The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
Wide-Angle vs. Telephoto Lenses for Portraits
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

As I may have mentioned once or twice before, a huge national controversy has been sparked by photographs of beaches taken with telephoto lenses, which, as you know and I know, but apparently nobody else knows, exaggerate how crowded a scene is by exaggerating the size/closeness of distant figures.

The distance-distorting effects of zoom lenses are an important issue in taking portrait photographs as well. Here is a portrait shot at 50mm focal length, which best represents what the human eye sees:

And here is what he looks like with at the various standard zoom focal lengths from wide-angle to telephoto:

A 50mm lens is roughly what the human eye sees. A wide-angle lens (focal length less than 50mm) exaggerates the size of that which is closer, such as the nose in a portrait and understates the size of that which is further, such as the ears in a portrait.

A wide angle lens makes your face look skinnier, a telephoto lens (>50mm) broader. If you are fatter, you’d probably prefer wide angle. If you are skinny, like most male models, a telephoto lens makes you look more formidable.

As you can see in the above example, a wide angle lens (20mm = 0.4X while 200mm = 4.0X) makes you look more Jewish, a telephoto lens more Gentile.

 
Hide 91 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. So the camera subtracts ten pounds?

    • LOL: bruce county
  2. Russ says:

    An effective rebuttal of the following from an earlier thread:

    “Many photographers claim that a wider angle lens will distort facial features either because of the lens distortion, or the focal length of the lens being too short. In this article and the accompanying video (which is extracted from our upcoming Photography Life Basics Video), we will prove that focal length has nothing to do with distorting a subject’s face”

    It only stands to reason: The human face is hardly a 2-D object.

    • Replies: @utu
    "The human face is hardly a 2-D object." - Exactly. Both 20mm and 200mm lenses will produce exactly the same 2D circle. The lenses have rotational symmetry. There is no preferential direction where magnification is larger or smaller. So what is the explanation that we see different magnifications in Y and X dimensions? Y dimension is defined by forehead and chin while X dimension is defined by ears. Ears are ∆z inches behind chin and forehead. The (de)magnification M depends on the distance z from the camera: M=f/(z-f). When z is large like when using a telephoto lens then two magnifications f/(z-f) for the forehead and chin plane and f/(z+∆z-f) for the ears plane are practically the same. But when z is small like when using the wide angle lens then the difference between the two magnifications is large enough to manifest as shrinking in the X dimension or elongating in Y dimension.

    If both pictures were taken from the same distance and then cropped and magnified to the same dimension there would be no significant difference between them as long as z/f is large. This is not about the focal length but about the camera-object distance.

    It is interesting that many photographers seem to make an incorrect inference. They associate the effects they see with the focal length f while they ignore the object-camera distance z. It is the distances z that is responsible for the effects but then the distance z determines what f a photographers is going to use, so in in mind the culprit is f not z.

    , @Kratoklastes

    The human face is hardly a 2-D object
     
    That's what tripped up the charlatans who forged the Shroud of Turin (anyone whoever looked at it and thought "Seems legit" is explained by the fact that >95% of people are imbeciles).
  3. It’s worth noting, in that example by Yasin Hazinedar, that the camera has to be moved, to keep the width of the face constant relative to the frame. The wide angle shots are from close by, the telephoto shots from far away.

    In fashion photography using young female models older male fashion photographers use telephoto focal lengths, not just to “draw” facial features “evenly”, but also to not crowd their young, teen models and make them uncomfortable. It helps them keep their expressions relaxed.

    Finally, there’s a reason models are often so exceptionally thin. It helps them offset the slightly fattening effect of those telephoto lenses.

    Wide angle lenses used to be considered, until about the 1960s, completely unsuited to portraiture, because of their “uglifying” effects. But photographers such as Arnold Newman started using them to advantage, especially for environmental portraiture (including the surroundings), and getting people used to the wide-angle look. Today, no one under the age of 70 considers the wide-angle portraits from smartphones to be “ugly.”

    • Replies: @anonymous

    It’s worth noting, in that example by Yasin Hazinedar, that the camera has to be moved, to keep the width of the face constant relative to the frame. The wide angle shots are from close by, the telephoto shots from far away.
     
    Nope. There's cropping, in accordance to a little thing called "resolving power" of the chip. Pull your head out of the 1990's.

    In fashion photography using young female models older male fashion photographers use telephoto focal lengths, not just to “draw” facial features “evenly”, but also to not crowd their young, teen models and make them uncomfortable. It helps them keep their expressions relaxed.
     
    Wrong. Are you just pulling all of this out of your ass, or have you worked with professional models and/or photographers? I'm betting neither. If you're a 15 year old Ford model, you're expected to hold your shit together, since you are being paid $3000 an hour. Print modeling is fiercely competitive, and if you don't have your shit together, you won't be called for another gig. Pro photogs generally don't give a fuck about "not scaring the girls." They've got too much going on setting up the shot to worry about that shit. If they're too tense, the photog might give them a shot of tequila. That's usually about it.

    Also, they're not trying to "draw facial features evenly." That's insane. They're going for a particular effect, by which a models facial angularity is taken into account as an incidental to the artistic or commercial effect the photog is going for. Any particular model is of secondary importance, son.


