MJK's photo censored/vandalised?

[Abby Normal]

"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.

great flick and graphic novel, and a chilling quote

[Mark J D]

Here's the one in the Casebook album...

M.

[DJA]

Casebook: Jack the Ripper - Dr. Bond's Post Mortem on Mary Kelly

[DJA]

[Losmandris]

The photo on the JTR3D site MJK2_Hi_4x.png (2308×2896) (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.

I think you are right here. There is some amazing clarity in other parts. It doesn't make sense that literally nothing (Sorry DJA) is even remotely recognisable in the facial area. That is apart from the hair which is very clear.

[Losmandris]

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?

[DJA]

Teaching grandmother to suck eggs - Wikipedia

[Mark J D]

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 (2308×2896) (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.

[erobitha]

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.

[Harmonica]

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.

[Mark J D]

"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.

[DJA]

Gee wizz.

Thanks Mark

[Mark J D]

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.

[DJA]

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".

[Losmandris]

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

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?