I bet the camera here is modified from a phone camera (an LG Revolution or something). My phone camera is 8 MP (HTC Inspire), which isn't shabby. It looks like they have a series of LED lights, a camera-phone camera, and more-than-one optical mouse LED/CMOS points to capture twisting and write the info on the fly instead of relying completely on software to autostitch similar data together.

The predefined depth-of-focus of about a cm and the optical mouse info would be all this has over my phone (which has a light with adjustable brightness next to the camera)... so, I was honestly expecting someone to reply 'yeah, here are some phone apps that can do this with varying degrees of quality'.

>> ^MarineGunrock:

High-resolution scanning? No.>> ^bamdrew:
isn't this something a phone camera should be able to do decently?

High-resolution scanning? No.>> ^bamdrew:

isn't this something a phone camera should be able to do decently?

I think you meant "which sort of whatcraft is this?"




>> ^bamdrew:

analogue scanner! what sort of whichcraft is this!

analogue scanner! what sort of whichcraft is this!

That's something i might actually buy, scanners aren't portable enough.

To presume anyone is unarmed is a quick way to die when you're a police officer. >> ^blankfist:

>> ^gwiz665:
Utter nonsense. He didn't implore anything, he demanded and refused to comply with the policeman's instructions. Threatening behavior, refuse to comply with lawful orders. Put your hands on the car, then ask what you're pulled over for. better yet, stay in your fucking car until the cop comes up to you.
This douche cost his city a bunch of money.

I'd like to dig a bit further into some of these reactions. There were three moderately sized officers on the scene pointing weapons at a presumedly unarmed man. I agree that common sense should've told him to stay in the car, and certainly to comply with their orders if he wanted to get to where he was going that night.
But then again the same can be said for those who refuse to go through the porno scanners or be molested at the TSA checkpoints. Common sense says comply if you want to get to where you were going. But does it make it right?
I see two things happening simultaneously in this video. 1. The man wanted to know why he was stopped. 2. The officer reacted as if this man was a threat. I feel both are reasonable responses. The man did eventually comply with the officer's instructions until he was ordered on his knees.
Let's put this into perspective: he was stopped for a crooked license plate on the front of his car. It's important to consider why he was pulled over. Not for a felony, but what's probably an infraction. Is the crooked license a threat of any kind? A danger? What's the purpose of the stop?
When the man asked why he was stopped, and he had his hands out of his pockets, and the officer had his taser sights locked onto the man, at that point I feel it's reasonable to assume a simple explanation isn't too much to ask for. "Why was I pulled over?" "Your front license is crooked. If you'd return to your vehicle, I'll be over to discuss with you further and you can be on your way."
Another thing to note, statistically most female police officers don't have situations like this escalate further. I think it has to do with their approach. And I wonder if they're set on defusing situations while male officers want compliance.

>> ^gwiz665:

Utter nonsense. He didn't implore anything, he demanded and refused to comply with the policeman's instructions. Threatening behavior, refuse to comply with lawful orders. Put your hands on the car, then ask what you're pulled over for. better yet, stay in your fucking car until the cop comes up to you.
This douche cost his city a bunch of money.


I'd like to dig a bit further into some of these reactions. There were three moderately sized officers on the scene pointing weapons at a presumedly unarmed man. I agree that common sense should've told him to stay in the car, and certainly to comply with their orders if he wanted to get to where he was going that night.

But then again the same can be said for those who refuse to go through the porno scanners or be molested at the TSA checkpoints. Common sense says comply if you want to get to where you were going. But does it make it right?

I see two things happening simultaneously in this video. 1. The man wanted to know why he was stopped. 2. The officer reacted as if this man was a threat. I feel both are reasonable responses. The man did eventually comply with the officer's instructions until he was ordered on his knees.

Let's put this into perspective: he was stopped for a crooked license plate on the front of his car. It's important to consider why he was pulled over. Not for a felony, but what's probably an infraction. Is the crooked license a threat of any kind? A danger? What's the purpose of the stop?

When the man asked why he was stopped, and he had his hands out of his pockets, and the officer had his taser sights locked onto the man, at that point I feel it's reasonable to assume a simple explanation isn't too much to ask for. "Why was I pulled over?" "Your front license is crooked. If you'd return to your vehicle, I'll be over to discuss with you further and you can be on your way."

Another thing to note, statistically most female police officers don't have situations like this escalate further. I think it has to do with their approach. And I wonder if they're set on defusing situations while male officers want compliance.

Want to know what will be visible when you go through the new scanners installed at the airports ? What will be visible ? Let's just say, if you have pimples on your ass it will show up on these cameras, lol

American Airports

Taking a gander at his filmography, Cronenberg has made a career out of making very cold-looking films. I'm not sure if it's the cinematography or if it's something else entirely like his storytelling style.

Far as DPs go, he had Mark Irwin for The Brood, Scanners, Videodrome, Dead Zone, and The Fly which are the main five "chilly" films I'm talking about. He then had Peter Suschitzky for all the rest, which weren't exactly warm looking either. Cronenberg doesn't have a big photography background like Kubrick so...I dunno. He must have a very clear vision from the git-go.

