Boston Bomber Photoshopped Leaving Scene

I couldn't find any posts on this and I found a couple other inconsistencies in the photo worth pointing out. If you haven't heard yet, there are some serious problems with the photograph of Suspect #2 of the Boston Bombings (Dzhokhar Tsarnaev), the younger brother of the two "suspects". There appears to be heavy Photoshopping done to piece together a new arm farther behind his back, most likely to hide a backpack still there after the explosion. If true, it's far from proving his innocence, simply that he's a pawn in someone else's plot. Anyway, here we go:

First off, this video does a great job of showing the "patch" they did. Watch this first, and if you're not convinced yet, come back to the thread.


So first off, unless he's somehow the only person in the picture with motion blur, despite the quality of this camera (this is a small small section of the overall picture), his arm is still partially in its original place.


So are his fingers.


There's these tone changes, where the arm is needlessly darker than the rest. Though they're probably the least convincing of evidence, they do give a great reference for where the edits begin.


If you skipped over the video, watch it now to see the patch of pixels in his shoulder, he'll show you then zoom out, and you can see the square and how it's displaced.

I also found some cloning personally, let me know what you think:


I took a look at the bricks of the wall to make sure they were even, and they are indeed, close enough at least, but in case anyone else sees something I don't:


Last, these aren't photo edits, or proof of photo manipulation, but they're just as noteworthy. See these gray spots? :


What about the line next to it? Where the texture changes:


He's usually wearing the backpack on one shoulder when walking. However you can see him watching the crowd with the left strap on also.


When viewed more directly from the front, you can see little gray plastic tabs in the straps, like most backpacks. It's also clear from this picture that the bag is two-strapped like most, not a European cross-strap. You can tell because the backpack hangs low and the strap is going directly down.


So again:


Thoughts? I personally believe this photo was edited, the fingers are the most solid proof to me, held more so by the fact that there's no motion blur elsewhere. Also the patching is a tell-tale sign of translated pixels.

His forearm looks kind of long.

It is, his arm is extended as a result of the manipulation. I'll spend some time with the photo and see if I can demonstrate that visually.

reply to post by SkepticPerhaps


Commendable work and please know that I am not disagreeing with you in the strict sense of the term. .......But I would like to make a point of observation regarding the "back-pack. He (Dzhokar) is always seen with a "shoulder bag" - as distinguished from a "back-pack," and it has always been seen hanging rather low from his right shoulder. I am saying that the use of the term "back-back" in reference to Dzhokar is a little misleading.

That being the case - if I were to look for evidence of what he was carrying I would look to the area of his right shoulder and hanging down rather low.

This means that if he was always know to have been carrying a shoulder bag from the right side - why are we (you) attempting to substantiate the fact that his 'back-pack' has been "Shopped" out of the image?

If you read the end of the post, the last four links explain that, and show the strap on his left shoulder while running from the scene. This was a concern I had myself and had to do some digging to find what type of backpack he had and if it HAD two straps even if he wasn't using them the whole time. One of the pictures there even shows the strap on the other shoulder while he's watching the crowd. I agree I could be wrong, but the evidence I've gathered influences me to believe the backpack was not a shoulder-pack, but simply hanging off of one shoulder like most teenagers do.

hey nice one OP

I did some work in GIMP last night and come up with the idea the arm had been cut out using the "lasso tool"
then scaled to cover the backpack.

some how they were in a hurry to set this up and missed the part of the fingers.

Not just the fingers, they missed a piece of the arm as well. The fingers they missed because it's entwined behind the hair of the woman in front of him, so if they had taken them out there would be clear pixelated edges to the hair still containing the fingers, one of the hardest things to edit something out of is loose hair.

In response to the backpack, here's a picture displaying the other strap, despite it not being used in the picture:

Originally posted by SkepticPerhaps
If you read the end of the post, the last four links explain that, and show the strap on his left shoulder while running from the scene. This was a concern I had myself and had to do some digging to find what type of backpack he had and if it HAD two straps even if he wasn't using them the whole time. One of the pictures there even shows the strap on the other shoulder while he's watching the crowd. I agree I could be wrong, but the evidence I've gathered influences me to believe the backpack was not a shoulder-pack, but simply hanging off of one shoulder like most teenagers do.

I see what you mean - I was hoping to find a photo of Dzhokar actually wearing it as a back-pack on both shoulders, but so far no luck. BUT if he had been wearing it as a back-pack on both shoulders then the photo in question would certainly have been 'Shopped' due to the fact that is would have projected out considerably far.

This is the part I'm not sure about Casa, is if he was seen wearing it with both straps. However I do have this picture which suggests it, both his posture and the dark line under his hood, the one that extends beyond the shadow of his hood against the sun's exposure:



Edit: I should also note that running with a backpack down like that is very hard. Putting it on both straps makes things infinitely easier. If things didn't go as planned and he was making a quick escape, I'd of put the other strap on if I was him.


'Nother Edit: If you're reading this thread and this is the first you've heard of any of this. Look up Craft International and what they were doing at the Marathon. Then look at their backpacks and the picture of the shredded backpack. That's what led me to look at a picture of Dzhokar leaving the scene after the bomb. To see if he was missing his backpack, and if they were missing backpacks. For the record, they were missing a FEW backpacks when regrouping after the bombing.

reply to post by SkepticPerhaps

Lets compare them side x side -

This white spot 'could' be an indication that he's wearing it on both shoulders?


