Yet another Photoshop scandal? Maybe, maybe not…
The Associated Press is now distributing this photo of Michael Jackson, allegedly taken during a show rehearsal in the Staples Center in Los Angeles, two days before he died:
The original is a “handout photo,” distributed by concert promotion conglomerate AEG and reportedly moved a month ago by Reuters. It’s credited to famed rock music photographer Kevin Mazur.
The photo has picked up a little buzz over the past week or two. Folks are saying it might be a fake.
The big clue? First, let’s zoom in on Michael:
Do you see it yet? No?
Does this help?
Yeah, it appears as if someone cut Michael out of another photo and then Photoshopped him into the “This is it” backdrop. It appears as if the person doing the Photoshop work neglected to clip out the area between Mikey’s knees.
We say appears because the rest of the photo looks quite authentic to us. The lighting appears to be perfect and stray strands of Michael’s hair appear in front of the big neon “S.” Speaking as a very experienced Photoshop cutout guy, that would be very difficult to pull off.
And how odd the artist forgot the space between Michael’s legs but caught the few pixels trapped within the fingers of his left hand.
Besides: This photographer, Mazur, is good. World-famous, even. Why would he risk his reputation by photoshopping like this? And badly?
Here’s a video, shot by CNN at about the same time. It doesn’t include the banner, though, so it’s only so helpful:
No, we’re wondering if there’s another explanation for this one. Is he wearing a cape under his sport coat? Is there some kind of stand-up speaker or black box behind him?
We have to admit, though, its looks mighty odd. Mighty odd indeed.
The photo was first used weeks ago by the Daily Mail of London…
…and has been used all sorts of places today. This example happens to be the Huffington Post:
We screen-capped this one at Newsday. They cropped the photo so you don’t even see the odd part. Hmm.
So check it out and see what you think.
Find the growing thread about the alleged Photoshop work at the Photoshop Disasters web site.
See the first use of this photo we could find at the Daily Mail.
Find the largest version we could find here.
Thanks to Michael Higdon for the tip.
July 31st, 2009 at 4:05 pm
Looking at the first pick, is there a door at the top of the white ramp? That’s all I got.
July 31st, 2009 at 4:46 pm
It is a little odd, I thought the hand was really perfect looking too. Photoshop Disasters isn’t always right either. Judging by the large photo, I can’t tell. The light box behind him seems to match up well too.
But if you look way up in his crotch (I know it’s awkward) there’s a small pin light on it and stratch gradient light coming out of it. But it could still be a door or cloth or anything. Also, MJ’s skin looks a bit darker and younger to me.
I dunno.
July 31st, 2009 at 4:58 pm
Looking at the larger pic, I think it is REAL. The bottom of the S would not have extended that far anyway and if you look close there is a metal pipe railing that is on both sides of the legs and faintly in the middle too. If it is fake, then they did a perfect job everywhere else. Plus in the alrger photo you see the white ramp that has faint black stripes that you also see in the video.
July 31st, 2009 at 5:48 pm
I think the only flaw in the photo is that the area between his legs has been blacked out, perhaps to eliminate distractions. If you enlarge the photo and look at his right knee, you’ll see a sliver of the background that matches the uneven dark gray along the bottom of the photo and around the letters and metal braces. But the rest of the area between his legs has a definite edge, then is solid black. I would expect to see some element of the sides of the letters, the braces or the lighting showing between his legs. Instead it’s a solid black.
July 31st, 2009 at 5:51 pm
Ooohh, I seee it. Dennis you’re absolutely right, this is SOOOO good of a picture that the photographer knew not to cross the composition by sticking the bright letters on MJ’s crotch!
Well, Photoshop Disasters are idiots (so am I for believing them).
July 31st, 2009 at 6:19 pm
The jury still seems to be out, but I wouldn’t call the PSP people idiots over it.
First of all, the gap between his legs does seem weird.
Second, of the little footage we’ve seen from the rehearsals, we’ve never seen one with the stage lit up like that and with the props in place.
Third, it should be Rule One that if a shot looks too good to be true, chances are it probably is, particular in the Photoshop era. We’ve seen too many reputable photographers uncovered as fakers to reply solely on reputation (which, personally, I don’t believe you should ever rely on).
The fact that the PSP site is allowing a full debate over the authenticity of the photo should give them points. People with varying knowledge and expertise can weigh in and conclusions can be reached. And if it’s determined that it’s authentic, it will be hailed as such.
And if MJ’s people are really concerned about proving the photo is not a fake, they had can the photographer release a few more frames from the rehearsal. That would quiet the firestorm right quick, mmm?
July 31st, 2009 at 10:14 pm
Let’s see the whole take. Then we can know if there was a black box or a cape or a strange black reaper hanging out behind Michael. If other photos from the same day cannot readily be produced then we know it is a fake. I don’t care who took it - famous or not - when people see an opportunity for more fame and money their judgement is often skewed.
RIP Michael Jackson - it is a great photo illustration if nothing else. “This is it”
July 31st, 2009 at 10:20 pm
I’ll grant that the photo does look odd re: the legs, but I second Michael’s opinion of the Photoshop Disasters blog. Many of the things they rant and rave about are highly suspect “disasters” in my opinion.
Some things are obvious, others not so much. Yet they make it seem like it’s the worst piece of Photoshop work ever regardless of how minor the flaw might be if it is a flaw at all, which is often times very debatable.
July 31st, 2009 at 10:23 pm
Sorry…I mean Bill’s opinion.
July 31st, 2009 at 10:25 pm
OMG…I’m tired…nope…it was Michael’s opinion I’ll second. Sometimes the PS Disasters folks are idiots.
July 31st, 2009 at 10:38 pm
Thanks, John, for pumping up the number of comments I’m getting tonight. You’re a one-man steroid for the ol’ page-view meter! :)
August 1st, 2009 at 12:48 am
Looks real to me on the high-res version. The difficulty in blending the hair and the blur would make this a superhero Photoshop job.
August 1st, 2009 at 8:41 am
No problem Chuck. I was literally nodding off at the keyboard, and kept getting confused as I re-read the comments. I’ll have to remember to only read your blog when I’m sleepy so I can pad those hit stats for you.
August 1st, 2009 at 7:42 pm
There is so much evidence in favor of this being real that I almost have to believe it is. That hair is absolutely perfect — as is the hand.
However, it is the Daily Mail. Regardless of the photographer’s reputation, The Mail is notorious for bad photoshop jobs. We’re talking half cloned-out bodies bad — removing people without removing their hands bad. Whether this is the photographers’ faults or not is difficult to say.
With that considered, it is possible that the legs are from another photo. That would explain the perfect hair and hands along with the oddly-missed cutout island. But then again, I’m willing to give the photog the benefit of the doubt — false accusations on this level are career-ruiners.