    Finally, there’s a reason models are often so exceptionally thin. It helps them offset the slightly fattening effect of those telephoto lenses.
     
    Wrong again! I personally knew more than a few Ford models who made a lot more than you do a year, and their asses was the size of Wisconsin. Their upper torso and face were perfect symmetry, and that's why they made the big bucks. They wouldn't be hired as runway models in a million years, and they gave not a shit about it. They were getting Vogue covers in Europe.

    Thin, relatively tall, and physically symmetrical models make clothes look better. Everything lays on them better. You could wrap them in a potato sack, and they would rock that potato sack, and that's why THEY are paid the big bucks as runway models. Ideally, it would be nice if a model could pull off both, but it's not required, and again, it's not because a telephoto lens makes them fat.


    Wide angle lenses used to be considered, until about the 1960s, completely unsuited to portraiture, because of their “uglifying” effects. But photographers such as Arnold Newman started using them to advantage, especially for environmental portraiture (including the surroundings), and getting people used to the wide-angle look. Today, no one under the age of 70 considers the wide-angle portraits from smartphones to be “ugly.”
     
    Jesus... Here's what you're doing: you're coming up with subjective conclusions with little based in experience, and trying to pass it off as facts you know something about, preying on those who know fuck all about the subject.

    Knock that shit off. Find a hobby, and stop being annoying. Maybe photography?

    , @Old Palo Altan
    Just one more example of how we over 70s see the world as it is, and not as Technik wants us to see it.

    Of course such portraits are ugly: they are a distortion of the truth, and thus of the good and the beautiful as well.

    As for Arnold Newman ... well, what else is new.
  4. a wide angle lens… makes you look more Jewish, a telephoto lens more Gentile

    like Nordic Aryan superman Paul Newman

  5. The Jewish/Gentile “observation” is going to produce some weird psychodrama malarkey among the Unz.com readership. Once it is 100+ comments in, it will be an absolutely fascinating read.

    OT:
    https://www.itv.com/news/2020-04-22/60-000-cancer-patients-could-die-because-of-lack-of-treatment-or-diagnosis-oncologist-on-coronavirus-dilemma/

    • LOL: PiltdownMan
    • Replies: @J.Ross
    Off by 96, see immediately above you.
    , @James Speaks
    Yeah, some threads are like
    Fetch the calf. The piranhas are this way.
    , @Resistentialist
    As someone who looks very much like the left photo, Steve’s post cracked me up. They’re onto our (((telephoto lenses))). Shut it down!
  6. “makes you look more Jewish, a telephoto lens more Gentile.”

    On the other end of the focal length spectre, Leni Riefenstahl used extreme telephoto lenses to compress large crowds in Triumph of the Will while the Führer Adolf Hitler is seen through normal lenses and often from a low angle to appear tall in comparison.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perspective_distortion_(photography)#Mood_effect_and_famous_uses

    The Governor used perspective distortion to close beaches while Der Führer used perspective distortion to …

    With Antifa hobbled by social distancing regulations and fear of contracting Covid Fascists are taking over the Michigan statehouse.

    ‘Swastikas and nooses’: governor slams ‘racism’ of Michigan lockdown protest
    https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/may/03/michigan-gretchen-whitmer-lockdown-protest-racism

    • Replies: @George
    The Grimm Reaper, fooled by perspective distortion, shows up on empty beach. TV news crew does not need masks or social distancing.

    Florida man stalks beach as Grim Reaper to protest reopening amid pandemic
    https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/may/02/florida-grim-reaper-beach-video-coronavirus
    , @J.Ross
    Armed protesters have peacefully made it inside the Michigan capitol building on multiple occasions without incident, to the credit of the security staff there. If there's a way they can be criticized it's that the Michigan capitol is pretty much on the same page already: they rejected the ghoul's latest lockdown extension attempt and are looking at sanctioning her. The lockdown is no longer law, it is up to individual counties. In the time that this has been happening I have failed to locate these pernicious neo-Nazis who so fascinate the ghoul. All of the armed protests were heavily photographed but the neo-Nazis are really good at camouflage (that pea dot tho).
    A security guard in the same predominantly basketball-American place which managed to screw up water while surrounded by the Great Lakes was shot trying to insist that a dollar store patron put on his shoes, excuse me, that should be put on his mask.
    In Chicago cops have tackled maskless people on video and the haircut hobbit has promised to "treat you like a criminal" if you lack PPE (but not if you do hundreds of other behaviors normal in Chicago).
    I live in an exciting place decorated with random gunshots and car theft, so I agreed to join a neighborhood rumor app. I know it will contain a lot of hausfrauquatsch but I want to know if somebody sees a new guy looking at parked cars (this strikes me as one of the few ways smart phones and social media are very good). Yesterday a hysterical Mark decried a particular Kroger which I had just visited, masked, observing everyone else masked, employee sanitizing carts, all precautions followed. Mark had apparently seen many people without masks on his visit, so he decided to publicly opine about law without a law degree to a (probably exhausted) manager. The manager was all like "not your personal army" (image of smug Kizuna AI, not pictured). Mark is calling for this manager's head. Unfortunately, the comments replying to Mark's madness at last count were two politely disagreeing and about twenty making a chorus of the sound of knitting and (baffling!) going on to denounce Kroger as totally over and not a good grocery store. Just a few days back I visited (a very pretty but only superficially and in price) upmarket shop to find safflower oil and was kind of shocked at what they lacked (they did have a kickass meat counter and excellent frozen specialties), and of course the first Kroger I tried had safflower oil, for a better price and quantity than Amazon. That dead security guard will be weighing into store staff decisions to really ride the unmasked.
    , @Reg Cæsar

