View Single Post
Old 18-05-2013, 12:14 AM   #37
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 18,627
Likes: 595 (370 Posts)

Originally Posted by yass View Post
I tried enhancing further though there is little improvement if any.
Thanks for doing that, yass, it has improved the contrast quality which makes it easier to highlight what I'm highlighting below.

Originally Posted by martg View Post
look closely at the shadows on any picture and you will see shapes, usually faces.
people are programmed to look out for shapes that resemble faces, it doesn't mean there's anything there.
It's called pareidolia.
Hi martg.

Set aside for a moment the issue of what the face looks like - which is where the pareidolia effect is relevant - and consider instead how the face can appear where it does.

Below, the blue lines mark the shoulders of the coat, and the red lines mark the neck of the figure.

There's an undeniable overlap where the neck-line (red) interrupts the shoulder-line of the coat (blue), right?

Not even a James Randi-calibre liar would bother arguing otherwise.

Now if the head of the figure was created by the chandelier reflected in the mirror behind the coat and torso - and the chandelier here is only a reflection in the background mirror -

... then the shoulder-line of the coat would not be interrupted by the chandelier reflection but would continue on something like this:

Since it doesn't do that, and appears like this...

...THE HEAD IS NOT THE CHANDELIER because the chandelier is only a reflection in the mirror.

Basic observation conclusively rules out both of the most mundane explanations.

- There is no chandelier hanging from the ceiling in front of some person obscuring his or her face

- The chandelier reflected in the mirror is not creating the illusion of a strange-looking head atop some empty coat accidentally misplaced so that it appears in the background of the Queen's official portrait photograph. ( )

So to cut a long story short, the figure wearing the coat has a strangely nonhuman-looking head. (Deep down I think we all know that; it's the metaphorical elephant in the room. )

Now reptilian and boogeyman skeptics needn't become apoplectic with rage at this point, because I'm not alleging this is a photo of an inter-dimensional being.

I don't rule it out as a possibility, but think that logically that's not the most likely of options by a long stretch.

The most reasonable explanation to me is that the nonhuman-looking figure is either a partial or complete digital creation added to the photo by Annie Leibovitz's team, with the prior or subsequent approval of the Queen's team.

If you Google 'annie leibovitz fantasy portrait' you'll see just how many other Leibovitz images of famous people have been digitally manipulated to incorporate fantasy elements and dark themes into the work, so it shouldn't be controversial to suggest that she's also done this with her portrait of the Queen, unless you're inclined to splutter on about 'royal protocol' and 'preserving the dignity of Her Majesty' or reject the notion that establishment artists and the British Monarchy have been mindfucking the docile, unquestioning public for centuries with covert symbolism that alludes to the true sources of control behind the power structures on this planet.

Last edited by size_of_light; 18-05-2013 at 02:14 AM.
size_of_light is offline   Reply With Quote