Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

MJK's photo censored/vandalised?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post
    im wondering if the AI may have enhanced the cracks in the photo, like the ones you can see on the pillow next to her head, but only the ones on and around her face thinking they were hair and enhancing them?
    I think we need to see the best existing copy that has not been digitally interfered with: as large as possible and with sensible contrast.

    I am perfectly prepared to withdraw my suggestion if poor Kelly's face is visually comprehensible, as it were, in that version.

    M.
    (Image of Charles Allen Lechmere is by artist Ashton Guilbeaux. Used by permission. Original art-work for sale.)

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by Losmandris View Post
      Over on another thread MarkJD has kind of blown my mind postulating that the face in the famous MJK photo was intentionally obscured/vandalised/censored to possibly protect public decency etc. This to me at least makes a lot of sense. I have never been able to pick out any kind of detail. Which is strange as some accounts said her eyes were open and staring. Could this be an explanation? Thoughts?


      Here is Mark's excellent post for context:


      Originally posted by Mark J D

      The facial area on the photographic plate has been censored by way of vandalism with some kind of stylus. Essentially, the emulsion bearing that part of the image has been broken up and moved around by a great deal of scraping motion. What we see is not a hacked-about face. What we see is a hacked-about image that no longer allows us to see the hacked-about face.

      Yes, at some point -- perhaps when the plate was first developed and the emulsion was still wet -- someone with custody of the image decided that Mary Jane's ravaged face was something that the world would not be permitted to see, and the image was vandalised to prevent it being seen. It's not impossible that this was done preparatory to the image being released for first publication and in line with applicable obscenity laws; but if the very earliest published reproductions can be examined, there may be a small chance of the un-vandalised image having been used somewhere.

      Note of caution. Close up of the MJK photo attached.
      Maybe. I've never been able to make much sense of her face either, but the image you presented is the clearest I've seen so far. I'm thinking that part of the problem for us is that there may be a lot of strips of flesh hanging over her face.

      I'm making a lot of guesses here, just trying to make sense of what my eyes see. I think the blue circle is her eye. I think the bit I've outlined in solid orange is skin and flesh from her forehead which came from the dotted orange area. The solid purple is another piece of flesh that comes from her left cheek (dotted purple area). These flesh strips are covering her nose, so we can't see that for reference. I think the sold red area, in whole or in part, is part of the flesh found under her head and is in front of the face, not part of the face. The green outlined area appears to be her teeth, but I think we're seeing the side view (mostly molars, etc) but the front teeth are in the light blue circled area, which would align with the eye.

      There is what could be her other eye just above the solid orange bit, but it is too small in comparison with the other eye and out of place with the other eye and where the front teeth appear to me, so that might be a red herring.

      Basically, it seems possible that the reason we cannot make out her face is because, as described, the flesh is hacked all to pieces and some of it is hanging down over her features, combined with the other bits of flesh that her head has been placed upon. The black and white photo makes it harder to distinguish all of these, and so none of it makes visual sense.

      As such, I may just be seeing the equivalent of the drawings we saw on the wall here. But I thought I would share my guess all the same.

      - Jeff


      Click image for larger version

Name:	MJK_Face.jpg
Views:	647
Size:	83.4 KB
ID:	783490

      Comment


      • #18
        Hi Jeff
        i think her eye would be lower and more to the middle of her face.
        "Is all that we see or seem
        but a dream within a dream?"

        -Edgar Allan Poe


        "...the man and the peaked cap he is said to have worn
        quite tallies with the descriptions I got of him."

        -Frederick G. Abberline

        Comment


        • #19
          Click image for larger version

Name:	weeping woman.jpg
Views:	651
Size:	186.6 KB
ID:	783502
          My name is Dave. You cannot reach me through Debs email account

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post
            Hi Jeff
            i think her eye would be lower and more to the middle of her face.
            Maybe. If I zoom in that blue circle looks like an eye, but as we saw before with the pictures on the wall, one can see all sorts of things that aren't there. The brain doesn't like random visual chaos and it tries to make sense of it, even if it has to make up stuff to do so. That could be what mine is doing. Stupid brain.

            - Jeff

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by JeffHamm View Post

              Maybe. I've never been able to make much sense of her face either, but the image you presented is the clearest I've seen so far. I'm thinking that part of the problem for us is that there may be a lot of strips of flesh hanging over her face.