    On the other end of the focal length spectre, Leni Riefenstahl used extreme telephoto lenses to compress large crowds in Triumph of the Will while the Führer Adolf Hitler is seen through normal lenses and often from a low angle to appear tall in comparison.
     
    What did she use on the Nubians?


    https://assets.catawiki.nl/assets/2018/9/6/a/8/c/a8c044ae-92c4-4fb2-b83d-2d5e087b0f7e.jpg

    , @Mr McKenna
    https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2020/05/03/17/27954004-0-image-a-4_1588522869932.jpg

    What kind of lens is being used on Gretchen Whitmer? Something creepy and plasticky about her, though I note that 1) her most unflattering pics have been removed from Google Image Search and 2) in related news, she may be angling for Biden Veep.

    She's very cold and calculating about her pronouncements and policies. She may be just the sort of nightmare cynical politician this country deserves. Entirely devoid of principal, except the Will to Power.

    Speaking of, the 'right-wing' protestors never miss an opportunity for an 'own goal'. Granted they'll be crucified in the MSM anyway, but I wish they'd be just a bit smarter.

    , @Ron Mexico
    Yes, there were SwastikaFoot and El Noose.ra.cabra sightings in Lansing!
  7. @George
    "makes you look more Jewish, a telephoto lens more Gentile."

    On the other end of the focal length spectre, Leni Riefenstahl used extreme telephoto lenses to compress large crowds in Triumph of the Will while the Führer Adolf Hitler is seen through normal lenses and often from a low angle to appear tall in comparison.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perspective_distortion_(photography)#Mood_effect_and_famous_uses

    The Governor used perspective distortion to close beaches while Der Führer used perspective distortion to ...

    With Antifa hobbled by social distancing regulations and fear of contracting Covid Fascists are taking over the Michigan statehouse.

    'Swastikas and nooses': governor slams 'racism' of Michigan lockdown protest
    https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/may/03/michigan-gretchen-whitmer-lockdown-protest-racism

    The Grimm Reaper, fooled by perspective distortion, shows up on empty beach. TV news crew does not need masks or social distancing.

    Florida man stalks beach as Grim Reaper to protest reopening amid pandemic
    https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/may/02/florida-grim-reaper-beach-video-coronavirus

  8. The basics are simple: Longer lenses (teles) compress the image, shorter ones (wide angles) open it up.

    Shorter lenses are also useful to emphasize what’s nearer to the lens; could be a nose, but also – legs, for example:

    .https://beautyeternal.tumblr.com/post/45041895361/added-to-beauty-eternal-a-collection-of-the-most  

  9. Anonymous[447] • Disclaimer says:

    “In the 1960s it was the ‘Let it Be’ look”.

    ” In the 1970s it was the ‘Wild-Man’ look”.

    Full page advert for some men’s grooming product, or the other, oft printed in the Playboy magazine of the 1980s.
    The image of the ‘wild man’ with 1970s wild hair – and that iconic tagline are seared in my memory, that photo acted as a trigger ; )

  10. Anonymous[290] • Disclaimer says:

    If you use a wide angle on a Jew you get this.

    Inb4 a lens is not a determinant of religion!

    Also if you use a telephoto on a goy you get this:

  11. @UK
    The Jewish/Gentile "observation" is going to produce some weird psychodrama malarkey among the Unz.com readership. Once it is 100+ comments in, it will be an absolutely fascinating read.

    OT:
    https://www.itv.com/news/2020-04-22/60-000-cancer-patients-could-die-because-of-lack-of-treatment-or-diagnosis-oncologist-on-coronavirus-dilemma/

    Off by 96, see immediately above you.

  12. @UK
    The Jewish/Gentile "observation" is going to produce some weird psychodrama malarkey among the Unz.com readership. Once it is 100+ comments in, it will be an absolutely fascinating read.

    OT:
    https://www.itv.com/news/2020-04-22/60-000-cancer-patients-could-die-because-of-lack-of-treatment-or-diagnosis-oncologist-on-coronavirus-dilemma/

    Yeah, some threads are like
    Fetch the calf. The piranhas are this way.

  13. Anonymous[146] • Disclaimer says:

    The focal length numbers you cite are based on “normal” assuming the old 35mm, 24×36 image area. A normal lens for a 8mm or 16mm movie camera was much shorter, for “medium format” film cameras considerably longer, and large (4×5, or bigger) larger still.

    80mm was the standard lens for the famous Hasselblad camera, which had a 60mm square film area. Graflex press cameras usually sported a 127mm standard lens as I recall.

