| |
|
Article: <5ei0ke$73v@dfw-ixnews3.ix.netcom.com>
From: saquo@ix.netcom.com(Nancy )
Subject: Re: Tholen Caught DOCTORING Hale-Bopp Images! - 1
Date: 20 Feb 1997 17:11:42 GMT
In article <5eh3eq$4tq@news.Hawaii.Edu> David Tholen writes:
>> Remember when David Tholen complained that Shramek
>> was using one of HIS images, had lifted his image and
>> modified it to show that stupid fake "companion" thing?
>
> Nobody can remember something that never occurred,
> Nancy. If you have some evidence of such a complaint,
> feel free to reproduce it. I know you can't, unless you forge it.
> If you forge it, you're opening yourself up to legal action.
> tholen@ifa.hawaii.edu
I not this your letter on the web site mentioned below, defending the REAL image being compared to the Shramek FALSE image as being your image?
REAL = original Hawaii image from Tholen
FALSE = Shramek alteration of Tholen original image
Below, quotes from the web sites I quotes from earlier, when beginning this thread. I, Nancy, am not making these statements. Others are. I'm simply pointing to this interesting development! Interesting statement that images released from observatories are ALWAYS composed of various overlays. This would be a real easy way to edit IN an image of Hale-Bopp, now, wouldn't it!
........
http://www.anc.net/~neff/access.html
Enigma site
as only today that Gary Goodwin, who operates a Hale-Bopp information site, alerted us to a possible problem with the contention that the original Tholen image, from which the fake Hale-Bopp image was constructed, might itself be a fake... tampered with...
...........
http://www.pe.net/~minnie/drath.html
Analysis of "FAKE" Images by David Rath
On a tip, I decided to check out the controversy surrounding Hale-Bopp and the Companion (Hail-Mary,) herein reffered to as HB and HM, respectively. ... What I would like to address here are the two images labelled as "REAL" and "FRAUD," both showing very similar images of HB before a cluster of bright stars, more in the background. These images are, at first look, virtually identical with one major feature, that being that "FRAUD" shows the image of HM above and to the left (or NorthWest) of HB, in the midst of the cluster of other bodies. Both images were touted as being from the same source photo by the debunkers, ...
Just as I noticed by sight that the images were out of line, I noticed something else: a barely-discernable fingernail crescent in the midst of the star mass of "REAL," just above and to the left of HB. Guess what? That slight fingernail crescent, for those of you attentive enough to discern it (come on, I did it with ONE EYE) ... I adjusted the intensity levels of the "REAL" fragment to diminish the background and enhance the crescent. Unfortunately, I could only do a limited job of this - it is a somewhat disperse and grainy pic that to go any further would destroy detail. As I suspected, the crescent showed up.
.............
http://www.anc.net/~neff/argue.html
Copyright 1996 Gary D. Goodwin
The hawaii image was composed of 3 separate exposures, or plates, one on top of the other, to produce the image. This is common in astronomical imaging.
............
http://www.anc.net/~neff/tholen2.html
From: tholen@hale.IFA.Hawaii.Edu (Dave Tholen)
As for the REAL image, its authenticity can be easily verified by a simple comparison against any sky atlas that shows stars to a sufficient limiting magnitude.