              I'm making a lot of guesses here, just trying to make sense of what my eyes see. I think the blue circle is her eye. I think the bit I've outlined in solid orange is skin and flesh from her forehead which came from the dotted orange area. The solid purple is another piece of flesh that comes from her left cheek (dotted purple area). These flesh strips are covering her nose, so we can't see that for reference. I think the sold red area, in whole or in part, is part of the flesh found under her head and is in front of the face, not part of the face. The green outlined area appears to be her teeth, but I think we're seeing the side view (mostly molars, etc) but the front teeth are in the light blue circled area, which would align with the eye.

              There is what could be her other eye just above the solid orange bit, but it is too small in comparison with the other eye and out of place with the other eye and where the front teeth appear to me, so that might be a red herring.

              Basically, it seems possible that the reason we cannot make out her face is because, as described, the flesh is hacked all to pieces and some of it is hanging down over her features, combined with the other bits of flesh that her head has been placed upon. The black and white photo makes it harder to distinguish all of these, and so none of it makes visual sense.

              As such, I may just be seeing the equivalent of the drawings we saw on the wall here. But I thought I would share my guess all the same.

              - Jeff


              Click image for larger version  Name:	MJK_Face.jpg Views:	79 Size:	83.4 KB ID:	783490
              It is possible I suppose. Though I am struggling to see any of this in the picture:

              'The face was gashed in all directions the nose cheeks, eyebrows and ears being partly removed. The lips were blanched & cut by several incisions running obliquely down to the chin. There were also numerous cuts extending irregularly across all the features'.

              Surely it would be possible to see the lips and the oblique cuts at least?
              Best wishes,

              Tristan

              Comment


              • #22
                The lips and front top teeth are at the bottom left hand corner.

                Perhaps your PC screen is not large enough.

                I'm using a 1080p projector. 120".
                My name is Dave. You cannot reach me through Debs email account

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by DJA View Post
                  The lips and front top teeth are at the bottom left hand corner.
                  I'm hoping Simon Wood is going to look in on this thread: he's done a lot of work on both Kelly photos down the years...

                  -- Are you there, Simon, old bean...?

                  M.
                  Last edited by Mark J D; 03-24-2022, 12:32 PM.
                  (Image of Charles Allen Lechmere is by artist Ashton Guilbeaux. Used by permission. Original art-work for sale.)

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Gee wizz.

                    Thanks Mark
                    My name is Dave. You cannot reach me through Debs email account

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by DJA View Post
                      Click image for larger version

Name:	weeping woman.jpg
Views:	651
Size:	186.6 KB
ID:	783502
                      "One day men will look back and say I gave birth to the twentieth century..."

                      As I once heard a man say in a film...

                      M.
                      (Image of Charles Allen Lechmere is by artist Ashton Guilbeaux. Used by permission. Original art-work for sale.)

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        I'm sure the image in the OP comes from the JTR3D site and it's an upscale using AI. There's no point trying to interpret it because the added detail is guesswork and the AI clearly doesn't know what to make of the facial damage in relation to the shapes it's used to.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by Harmonica View Post
                          I'm sure the image in the OP comes from the JTR3D site and it's an upscale using AI. There's no point trying to interpret it because the added detail is guesswork and the AI clearly doesn't know what to make of the facial damage in relation to the shapes it's used to.
                          I think AI photo enhancement technology is pretty incredible on the whole. However, as you rightly state - it does have its limitations.

                          This is such a unique photo I do not believe any AI tech will be able to make any sense of the face at all.
                          Author of 'Jack the Ripper: Threads' out now on Amazon > UK | USA | CA | AUS
                          JayHartley.com

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by erobitha View Post
                            This is such a unique photo I do not believe any AI tech will be able to make any sense of the face at all.
                            The photo on the JTR3D site MJK2_Hi_4x.png (23082896) (jtr3d.com) is astoundingly impressive (I know the word is hardly applicable to such a scene...) in other parts of the image. In view of the likelihood that the face part specifically is messed up because the software is determined to find facial features where it really won't find them, I might suggest to the JTR3D bod that enhancing the image with the 'facial recognition' bit switched off could be an idea...

                            M.
                            (Image of Charles Allen Lechmere is by artist Ashton Guilbeaux. Used by permission. Original art-work for sale.)

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Teaching grandmother to suck eggs - Wikipedia
                              My name is Dave. You cannot reach me through Debs email account

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by DJA View Post
                                The lips and front top teeth are at the bottom left hand corner.

                                Perhaps your PC screen is not large enough.

                                I'm using a 1080p projector. 120".
                                I can kind of see what you mean. But doesn't the position of the hair/forehead indicate that she is essentially looking directly at the camera? I could certainly envisage the original ( i.e. pre the face being obscured, if that were the case) featuring a pair of staring eyes and possible open mouth. This could indeed be a reason the picture was doctored, it being too distressing an image?
                                Best wishes,

                                Tristan

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X