Aug 28 2006

Another PhotoShop Moment

Published by at 3:00 pm under All General Discussions

Too funny. You can clearly see the area where a microphone chord has been taken out of this photo. You can see the coloring changes on the far wall where the cord was. Wonder why? Probably to clean up the shot – but it is such a childish effort. The NY Times probably can’t afford professional services anymore. H/T Drudge.

Update: Allahpundit at Hot Air has bought into a wild theory from DU to explain the photo. Needless to say I am not buying it – here is my comment on the post:

Sorry Allah, but there is no way the mic cord was moving that much up top and absolutely still above the ground. I would believe that theory if the cord’s movement was all the way to the ground – maybe. I use cords like this and that kind of motion would have travelled to the ground at least. Plus, the singer would have had something out of focus herself to move the cord in this manner. And why are there no other ‘blurs’ from other movements? Either the photo would blur easily (because the mic phone ‘haze’ is thin and thus shows a slow motion) or the chord is moving incredibly fast (which means the singer must be doing SOMETHING to create short, but high frequency movements). The faster the cord moves the more it would move side to side.

Sorry, the DU alibi is DUmb.

Cheers, AJStrata

The physics of just doesn’t add up. I could be wrong…

Update: OK, I am rethinking my doubts on this. I find it hard to believe the cable alone was moving that fast and the singer wasn’t – but it is not impossible. A lucky click of the camera when the mic cord is pulled up a few inches by raising the mic’s end itself could cause the blur. I see no reason not to believe the photographer. Mea Culpa!

6 responses so far

6 Responses to “Another PhotoShop Moment”

  1. For Enforcement says:

    I’m going with you AJ, the picture has been modified, if you look at the Marines arm, it is out of joint, and the marine just a bit higher has two heads (the bald one). Obviously it’s been modified.

  2. Sir:

    Even if you believe the section of cord in question could blur out and disappear without any effect on the rest of cord, I have the following questions:

    1. Why is nothing under the area of the ‘cord’ out of focus?
    2. What’s with the three headed guy in the middle, and how come part of his face looks so much like the bald guy in the right rear of the photo?

    I think these idiots took out a mic stand and photoshopped in a few details, including a cloned face in the middle of the photo.

  3. Tinian says:

    I think AJ got it right the first time. (Good).

    I also think AJ is in dire need of a spell-check. (Bad).

  4. The Vanishing Microphone Cord…

    Getting new carpet installed in the house so no real time to blog but I came across this story and I just had to post it:
    What happened to the mic cord in this NYT’s photo? (click pic to get larger view)

    Guys, look away from the legs…now f…

  5. AJStrata says:


    AJ has always needed a spell checker! Part of the fun of this blog is stopping by to see what typos I will come up with next!

    BileSnarkSneer, please don’t ‘sir’ me – that’s for the old man.

    Thanks you both for stopping by and posting.


  6. MerlinOS2 says:

    We don’t need no freaking spell checker!
    Mel Brooks eat yer heart out.

    Besides we would have to do all those over rides for things like
    MockMood ImADamnNutJob, don’t ya know.

    You can call me Sir, since I’m so old I took God’s grandmother to my junior prom!