    Polaroid cameras were technically large format but because the images were not enlarged usually, most models had crude optics and were not held in good odor by the camera authorities, who were disproportionately located in certain areas and of a certain ethnicity. But the availability of a Polaroid back for medium format cameras was one of their primary advantages over 35mm. The only Polaroid materials now available don’t fit those backs, alas.

  14. A telephoto lens makes someone look better.

  15. Dave3 says:

    A photograph on your screen should subtend about the same angle in your visual field as it would in real life. The 20mm photo looks correct if you magnify it to full screen with your eyes eight inches away; it feels like you’re about to kiss him.

    That is not how we normally look at other people, especially in the COVID era, so use the longer lens when shooting faces.

  16. As you can see in the above example, a wide angle lens (20mm = 0.4X while 200mm = 4.0X) makes you look more Jewish, a telephoto lens more Gentile.

    Alert the SPLC! Telephoto lens are anti-Semitic and therefore hate crimes!

  17. @George
    "makes you look more Jewish, a telephoto lens more Gentile."

    On the other end of the focal length spectre, Leni Riefenstahl used extreme telephoto lenses to compress large crowds in Triumph of the Will while the Führer Adolf Hitler is seen through normal lenses and often from a low angle to appear tall in comparison.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perspective_distortion_(photography)#Mood_effect_and_famous_uses

    The Governor used perspective distortion to close beaches while Der Führer used perspective distortion to ...

    With Antifa hobbled by social distancing regulations and fear of contracting Covid Fascists are taking over the Michigan statehouse.

    'Swastikas and nooses': governor slams 'racism' of Michigan lockdown protest
    https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/may/03/michigan-gretchen-whitmer-lockdown-protest-racism

    Armed protesters have peacefully made it inside the Michigan capitol building on multiple occasions without incident, to the credit of the security staff there. If there’s a way they can be criticized it’s that the Michigan capitol is pretty much on the same page already: they rejected the ghoul’s latest lockdown extension attempt and are looking at sanctioning her. The lockdown is no longer law, it is up to individual counties. In the time that this has been happening I have failed to locate these pernicious neo-Nazis who so fascinate the ghoul. All of the armed protests were heavily photographed but the neo-Nazis are really good at camouflage (that pea dot tho).
    A security guard in the same predominantly basketball-American place which managed to screw up water while surrounded by the Great Lakes was shot trying to insist that a dollar store patron put on his shoes, excuse me, that should be put on his mask.
    In Chicago cops have tackled maskless people on video and the haircut hobbit has promised to “treat you like a criminal” if you lack PPE (but not if you do hundreds of other behaviors normal in Chicago).
    I live in an exciting place decorated with random gunshots and car theft, so I agreed to join a neighborhood rumor app. I know it will contain a lot of hausfrauquatsch but I want to know if somebody sees a new guy looking at parked cars (this strikes me as one of the few ways smart phones and social media are very good). Yesterday a hysterical Mark decried a particular Kroger which I had just visited, masked, observing everyone else masked, employee sanitizing carts, all precautions followed. Mark had apparently seen many people without masks on his visit, so he decided to publicly opine about law without a law degree to a (probably exhausted) manager. The manager was all like “not your personal army” (image of smug Kizuna AI, not pictured). Mark is calling for this manager’s head. Unfortunately, the comments replying to Mark’s madness at last count were two politely disagreeing and about twenty making a chorus of the sound of knitting and (baffling!) going on to denounce Kroger as totally over and not a good grocery store. Just a few days back I visited (a very pretty but only superficially and in price) upmarket shop to find safflower oil and was kind of shocked at what they lacked (they did have a kickass meat counter and excellent frozen specialties), and of course the first Kroger I tried had safflower oil, for a better price and quantity than Amazon. That dead security guard will be weighing into store staff decisions to really ride the unmasked.

  18. Anon[174] • Disclaimer says:

    Portrait lenses are usually between 85 mm and 180 mm. I don’t think that the “50 mm is closest to the human eye” rule works for something unnatural like filing your visual field with the face of a single person. It’s another matter if the portrait includes a lot of a person’s environment. And for indoor “person in his environment” shots, 20 mm produces quite natural portraits if the face is near the middle and there is a lot of the room visible. But circa 1980 wide angle environmental portraits with the distorted face at the edge or corner of a wide angle shot became trendy, and we haven’t looked back, now that all lenses are wide angle cell phone lenses.

    • Replies: @but an humble craftsman
    People love my portraits, shot with a slight tele.
    Laymen have good judgement, perhaps because they have not been "educated" in dubious taste.
  19. Thank you, great lesson in photography. Next time feature an attractive female model.

    • Agree: Lot, Jim Don Bob
  20. A fascinating documentary about another kind of distortion:

    • Thanks: danand
  21. @UK
    The Jewish/Gentile "observation" is going to produce some weird psychodrama malarkey among the Unz.com readership. Once it is 100+ comments in, it will be an absolutely fascinating read.

    OT:
    https://www.itv.com/news/2020-04-22/60-000-cancer-patients-could-die-because-of-lack-of-treatment-or-diagnosis-oncologist-on-coronavirus-dilemma/

    As someone who looks very much like the left photo, Steve’s post cracked me up. They’re onto our (((telephoto lenses))). Shut it down!