I despise Canon Pixma with a fervent, seething passion. I won't fall for their corporate art. They didn't invent paint + sound sculptures. Just using them to promote their crappy printers and brand.

The pixma inkjet printer typically has 5 cartridges, two of which are blacks. If just one runs out, including the extra black you're not using, it stops working altogether. When I say it stops working I don't mean it just stops printing, the fax machine and scanner become defunct as well.

And by "run out" I mean half the ink cartridge still has ink in it. And because of the microchip they place in them, you can't reinstall the same cartridge in the hopes of fooling it. And they run about $50 a pop. I don't want to go off on a rant here, but...

Best fictional drug is Substance D from Scanner Darkly

http://youtu.be/_um0Nj5DveA

>> ^Mysling:

>> ^bobknight33:
That would be fine if you just wanted the text from the document. In this case the the document as a whole is what is of interest. Anyone with any graphic sense would scan into photoshop since the image would be a photo. This would present itself as 1 and only 1 layer.
No one would OCR scan to PDF execpt those with out photoshop. Sure the scanner will have software provided for OCR ( optical character recognition).

The problem is that you are assuming that this was done by a person with graphic sense, or with knowledge of photoshop.
If the birth certificate was simply scanned by some office worker in Hawaii, with no graphic sense and no photoshop available, and sent to the White House for publication, would that not explain the entire thing?


Not quite...the -real- problem is that you seem to assume that the birther crowd have -any- concern or connection to reality. They don't. They will not -ever- accept that we have a black president. For every bullshit claim that is refuted, they'll simply spawn a new variant.

You can see that perfectly clearly in our own local variety..."fact" just isn't a meaningful concept to them.

Continuing the discussion is like wrestling with pigs...the only thing you're going to achieve is to waste your time and amuse the pigs.

Good question. The news and or OBAMA indicated that his attorney went to Hawaii and obtained it. It then would make sense the the attorney would come back with an official copy/ duplicate. The White house staff would then process it and post it on the web.


To indicate that the "locals" scanned it and then email it or such is a possible point but it still does not answer the alterations.

The white surly have access properly knowledgeable individuals of photoshop and other ADOBE products.

>> ^Mysling:

>> ^bobknight33:
That would be fine if you just wanted the text from the document. In this case the the document as a whole is what is of interest. Anyone with any graphic sense would scan into photoshop since the image would be a photo. This would present itself as 1 and only 1 layer.
No one would OCR scan to PDF execpt those with out photoshop. Sure the scanner will have software provided for OCR ( optical character recognition).

The problem is that you are assuming that this was done by a person with graphic sense, or with knowledge of photoshop.
If the birth certificate was simply scanned by some office worker in Hawaii, with no graphic sense and no photoshop available, and sent to the White House for publication, would that not explain the entire thing?

>> ^bobknight33:

That would be fine if you just wanted the text from the document. In this case the the document as a whole is what is of interest. Anyone with any graphic sense would scan into photoshop since the image would be a photo. This would present itself as 1 and only 1 layer.
No one would OCR scan to PDF execpt those with out photoshop. Sure the scanner will have software provided for OCR ( optical character recognition).


The problem is that you are assuming that this was done by a person with graphic sense, or with knowledge of photoshop.

If the birth certificate was simply scanned by some office worker in Hawaii, with no graphic sense and no photoshop available, and sent to the White House for publication, would that not explain the entire thing?

That would be fine if you just wanted the text from the document. In this case the the document as a whole is what is of interest. Anyone with any graphic sense would scan into photoshop since the image would be a photo. This would present itself as 1 and only 1 layer.

No one would OCR scan to PDF execpt those with out photoshop. Sure the scanner will have software provided for OCR ( optical character recognition). in such case then you would und up with a plain text document with no background. According to what you wrote, then all of these TEXT areas would have to be reassembled and arranged to fit onto the green pattern background. That does not make sense. Why would anyone pull a document apart just to put it back together? The only logical way to do this is to scan into Photoshop and save as a jpeg or equivalent. To convert it ti PDF then I would open it in Illustrator and do a save as PDF.Or on a Mac just print to PDF



In the video they use Illustrator to open the document. Illustrator will open a PDF and if there were any layers then they would be available also.

Again there is no reason for this document to have this amount of adulteration that this has.


>> ^mfsteele:

Here's a very simple explanation I found on a forum I frequent:
When you scan a document into PDF, you can use a mode which does text recognition. This will produce a document with layers. It stores the text as actual text instead of an image. This option is there because it typically generates a smaller PDF file.
In the areas where the birth certificate is near-black, Adobe's PDF-rendering engine eliminates the 8-bit RGB data and replaces it with a 1-bit layer with alpha. It's all in the interest of reducing file size
Try scanning ANY item directly into Acrobat using the twain tool, which the EXIF data shows was done. Run OCR on it, as is required by all federal and state agencies that work under the paperwork reduction act. Multiple control layers are added, as are masks for objects.