that's David's story)?

I can offer speculative answers to the above -- but to do so I first would have to don my novelist's attire (see below).

I have no desire to insult the memory of a man of whom you think so highly. And it is the esteem in which I hold both of you that prohibits me from dismissing out of hand the EMK portion of the Wilson story.

That, and the fact that my storyteller's instincts sense something important here. Perhaps it's merely the Book of Secrets-echoing plot line that so intrigues me. On the other hand, during my very first public presentation of a JFK research paper (at Jerry Rose's first Third Decade conference in Fredonia), I speculated on the existence of a "trophy room" of sorts in which the highest-level conspirators (the "sponsors," in the Evica/Drago conspiracy model) kept documentation of their world-historic deed.

After all, to do so would only be inhuman nature.

One more point: The inherent danger in Wilson-like smoking gun stories is that, if proven false, they are utilized by the cover-up artists to argue that all conspiracy "theories" are likewise made of whole cloth.

We don't need Tom Wilson's work to prove conspiracy.

We do need Tom Wilson's work to deliver that proof, in the most emotionally powerful and persuasive manner, to a global population unsophisticated in the ways of deep politics.

Jack White
11-18-2008, 03:24 PM
Charles, all I can say is that the JFK case is full of baffling enigmas. You raise valid points, but the same can be said of most aspects of the case.

In defense of Tom, let me point out:

1. He was an electrical engineer with a specialty in computers and optics.

2. He was a vice president of US Steel in charge of quality control.

3. He was an inventor, inventing methods of using video cameras connected to computers for assembly line inspection of products. He invented something which he called a "light valve" which could withstand the heat of steel production to perform inspections without the use of glass lenses.

4. He developed a massive database of grayscales of hundreds of things which enabled him to tentatively identify the composition of things seen by a lens. The key part of his method involved using a computer's 256-tone grayscale and assigning pseudo-colors to a questionable tone. He described to me in great detail how he applied this to his first JFK subjects after seeing a JFK documentary. His first subject was Badgeman. His second was the Backyard photos. The third was the Z film. His specialty was use of the grayscale and computer pseudocolors to identify things, especially metals, on a black and white grayscale. Using Badgeman as an example, he instructed his computer to highlight in red pseudocolor anything in the Moorman photo which corresponded to the grayscale database for a silvery metal...and the badge in the photo popped out in bright red. With the help of Cyril Wecht he videotaped numerous autopsies and embalmings, and developed a database which included embalmer's wax, which he later used on the autopsy photos to show that embalmer's wax covered a wound in the right temple.

Tom was a brilliant man, and a patriot. He was naive to believe that he could use our justice system to solve the case. He was wrong to operate in total secrecy.

I have no doubt that his contacts with Teddy and Burke were real. If I were to speculate, I think that they thought that a man of Tom's credentials could expose information that they wanted someone to make public.

Jack

Peter Lemkin
11-18-2008, 05:42 PM
Jack, Peter,

To quote Fox Mulder: "I want to believe."

And I do accept at face value the sincerity of your representations of what Wilson told you.

If such an ultra-secret repository of JFK evidence is a reality, certain questions arise.

1. Why would the conspirators permit this threat to exist? Their reach extends to the deepest recesses of government -- hell, they are the "government" in the broader sense, and one is hard-pressed to believe that the materials would exceed their collective grasp.

2. Whose agendas are served by the preservation of such evidence? The fact that the interim materials documenting the forgery process are said to be intact profoundly complicates the equation; this gives rise to the wild speculations that the conspirators are being blackmailed and/or kept at bay by the threat of exposure. (The latter hypothesis seems to be rendered moot by the passing of JFK Jr.)

3. Why would EMK permit Wilson to see it?

4. Who else has seen it?

5. Isn't it far more likely that this tale is tall -- and reminiscent of the claim by the French researcher Reymond that he had access to the "real" Z-film, prompting David Mantik to be suckered into a trip to Europe to see footage that never was forthcoming (or at least that's David's story)?

I can offer speculative answers to the above -- but to do so I first would have to don my novelist's attire (see below).

I have no desire to insult the memory of a man of whom you think so highly. And it is the esteem in which I hold both of you that prohibits me from dismissing out of hand the EMK portion of the Wilson story.

That, and the fact that my storyteller's instincts sense something important here. Perhaps it's merely the Book of Secrets-echoing plot line that so intrigues me. On the other hand, during my very first public presentation of a JFK research paper (at Jerry Rose's first Third Decade conference in Fredonia), I speculated on the existence of a "trophy room" of sorts in which the highest-level conspirators (the "sponsors," in the Evica/Drago conspiracy model) kept documentation of their world-historic deed.

After all, to do so would only be inhuman nature.

One more point: The inherent danger in Wilson-like smoking gun stories is that, if proven false, they are utilized by the cover-up artists to argue that all conspiracy "theories" are likewise made of whole cloth.

We don't need Tom Wilson's work to prove conspiracy.