  22. @George
    "makes you look more Jewish, a telephoto lens more Gentile."

    On the other end of the focal length spectre, Leni Riefenstahl used extreme telephoto lenses to compress large crowds in Triumph of the Will while the Führer Adolf Hitler is seen through normal lenses and often from a low angle to appear tall in comparison.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perspective_distortion_(photography)#Mood_effect_and_famous_uses

    The Governor used perspective distortion to close beaches while Der Führer used perspective distortion to ...

    With Antifa hobbled by social distancing regulations and fear of contracting Covid Fascists are taking over the Michigan statehouse.

    'Swastikas and nooses': governor slams 'racism' of Michigan lockdown protest
    https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/may/03/michigan-gretchen-whitmer-lockdown-protest-racism

    On the other end of the focal length spectre, Leni Riefenstahl used extreme telephoto lenses to compress large crowds in Triumph of the Will while the Führer Adolf Hitler is seen through normal lenses and often from a low angle to appear tall in comparison.

    What did she use on the Nubians?

    [MORE]

    • Replies: @Cloudbuster
    Her mouth.
    , @Anonymous
    ... both hands and a flashlight.

    Oh wait, I think that's the punchline to another joke. I don't know why that came to mind. 2C or not 4D, that is the question.
    , @danand

    What did she use on the Nubians?

     

    Reg Cæsar, whatever it was, after Leni Riefenstahl's Angela Merkel phase she used concealer:

    https://flic.kr/p/2iXL37i
  23. utu says:
    @Russ
    An effective rebuttal of the following from an earlier thread:

    "Many photographers claim that a wider angle lens will distort facial features either because of the lens distortion, or the focal length of the lens being too short. In this article and the accompanying video (which is extracted from our upcoming Photography Life Basics Video), we will prove that focal length has nothing to do with distorting a subject’s face”
     

    It only stands to reason: The human face is hardly a 2-D object.

    “The human face is hardly a 2-D object.” – Exactly. Both 20mm and 200mm lenses will produce exactly the same 2D circle. The lenses have rotational symmetry. There is no preferential direction where magnification is larger or smaller. So what is the explanation that we see different magnifications in Y and X dimensions? Y dimension is defined by forehead and chin while X dimension is defined by ears. Ears are ∆z inches behind chin and forehead. The (de)magnification M depends on the distance z from the camera: M=f/(z-f). When z is large like when using a telephoto lens then two magnifications f/(z-f) for the forehead and chin plane and f/(z+∆z-f) for the ears plane are practically the same. But when z is small like when using the wide angle lens then the difference between the two magnifications is large enough to manifest as shrinking in the X dimension or elongating in Y dimension.

    If both pictures were taken from the same distance and then cropped and magnified to the same dimension there would be no significant difference between them as long as z/f is large. This is not about the focal length but about the camera-object distance.

    It is interesting that many photographers seem to make an incorrect inference. They associate the effects they see with the focal length f while they ignore the object-camera distance z. It is the distances z that is responsible for the effects but then the distance z determines what f a photographers is going to use, so in in mind the culprit is f not z.

    • Replies: @res

    It is interesting that many photographers seem to make an incorrect inference.
    They associate the effects they see with the focal length f while they ignore the object-camera distance z. It is the distances z that is responsible for the effects but then the distance z determines what f a photographers is going to use, so in in mind the culprit is f not z.
     
    I think that is because photographers tend to think in terms of their intended framing (what they see in the viewfinder).

    Looked at that way, it is reasonable to attribute the effect to the lens. In other words, you select the focal length giving the desired effect then frame your subject as desired by moving to the appropriate distance.

    I think it is much less natural to choose your distance first then pick a focal length to give the desired effect. Usually the attention is given to creating a desirable framing. Not thinking about how one might be able to crop a photo to give the desired perspective.

    This also ties in with usually wanting to maximize your use of the film/sensor (i.e. not crop a great deal).

    P.S. This is a pretty common theme in life where people doing practical things may have heuristics which seemingly don't fit well with the theory, but work given how they do (or think about) things.
    , @anon
    Can you take all that photographic jargon and explain in plain English how a person can make themselves look better in a selfie?
  24. “a wide angle lens… makes you look more Jewish, a telephoto lens more Gentile”

    Wide angle lens are anti-semitic and should be banned!

  25. anonymous[186] • Disclaimer says:
    @PiltdownMan
    It's worth noting, in that example by Yasin Hazinedar, that the camera has to be moved, to keep the width of the face constant relative to the frame. The wide angle shots are from close by, the telephoto shots from far away.

    In fashion photography using young female models older male fashion photographers use telephoto focal lengths, not just to "draw" facial features "evenly", but also to not crowd their young, teen models and make them uncomfortable. It helps them keep their expressions relaxed.

    Finally, there's a reason models are often so exceptionally thin. It helps them offset the slightly fattening effect of those telephoto lenses.

