CCdW Wrote:
===================================
> I see the manipulating of images as the
> same as asking someone to step out of a
> frame, waiting for an auto to drive away
> or waiting for the right season {or light}.
Don't tell dem dam tree-huggers, but ein notorious hard-core Phraud-O-Grapher of mein acqvaintance vas
efen geknown to carry ein brush cutter und schmall saw in his junger days - see [ngdiscussion.net] ...
> It's all manipulation of the image and the
> artists prerogative. As stated earlier though
> the problem is when someone in the future
> takes it as proof of history.
Right On, CCdW -
I couldn't have said it better myself!
But what about manipulating an image to represent an imagined future event? Isn't that also Phraudistöry?
We all know that Hollywood does this sort of thing all the time, but should it be allowed here on the NGDF?
For example, back in the fall of 2008 the Ignacio Inquirer posted an exposé (borrowed without permission from the Tiffany Tattler) describing the goings-on between JBWX and a certain "Painted Lady", which included the following incriminating photograph:
Not long ago another photo was posted implying that the affair was STILL going on two years later, in the fall of 2010:
The "proof" being that #489's jacket was now Moffat Green, which is well known to have been the case only during the spring and summer of 1950 and during the 2010 operating season of the Cumbres & Toltec Scenic Railroad.
IMHO, the above is further evidence that blatant Phraud-O-Graphs taken in recent times but purporting to show histörical events should, along with the term "N*I*M*B*Y" and any links to said Phraud-O-Graphs, be banned from this forum henceforth.
- Sincerely,
Willie (Wm. Claude Johnson-Barr III, Esq.)
"
Not All Who Have Cell-Phones Do Twitter *
"
Not All Those Who Ponder Can Think . . . "
* Only TWITS Twitter!
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/31/2015 06:59PM by Johnson Barr.