We do need Tom Wilson's work to deliver that proof, in the most emotionally powerful and persuasive manner, to a global population unsophisticated in the ways of deep politics.

A short response, to a series of questions that could well be a book or a conference. While we know much incriminating evidence [and persons] have been expunged; we also know that far from all has been.

The way Jack described Tom is the same way I knew of his background. He stumbled upon the assassination by chance - living near Cyril Wecht and being [by chance] exposed to his work on the case. It changed his life and changed the way he viewed his own country - and it upset him greatly!

Even though he denied me the promised results on my photos and information [I got the response that his Court case was too important and it took priority...and he needed my photos for it], I no longer have ill feelings toward him. He was a bit excentric; a bit naive; a bit too cocky about his ability to single-handedly prove the case; and the other things already mentioned by Jack and myself. He was very bright and a computer genius. It is my belief that his techique found new proofs and information within the photo record. I fired-off new pleas today and hope to have some responses shortly. Several on this Forum would be invited to help work on the materials when we have access. Then we will know. The very fact that the FBI is denying receipt of a large number of photos and their interpretations from Wilson [though I know exactly who can still prove they did get them and the quantity of those recieved!], to me says that what they recieved was so 'damaging' to the official verson, they had to be buried in the black hole of the 'intelligence' community. That, alone, should tell us something.

Dawn Meredith
11-19-2008, 11:57 AM
I was one of the few researchers who understood Tom's work, and he often told me that I was the only "researcher" that he trusted, along with Cyril Wecht.

To answer your question, Tom discovered MANY REMARKABLE THINGS, but he was a "lone operator" and not trusting nor inclined to work with others, so I believe he in some instances misinterpreted his findings. Not being a researcher, he was rather naive about some aspects of the investigation. Not believing that the Justice Department could have been involved (Hoover, FBI), he was hoping to use his discoveries to get the Justice Department to reopen the investigation.

He had a brilliant scientific mind, but as a newcomer to JFK research, some of his approaches were flawed. He should have worked with other trusted
researchers...for instance George Michael or PD Scott.

His most important discovery is UNKNOWN. Through Ted Kennedy, he was
granted access to the MOST SECRET FILES in the Archives, where he was able to VIEW THE ORIGINAL AUTOPSY PHOTOS BEFORE THEY WERE ALTERED. He was not allowed to copy them or make notes, but I presume that among his effects he left a description of the event.

I hope that this knowledge was not involved in his untimely demise.

Jack


So Jack, it is your belief then that it was the actual autopsy pics that were altered and not the body? I found Lifton's work very convincing when I read it in the early 80's. Now David himself is another matter :)
Or do you support both body alteration and photo alteration?
Thanks,
Dawn

Jack White
11-19-2008, 02:17 PM
So Jack, it is your belief then that it was the actual autopsy pics that were altered and not the body? I found Lifton's work very convincing when I read it in the early 80's. Now David himself is another matter :)
Or do you support both body alteration and photo alteration?
Thanks,
Dawn

Obviously the wounds were altered (per Lifton), and the photos were also
altered (per most researchers, including Wilson).

The body alteration seemed to be searching for "inconvenient" evidence.
The photo alteration seemed to be to "confirm" the official scenario
by covering up what happened. There is NO DOUBT that a different brain
was substituted.


Jack

Charles Drago
11-19-2008, 02:30 PM
Obviously the wounds were altered (per Lifton), and the photos were also
altered (per most researchers, including Wilson).

The body alteration seemed to be searching for "inconvenient" evidence.
The photo alteration seemed to be to "confirm" the official scenario
by covering up what happened. There is NO DOUBT that a different brain
was substituted.


Jack

Jack, et al,

There is another reason for body alteration, and it relates to the connected doppelganger and "cognitive dissonance" gambits.

"Doubles" are everywhere to be noted in the JFK assassination plot line-- and in other major intel ops through the ages. They serve to misdirect investigative attention pre- and post-operational life, and to confuse perceptions over extended periods.

If the question is, "Did body alteration take place to remove 'inconvenient' evidence or to mess with our heads?" --

The answer is, "Yes."

Dawn Meredith
11-26-2008, 09:29 PM
Interesting that Wecht disagreed with Lifton. I think body alteration is irrefutable, much more evidence to support this has been uncovered and cooraborated since Best Evidence. Shit, (FBI) ONeil /Silbert Report says it, and that's "official". And photo alteration occurred as well.

Good reasons CD. All of the above. Confuse, confabulate, fuck with our heads, and do it in our very faces.

Researchers who are on to something and it's proof of conspiracy have a way of just dying young, especially when they work solo. Hearing the description of Wilson reminded me of Jay Harrison, to whom I just used to refer as Secret agent man. (But Jay did trust too, and both proved to be his downfall).
Dawn

Jack White
11-26-2008, 11:23 PM
Right. Body alteration first, then photo alteration. Both.

Jack

Peter Lemkin
12-07-2008, 01:01 PM
See last chapter in new book by Russell for what I think is definitive answer here.