    Wide angle lenses used to be considered, until about the 1960s, completely unsuited to portraiture, because of their "uglifying" effects. But photographers such as Arnold Newman started using them to advantage, especially for environmental portraiture (including the surroundings), and getting people used to the wide-angle look. Today, no one under the age of 70 considers the wide-angle portraits from smartphones to be "ugly."

    It’s worth noting, in that example by Yasin Hazinedar, that the camera has to be moved, to keep the width of the face constant relative to the frame. The wide angle shots are from close by, the telephoto shots from far away.

    Nope. There’s cropping, in accordance to a little thing called “resolving power” of the chip. Pull your head out of the 1990’s.

    In fashion photography using young female models older male fashion photographers use telephoto focal lengths, not just to “draw” facial features “evenly”, but also to not crowd their young, teen models and make them uncomfortable. It helps them keep their expressions relaxed.

    Wrong. Are you just pulling all of this out of your ass, or have you worked with professional models and/or photographers? I’m betting neither. If you’re a 15 year old Ford model, you’re expected to hold your shit together, since you are being paid $3000 an hour. Print modeling is fiercely competitive, and if you don’t have your shit together, you won’t be called for another gig. Pro photogs generally don’t give a fuck about “not scaring the girls.” They’ve got too much going on setting up the shot to worry about that shit. If they’re too tense, the photog might give them a shot of tequila. That’s usually about it.

    Also, they’re not trying to “draw facial features evenly.” That’s insane. They’re going for a particular effect, by which a models facial angularity is taken into account as an incidental to the artistic or commercial effect the photog is going for. Any particular model is of secondary importance, son.

    Finally, there’s a reason models are often so exceptionally thin. It helps them offset the slightly fattening effect of those telephoto lenses.

    Wrong again! I personally knew more than a few Ford models who made a lot more than you do a year, and their asses was the size of Wisconsin. Their upper torso and face were perfect symmetry, and that’s why they made the big bucks. They wouldn’t be hired as runway models in a million years, and they gave not a shit about it. They were getting Vogue covers in Europe.

    Thin, relatively tall, and physically symmetrical models make clothes look better. Everything lays on them better. You could wrap them in a potato sack, and they would rock that potato sack, and that’s why THEY are paid the big bucks as runway models. Ideally, it would be nice if a model could pull off both, but it’s not required, and again, it’s not because a telephoto lens makes them fat.

    Wide angle lenses used to be considered, until about the 1960s, completely unsuited to portraiture, because of their “uglifying” effects. But photographers such as Arnold Newman started using them to advantage, especially for environmental portraiture (including the surroundings), and getting people used to the wide-angle look. Today, no one under the age of 70 considers the wide-angle portraits from smartphones to be “ugly.”

    Jesus… Here’s what you’re doing: you’re coming up with subjective conclusions with little based in experience, and trying to pass it off as facts you know something about, preying on those who know fuck all about the subject.

    Knock that shit off. Find a hobby, and stop being annoying. Maybe photography?

    • LOL: PiltdownMan
    • Replies: @vhrm

    Nope. There’s cropping, in accordance to a little thing called “resolving power” of the chip. Pull your head out of the 1990’s.

     

    I have no idea about the modeling world, but the face in the OP only "changes" because the camera is moving back away from the model.

    If the camera were in the same place and the framing were achieved through cropping then all the pictures would look the same (except for the lesser resolution of the highly cropped ones).

    So the longer lenses only change things because they allow you (force you) to move further from the model.

    (this is the counterintuitive observation/argument over the past two threads on focal length. It doesn't really change anything about how you take pictures in practice, but it's interesting that it's "moving your feet" that's changing perspective, not the lens)

    , @PiltdownMan
    You've been around some models?
  26. @Reg Cæsar

    On the other end of the focal length spectre, Leni Riefenstahl used extreme telephoto lenses to compress large crowds in Triumph of the Will while the Führer Adolf Hitler is seen through normal lenses and often from a low angle to appear tall in comparison.
     
    What did she use on the Nubians?


    https://assets.catawiki.nl/assets/2018/9/6/a/8/c/a8c044ae-92c4-4fb2-b83d-2d5e087b0f7e.jpg

    Her mouth.

  27. @PiltdownMan
    It's worth noting, in that example by Yasin Hazinedar, that the camera has to be moved, to keep the width of the face constant relative to the frame. The wide angle shots are from close by, the telephoto shots from far away.

    In fashion photography using young female models older male fashion photographers use telephoto focal lengths, not just to "draw" facial features "evenly", but also to not crowd their young, teen models and make them uncomfortable. It helps them keep their expressions relaxed.

    Finally, there's a reason models are often so exceptionally thin. It helps them offset the slightly fattening effect of those telephoto lenses.

    Wide angle lenses used to be considered, until about the 1960s, completely unsuited to portraiture, because of their "uglifying" effects. But photographers such as Arnold Newman started using them to advantage, especially for environmental portraiture (including the surroundings), and getting people used to the wide-angle look. Today, no one under the age of 70 considers the wide-angle portraits from smartphones to be "ugly."

    Just one more example of how we over 70s see the world as it is, and not as Technik wants us to see it.

    Of course such portraits are ugly: they are a distortion of the truth, and thus of the good and the beautiful as well.

    As for Arnold Newman … well, what else is new.