And comparatively speaking we know that the older brother always wore his as a regular back-pack on both shoulders.

I believe you've found what I've been looking for, or as close as we may get. That certainly should not be brigther due to sunlight as that's where the shadow should cast, must the backpack farther beyond the hood imo.

Edit: Wait, I see something, give a second.


Edit:


Kind of a reach, but looks like a piece of the strap they missed. It's separate from the hood and isn't the hat.

This video has been posted quite a few times, I myself have posted it in a thread about how ridiculous the conspiracy theories about the Boston Bombings have become which also is basically my response to this thread.

This thread will explain all.

LINK

Not nearly as ridiculous as the current "faith based narrative" issued out by the media, and authorities. Who would have you believe everything they say with literally no evidence. Absolutely none.

Meanwhile, the perpetrators could still be on the streets, but it's more important you have faith in the authorities, than it is to actually question the validity of their claims.

Hey OP have you got a original copy of the photo you are working with. as when I zoom in his face is pixalated.

I have to respectfully disagree with you OtherSide.

For one, your description of how a conspiracy forms is far too parallel to the process in which one comes out of denial. Take everything you said and mad lib for a girlfriend lying to you. Once you come around to believing it, all the signs start to show up, and other people who know are willing to talk about it. So using a THEORY about how conspiracy theories start is not EVIDENCE there is no conspiracy.

Next: If none of this is evidence of photoshopped or manipulated pixels, give me reasons for all of them, don't just say "There's no evidence in this video." If it was a photograph of a UFO and you saw the same things, you'd be saying "What a horrible hoax." For the record, I spend hours every day with pixel art and photo editing professionally and even in my spare time, as you can see here.

Third, the "National Guard" you're talking about has punisher logos on their hats. What branch of the National Guard has punisher logos? Also, why are they wearing the same military garb as Chris Kyle on the about page of Craft International's website?

If you would like to address all of these questions, I'm not saying you're wrong, but I highly disagree.


Edit: Here's my original photo for you. Any of this photo online will work though. Can anyone find the original source of this particular photo hitting the internet? That's the obvious big next step in evaluating it.

Yeah the original photo would be good raw from the camera with out any exif stuff touched.

even know exif data can be faked.

reply to post by SkepticPerhaps

What branch of the National Guard has punisher logos? Also, why are they wearing the same military garb as Chris Kyle on the about page of Craft International's website?

Who knows perhaps they once went to a “CRAFT” conference and got given a free hat.

Or maybe its not even a CRAFT hat and the guy just wore a Punisher hat to work that day.

Really it doesn’t matter because there presence there does not make them guilty of anything.

Anybody who is familiar with image compression artefacts will understand of just how little value this so called "evidence" is to anybody wishing to either prove or disprove that this image has been manipulated.

Let me tell you something. I've worked as a professional graphic designer for just a little over 20 years. Never, at any point in my career, have I ever seen anybody sign off on anything that is anything like as poorly executed as is being suggested here. You're talking about people who REALLY know their #, not somebody who just pirated themselves a copy of CS6 off the internet. Let me assure you that Photoshop has WAY more sophisticated tools for image manipulation than the "expert" in that video even seems to know of - content aware fills, smart healing brushes, it's a massive list. Cutting out and placing a patch here, cloning a few pixels there.... it's all very crude compared to what can be done now.

Given the very low resolution and poor quality of the image in question, I'm going to say again that its almost impossible to prove or disprove this either way. But if I had been working on that picture, I'm pretty sure that I could have left it a lot more bullet proof than is being suggested here. My contention is that what is being pointed at here is jpeg compression artefacts and distortion from a very low res image. Just my .02....

Originally posted by roguedesigner
Anybody who is familiar with image compression artefacts will understand of just how little value this so called "evidence" is to anybody wishing to either prove or disprove that this image has been manipulated.

Let me tell you something. I've worked as a professional graphic designer for just a little over 20 years. Never, at any point in my career, have I ever seen anybody sign off on anything that is anything like as poorly executed as is being suggested here. You're talking about people who REALLY know their #, not somebody who just pirated themselves a copy of CS6 off the internet. Let me assure you that Photoshop has WAY more sophisticated tools for image manipulation than the "expert" in that video even seems to know of - content aware fills, smart healing brushes, it's a massive list. Cutting out and placing a patch here, cloning a few pixels there.... it's all very crude compared to what can be done now.

Given the very low resolution and poor quality of the image in question, I'm going to say again that its almost impossible to prove or disprove this either way. But if I had been working on that picture, I'm pretty sure that I could have left it a lot more bullet proof than is being suggested here. My contention is that what is being pointed at here is jpeg compression artefacts and distortion from a very low res image. Just my .02....

Really??

You should be getting paid mr expert.

Originally posted by OtherSideOfTheCoin
reply to post by SkepticPerhaps

 

What branch of the National Guard has punisher logos? Also, why are they wearing the same military garb as Chris Kyle on the about page of Craft International's website?

Who knows perhaps they once went to a “CRAFT” conference and got given a free hat.

Or maybe its not even a CRAFT hat and the guy just wore a Punisher hat to work that day.

Really it doesn’t matter because there presence there does not make them guilty of anything.

Really the whole group wanted to sport CRAFT hat's thats pretty weird because they were fans and wanted to walk around a running event?