How to show the International Trade … Not!
Innovative, maybe - but it's inaccurate - and you have no idea, when you see this tangled web
This picture is looking a bit weird. You see Michael Jackson rehearsing just two days before his death - but that is not the weirdest thing about it. Look closer — look between his legs. Why is it so dark there, when he is standing in front of a large neon-sign?
It even made it to the website Photoshop Disasters, which is a fun place to look for really bad photoshop-editing. And lots of people chimed in with how bad this ‘job’ of putting Michael in a place where he never appeared was done. A few believe that the picture is not a fake - it is an object or a door painted black - standing there between Michael and the sign. And then a few people think the black area is a clone-job to remove something from between his legs, which probably looked silly.
I have carefully looked at the electronic version delivered to newspapers (4096 px wide). And as a efficient photoshopper myself, I can without a doubt say:
1: It’s definitely not a total fake - Michael Jackson wasn’t photoshopped in front of this sign. The picture is coherent and bears no sign of photoshopping. You see the right reflexes everywhere - and I couldn’t spot a single ‘clone-pattern’ either. In Michaels dark trousers you even see some correct small red reflection.
2. But - Someone very skilled and with very good time might have edited the area between Michaels legs. If so, that has involved taking the time to make a dark reflection in the bright reflective area leading up to the sign. Also taking the time to leave no trace of a pattern and keeping the noise consistent in the dark area. I simply don’t believe it - what could have been so important to remove - and why not just choose another picture from the event if this wasn’t suitable for publishing? Easier than spending hours with photoshop and risking a lot of trouble.
3. What has been deleted anyway? It looks like something is missing, but if you look at the letter S behind Michael, it is actually possible that the easiest solution to this question is simply that the lower end of the S is obscured by Michaels legs - and the dark area is then the spacing between the I and the S. Simple as that - and case closed.
4. So with 99,99% certainty - nah, make it 100% I dare to say that this picture is as real as they come - and this time Photoshop Disasters screwed up themselves. Well - everyone makes a mistake from time to time …
Bonus: A cropped version of the picture was also released right after the original (2000 px wide) - so the photographer Kevin Manzur must have thought his picture looked a bit weird and could use some cropping. He cropped it exactly where the discussion took off - below Michael Jacksons crotch.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Please use the secure 'Connect with Facebook'-button in the sidebar

Thomas Molén went ahead and made a very clean and elegant online-graphic, where you can see who voted for who in the European Song Contest

Innovative, maybe - but it’s inaccurate - and you have no idea, when you see this tangled web

It’s not personal taste - it is science, cognitive psychology, that tells us that the brain can’t handle overly complex graphics

The graph visualizing the Ebb and Flow of Movies 1986-2008 was awarded Best of Show/Peter Sullivan Award

Judges decided to seek out only the truly perfect graphics - and not to argue too much about the medals
I just watched the movie ‘This is it’ for an explanation. And yes - video holds a lot more information than stills, and now we’re above 100% for the proof that this picture isn’t faked.
The explanation is simply that the entire background is a big screen, where the letters and metal girders are projected onto. In front of that big screen is something big and black - the projector?
It can be seen a multitude of times in the movie in front of several backgrounds. If it really is the projector I haven’t found out. Who knows about scene-construction? The screen is supposedly an advanced 3D-projection-screen.
I was just going to say that too, Martin. Definitely a deletion of something in the shot and a silly omission to not clone in the metal girder pattern from the giant screen. It is a just worthy ‘Photoshop Disaster’.
Good detective work, Gert! I never thougt of this, before you mentioned it, but I have one comment: If there is no manipulating in Photoshop, then where is the towerconstruction between his legs? Those are visible behind the other letters, and to my point of view it also should be visible in the area between his legs. Best regards, Martin