  28. @Anon
    Portrait lenses are usually between 85 mm and 180 mm. I don't think that the "50 mm is closest to the human eye" rule works for something unnatural like filing your visual field with the face of a single person. It's another matter if the portrait includes a lot of a person's environment. And for indoor "person in his environment" shots, 20 mm produces quite natural portraits if the face is near the middle and there is a lot of the room visible. But circa 1980 wide angle environmental portraits with the distorted face at the edge or corner of a wide angle shot became trendy, and we haven't looked back, now that all lenses are wide angle cell phone lenses.

    People love my portraits, shot with a slight tele.
    Laymen have good judgement, perhaps because they have not been “educated” in dubious taste.

  29. Eeeesh.

    Nikole Hannah-Jones Wins Pulitzer Prize For ‘1619 Project’ Essay About Slavery

    • Replies: @Redneck farmer
    Well, the Pulitzer Prize has been iffy for years.
    , @syonredux

    The only Pulitzer the 1619 Project deserved was for fiction
     

    As it was designed to do, The New York Times’ woefully mistaken 1619 Project just won a Pulitzer Prize. Worse, the award for commentary actually went to Nikole Hannah-Jones for her essay introducing the series — that is, to the article that brought the most sustained criticism from historians across the spectrum for its naked errors of fact.
     
    https://nypost.com/2020/05/04/the-only-pulitzer-the-1619-project-deserved-was-for-fiction/
  30. @Russ
    An effective rebuttal of the following from an earlier thread:

    "Many photographers claim that a wider angle lens will distort facial features either because of the lens distortion, or the focal length of the lens being too short. In this article and the accompanying video (which is extracted from our upcoming Photography Life Basics Video), we will prove that focal length has nothing to do with distorting a subject’s face”
     

    It only stands to reason: The human face is hardly a 2-D object.

    The human face is hardly a 2-D object

    That’s what tripped up the charlatans who forged the Shroud of Turin (anyone whoever looked at it and thought “Seems legit” is explained by the fact that >95% of people are imbeciles).

    • Replies: @Charles Erwin Wilson Three

    That’s what tripped up the charlatans who forged the Shroud of Turin
     
    Right! Because it is not possible represent a three-dimensional object in two dimensions.
  31. Thanks Steve!

    I think you may have inadvertently answered a question I’ve had for some time:

    In some pics taken on iPhones at about selfie length it really narrows the face, so much so that I end up asking, “Wow, have you lost weight?” And I’m not talking about an obvious “fish eye” distortion a la the cover of Rubber Soul.

    I’m guessing the automatic settings are doing what you’re talking about?

  32. Sean says:

    As you can see in the above example, a wide angle lens (20mm = 0.4X while 200mm = 4.0X) makes you look more Jewish, a telephoto lens more Gentile

    Wide angle looks more French than Jewish. Telephoto is less like a rapist (lots of erectile tissue visible in nose*). In the days when people married as virgins it was common for them to get a nasty case of rhinitis on honeymoon. Nowadays it is more usually caused by viagra.

    *Boris Johnson has a nose like that.

  33. donut says:

    Not really relevant , but I have found that when checking an ID I often can’t tell if the picture is of the same person presenting the ID and age has nothing to do with it . As an aside what I see with my right eye is subtly different in shade , the amount of light , is that right ? No , if I walk into a poorly lit room with my left eye nothing is distinct but with my right eye things are clearer . When I read at night in bed I shut my left eye and read just with my right eye . So it’s a dominant eye thing right ? But this is a life long thing so , has favoring the right eye aggravated the differences or were they bound to be ?

  34. res says:
    @utu
    "The human face is hardly a 2-D object." - Exactly. Both 20mm and 200mm lenses will produce exactly the same 2D circle. The lenses have rotational symmetry. There is no preferential direction where magnification is larger or smaller. So what is the explanation that we see different magnifications in Y and X dimensions? Y dimension is defined by forehead and chin while X dimension is defined by ears. Ears are ∆z inches behind chin and forehead. The (de)magnification M depends on the distance z from the camera: M=f/(z-f). When z is large like when using a telephoto lens then two magnifications f/(z-f) for the forehead and chin plane and f/(z+∆z-f) for the ears plane are practically the same. But when z is small like when using the wide angle lens then the difference between the two magnifications is large enough to manifest as shrinking in the X dimension or elongating in Y dimension.

    If both pictures were taken from the same distance and then cropped and magnified to the same dimension there would be no significant difference between them as long as z/f is large. This is not about the focal length but about the camera-object distance.

    It is interesting that many photographers seem to make an incorrect inference. They associate the effects they see with the focal length f while they ignore the object-camera distance z. It is the distances z that is responsible for the effects but then the distance z determines what f a photographers is going to use, so in in mind the culprit is f not z.

    It is interesting that many photographers seem to make an incorrect inference.
    They associate the effects they see with the focal length f while they ignore the object-camera distance z. It is the distances z that is responsible for the effects but then the distance z determines what f a photographers is going to use, so in in mind the culprit is f not z.

    I think that is because photographers tend to think in terms of their intended framing (what they see in the viewfinder).

