MJK photo 4 enhanced

[sgh]

Here's my enhanced version of the MJK photo 4.
I've used the image found on this forum as it seems to be reasonably large enough to zoom into before becoming too pixelated, however, to start with
there is quite a bit of compression damage and artefacts apparent in the image to start with.
The image has been lightened to help reveal areas that were previously too dark to make out details , also I've added more contrast to help those available details a little more visible.

Nothing has been added or taken away from the image ie, blemish repairs etc,
because that would then become an individuals subjective decision as to what is real and what is not real.
I hope this is of some value to those who may not have suitable software to do these enhancements.
I have used Adobe photoshop CS3 for this work.

Best, Steve

[George Hutchinson]

Excellent work, sgh. There's things there I hadn't seen before - and not a Baphomet in sight. One thing I hadn't noticed, for example, is the amount of dried blood staining on her little finger. I hope others will post their reactions too.

Just a small point, though - don't be fooled by the number at the bottom right; we call this one MJK3.

PHILIP

[sgh]

Many thanks Philip.
I knew there was something about the numbering being different to the assigned number to the actual photo. I've taken your advice onboard -it's MJK3.
I have just done the enhancecment of the bed photo of MJK but I'm stumped on it's number so I'll just post it - below here!
Regarding the above MJK3 photo - yes, it's quite surprising what can be revealed within those shadow areas.
A hi res scan of the original would have been great to work on especially on the next photo to follow.


Best, Steve

[The Grave Maurice]

Wow, sgh, this is really amazing work. That's the clearest version of MJK3 ever. Where have you been all our lives? I look forward to your next posts.

[jmenges]

Steve,

See this page thread for a run down of the different MJK photos and what they are numbered or called.

http://forum.casebook.org/showthread.php?t=1821&page=24

JM

[sgh]

MJK 2nd enhancement - the bed shot

Two images showing the original on the left and my enhanced version to the right, then the same enhanced version below.
Again, as in my MJK3 enhanced shot (wrongly named as MJK4) I have only modified the contrast to enhance the details from a somewhat 'flat' almost grey looking image that doesn't have much 'bite' to it.

Nothing has been added or removed from the original image to produce the enhanced image, I simply worked on what was there and made it more visible.

It would be great to work on a high resolution scan of the original as I'm sure there's much more detail - thus information/clues/understanding to be gleaned from this image.
Tantalizingly, one can see what appears to be smudged finger marks on her right lower leg, but I could be wrong, I'm only guessing!

I do have a bit of a problem though with the injuries to her lower private regions when comparing like for like the two images - MJK3 and this one because I can see what appears to be dark squiggly lines here but not on MJK3 photo in the same location, and those lines do not behave like digital artefacts. The two images just don't seem to jive!
Perhaps somebody with medical knowledge could kindly explain what I'm probably misreading!

Best, Steve

[Mitch Rowe]

Hmm? Has anyone ever accused Lizzie Borden of the murders?

[Sam Flynn]

Hmm? Has anyone ever accused Lizzie Borden of the murders?

... no axe was involved, Mitch

[Glenn Lauritz Andersson]

What I find telling and interesting with sgh:s excellent enchancement of the MJK full body crime scene photo, is what a real mess it is - and quite a large amount of blood and blood spray on the wall.

All the best

[sgh]

Wow, sgh, this is really amazing work. That's the clearest version of MJK3 ever. Where have you been all our lives? I look forward to your next posts.

Many thanks,
I've been on and off with JTR for many years - then came the recent Whitechapel series and I'm in again deep !
Photoshop is one of my 'things' !

[Mitch Rowe]

... no axe was involved, Mitch

Look above the split femur. I think she left her broken hatchet there!

[sgh]

Steve,

See this page thread for a run down of the different MJK photos and what they are numbered or called.

http://forum.casebook.org/showthread.php?t=1821&page=24

JM

Ah! Now I understand.
I had seen your original post, but with this that and the other I forgot the numbers.
Many thanks for that - JM.

Best, Steve

[ChrisGeorge]

What I find telling and interesting with sgh:s excellent enchancement of the MJK full body crime scene photo, is what a real mess it is - and quite a large amount of blood and blood spray on the wall.

All the best

Hello Glenn and Steve et al.

Well it might be blood and blood spray but it might also be that the panelling is discolored so it's really hard to tell even with this enhancement. Thanks for your work, Steve!

Chris

[neathy]

enhanced lines in photo

Since you probably have zoomed in on this photo you have seen the enhanced (drawn in) pixel lines in the photo. One is the dark band on her right leg just below the knee. The other is the line on the lower outline of her right thigh. Then there is one extending from her left pinkie finger accross her 'stomach' and another on the right outline of the white material above her left knee. Pixel-wise these lines match nothing else on the entire photo. I used to do photo pixel level 'fixes' on old b&w and sepia pictures that were torn or damaged. So when I magnified the photo to only 3x those lines were pretty plain. The band on her right calve is darker than anything else in the photo, even the dried blood ! When I look at this and some of the anomolies such as the drawn in wall planks behind the headboard ( who would cut planks ALL this crooked ) I have to think "hmmmmm.... can we believe anything we see in these two photographs ?" Excellent work on the enhancements BTW.

[Mascara & Paranoia]

Is that the pattern of the blood on her arm or has her actual arm been shredded (in the whole-view shot of the body on the bed, not the picture from the original post)? 'Cause I didn't notice that before. o_O

Also, forgive me ignorance, but why is this photo called #4? I've only seen 2 and think that's all there are 'available', but were there four photos in total and the other two been misplace or something? Or am I horribly mistaken? So sorry for any confusion in advance. ;p