MJK2 & MJK3 Left/right & fake debate

[Elamarna]

[QUOTE=Pierre;368542][B]Richardh,

"It is a masterpiece."


For once we agree but I think masterpiece is over the top, but it is very good


"For me, it also implies that what we see to the right behind her bed in MJK3 is the real door to the yard. "


Pierre, You Believe what you say with regards to the position of the bed and door and I respect your right to do so.
However there is nothing in the work Richard has just done to support your statement. the work does not show the background on this occasion, and therefore your comment above is not based on this work, which does not IMPLY what you suggest.


"I can also see the cut in the shape of a chevron on her hand."


It is clear that there are several cuts to the hand, one level with the base of the thumb, which is not itself in view. One behind the little finger and two more on the knuckles of the 3rd and 2nd fingers.
However Pierre it is clear these do not join and do not form a chevron.
I know you would love to see one but it is not there in my humble opinion.

Please do not attempt to hijack yet another thread to try and support your views. Rather please let Richard's work stand for itself, and what it shows, that is the hand is a left hand, not a right hand.

[Pierre]

Lots of threads and debate on this (I've started a few myself) but I wanted to try to answer the questions raised in the title of this thread and provide a visual aid in the interpretation of these two photos.

I've done something like this before but this time, I have constructed an accurate left hand/arm and positioned it exactly over MJK2. It's a good fit and the aged overlay shows it is very accurate to MJK's actual left hand/arm.

From this position I have then animated the image so that we swing the camera around into the MJK3 position to see if the hand still fits what is depicted in MJK2 and that some feel is a right hand rather than left AND that others feel that MJK3 is an outright fake (hoax) image.

Now, I don't think I can prove that MJK3 is is or is not a fake BUT there is no denying that the hand position (setup and exactly correct according to MJK2) fits VERY closely over the image of MJK3. The slight inaccuracies can be put down to differences in camera focal length, original image size being different from my 3D image setup, light/shadow difference and other distortions that have been introduced that I can't account for. BUT, those slight inaccuracies aside, the 3D overlays DO fit and, in my opinion, show that the hand in MJK3 is the LEFT hand. Also, if MJK3 is a fake as some suggest, then it is a very accurate fake because the hand position agrees almost exactly with the hand's position in MJK2.

See what you think.



CLICK HERE FOR A LARGE IMAGE

Animation 1



Animation 2

Richardh,

It is a masterpiece.

And I think your work is honouring the memory of Mary Kelly. It implies that MJK3 is authentic, and that the finger some thought was a thumb was not.

For me, it also implies that what we see to the right behind her bed in MJK3 is the real door to the yard.

I can also see the cut in the shape of a chevron on her hand.

Thank you, Richardh.

Kind regards, Pierre

[richardh]

Thanks all!

Elamarna, I agree, No actual movement of the body on the bed, but a most likely movement of the bed in the room.

When I created these images I wanted to age them (the sepia toned ones) to get an idea of how a clear photo would deteriorate and lose detail. I used a program that did a fab 'aging' job and on a few occasions, I could see words/letters/pictures in the scratched and faded recesses of the picture that were certainly not in the original. I might post a few examples on another thread to demonstrate how photographs can lie!

Richard

that is so clear.

it will not stop the calls of fake, but means that it must be a very good one, if it is.

it also suggests very little movement of the body between photos

regards

steve

[Elamarna]

Richard

that is so clear.

it will not stop the calls of fake, but means that it must be a very good one, if it is.

it also suggests very little movement of the body between photos

regards

steve

[Rosemary]

Excellent

The stuff of nightmares, but as usual, superb, Richard

[Wickerman]

Thankyou Richard, though I think it's a shame when you have to go to such detailed lengths to demonstrate the obvious.

Let's hope that puts an end to it.

[barnflatwyngarde]

Nice piece of work Richardh.

I think you have pretty much nailed it.

[richardh]

Lots of threads and debate on this (I've started a few myself) but I wanted to try to answer the questions raised in the title of this thread and provide a visual aid in the interpretation of these two photos.

I've done something like this before but this time, I have constructed an accurate left hand/arm and positioned it exactly over MJK2. It's a good fit and the aged overlay shows it is very accurate to MJK's actual left hand/arm.

From this position I have then animated the image so that we swing the camera around into the MJK3 position to see if the hand still fits what is depicted in MJK2 and that some feel is a right hand rather than left AND that others feel that MJK3 is an outright fake (hoax) image.

Now, I don't think I can prove that MJK3 is is or is not a fake BUT there is no denying that the hand position (setup and exactly correct according to MJK2) fits VERY closely over the image of MJK3. The slight inaccuracies can be put down to differences in camera focal length, original image size being different from my 3D image setup, light/shadow difference and other distortions that have been introduced that I can't account for. BUT, those slight inaccuracies aside, the 3D overlays DO fit and, in my opinion, show that the hand in MJK3 is the LEFT hand. Also, if MJK3 is a fake as some suggest, then it is a very accurate fake because the hand position agrees almost exactly with the hand's position in MJK2.

See what you think.



CLICK HERE FOR A LARGE IMAGE

Animation 1



Animation 2