October 26, 2005
The Evil Condi Controversy: A RATHER GATE TYPE EXPOSE'
Michele Malkin, God Bless Her Soul, noticed a photograph (on the left here) of Condoleezza Rice that was published in USA today. The photo really looks evil with those eyes glaring out from under that classic forehead. Malkin, always alert, thought there was something fishy and went in search of perhaps a different photo and came up with this one:
And I'd say that this is a big difference (and no, I'm not referring to the size of the photo.)
As she blogged about the obvious "editing" of the photograph, the blogosphere picked up on the story and lo and behold USA withdrew the "doctored" photo and said:
Editor's note: The photo of Condoleezza Rice that originally accompanied this story was altered in a manner that did not meet USA TODAY's editorial standards. The photo has been replaced by a properly adjusted copy. Photos published online are routinely cropped for size and adjusted for brightness and sharpness to optimize their appearance. In this case, after sharpening the photo for clarity, the editor brightened a portion of Rice's face, giving her eyes an unnatural appearance. This resulted in a distortion of the original not in keeping with our editorial standards."Brightness huh? Sharpness huh? Well, being the type of fellow I am, and enjoying working with Photoshop Elements 2.0 as I do (and I'm testing 4.0 for the fun of it who knows, I may even buy it) I decided to see if my meager skills with photoshop could "sharpen and brighten" Ms. Rice and get the same evil-eyed effect. Here is the second photo "brightened" with a technique called fillflash, what USA said they did.
It does have them 'ole evil eyes don't it... NOT!!!! This photo was retouched using fill flash of about +10 on the scale of the fillflash technique. Much better than the original above, but still no evil eyes. So, now we have to try and "sharpen" the same photo with fillflash to produce them 'ole evil eyes.
Well, with the edges sharpened and a little fill flash, she looks a mite angrier, but she for sure doesn't look like the photo at the top.
This is my last submission, it looks MUCH more like the initial photo. It was done by changing the pixels in the photos at the eyes. I'm not really good at the skill needed for half tones, but given time, I'm pretty sure I could have almost exactly reproduced the very top photo, or one damn near like it.
I have no expectations that this will prove a "smoking gun" like they did with the non-memos of RatherGate but I think it does prove that the MSM is full of crap and they think they can get away with all kinds of things (and, before blogs, they could to be honest.) But, not this time folks, not this time.
Tip of the GM Chapeaux to Sissy Willis
UPDATE: Discussed this photo with a friend this morning (10/27/05) and he commented, "Hey George, and you are an amateur at photoshop." Yeah, I am, and if I could do this, a pro ought to be able to do much better. But the USAToday pro got caught because of us pajama-clad amateurs.
Posted by GM Roper at October 26, 2005 10:24 PM | TrackBackHah, yup, it's slam on USA Today day! I'm game, GM! ;-)
Posted by The MaryHunter at October 27, 2005 01:42 AM
There is an interesting analysis of the photoshopping at my site that you might be interested in.
Posted by Sam at October 27, 2005 03:44 AM
Good job sleuthing GM!
Posted by Squamata at October 27, 2005 07:25 AM
I hope the editors of USA Today find out who did this and...FIRE the jerk. Talk about journalistic integrity huh?
Posted by Raven at October 27, 2005 07:34 AM