    Looked at that way, it is reasonable to attribute the effect to the lens. In other words, you select the focal length giving the desired effect then frame your subject as desired by moving to the appropriate distance.

    I think it is much less natural to choose your distance first then pick a focal length to give the desired effect. Usually the attention is given to creating a desirable framing. Not thinking about how one might be able to crop a photo to give the desired perspective.

    This also ties in with usually wanting to maximize your use of the film/sensor (i.e. not crop a great deal).

    P.S. This is a pretty common theme in life where people doing practical things may have heuristics which seemingly don’t fit well with the theory, but work given how they do (or think about) things.

    • Agree: utu, vhrm, PiltdownMan
    • Replies: @Random Anonymous
    Good discussion in this sub-thread (and the OP), I learned some things.
  35. Ryan Murphy’s ‘Hollywood’ Is a Better Version of the Hollywood Fairy Tale Than ‘Once Upon a Time in Hollywood’

    Last year, director Quentin Tarantino rewrote one of Los Angeles’ darkest days — the murder of Sharon Tate — with his feature “Once Upon a Time in Hollywood.” That film, which garnered 10 Academy Award nominations and won two, received just as much flack as it did praise for the way it gave Tate a happy ending and presented the late 1960s Hollywood as a halcyon playground we’ll never see again. With that positivity came a complete erasure — or at least ignorance of — the real problems Hollywood endured with regards to its history.

    For Tarantino, Hollywood’s golden glow is directly tied to the blonde hair and wide eyes of Tate. Long cited as the angel of innocence whose brutal murder marked the end of the 1960s era of free love, it’s hard to watch Tarantino’s feature and ignore the white privilege presented in its depiction of Los Angeles. The Hollywood of “Once Upon a Time in Hollywood” is one where minority actors and their struggles are erased or just non-existent.

    And that is why Ryan Murphy’s new Netflix series, simply dubbed “Hollywood,” feels more like a true entertainment fairy tale. It not only contains revised backstories for famous personalities; it presents a landscape where the dream is that the people sitting behind the desks at various movie studios actually care about diversity. Taking place at the fictional Ace Studios (though bearing the famous Paramount Pictures gates), the series’ seven episodes create a world where the first African-American woman wins an Oscar for Best Actress in 1947, where actor Rock Hudson was able to live out and proud, and where a studio head — played by Broadway legend Patti LuPone, no less — understands that it’s not just about who is cast on-screen, but how a minority audience will feel seeing themselves presented on-screen.

    https://www.indiewire.com/2020/05/ryan-murphy-hollywood-bests-quentin-tarantino-1202224730/

    • Replies: @Jim Don Bob
    Yet another reason I am glad I cancelled Netflix. So much woke BS.
    , @Mr McKenna

    it’s not just about who is cast on-screen, but how a minority audience will feel seeing themselves presented on-screen.
     
    A telling quote, which perfectly encapsulates the inversion we see on-screen where all criminals and low-lifes are white males, and all strength and virtue are assigned to Approved Minorities. Heck, it's only been this way for fifty years now. Since people believe what they see on-screen much more readily than the 'anecdotes' from their own lives, it can be no surprise that our society is filled with Tiny Ducks.

    Hard to choose a favorite, but I do enjoy the routine whereby any female character less than Super Woman is construed as proof that the Director Doesn't Understand Women.

  36. @syonredux
    Ryan Murphy’s ‘Hollywood’ Is a Better Version of the Hollywood Fairy Tale Than ‘Once Upon a Time in Hollywood’

    Last year, director Quentin Tarantino rewrote one of Los Angeles’ darkest days — the murder of Sharon Tate — with his feature “Once Upon a Time in Hollywood.” That film, which garnered 10 Academy Award nominations and won two, received just as much flack as it did praise for the way it gave Tate a happy ending and presented the late 1960s Hollywood as a halcyon playground we’ll never see again. With that positivity came a complete erasure — or at least ignorance of — the real problems Hollywood endured with regards to its history.
     

    For Tarantino, Hollywood’s golden glow is directly tied to the blonde hair and wide eyes of Tate. Long cited as the angel of innocence whose brutal murder marked the end of the 1960s era of free love, it’s hard to watch Tarantino’s feature and ignore the white privilege presented in its depiction of Los Angeles. The Hollywood of “Once Upon a Time in Hollywood” is one where minority actors and their struggles are erased or just non-existent.
     

    And that is why Ryan Murphy’s new Netflix series, simply dubbed “Hollywood,” feels more like a true entertainment fairy tale. It not only contains revised backstories for famous personalities; it presents a landscape where the dream is that the people sitting behind the desks at various movie studios actually care about diversity. Taking place at the fictional Ace Studios (though bearing the famous Paramount Pictures gates), the series’ seven episodes create a world where the first African-American woman wins an Oscar for Best Actress in 1947, where actor Rock Hudson was able to live out and proud, and where a studio head — played by Broadway legend Patti LuPone, no less — understands that it’s not just about who is cast on-screen, but how a minority audience will feel seeing themselves presented on-screen.
     
    https://www.indiewire.com/2020/05/ryan-murphy-hollywood-bests-quentin-tarantino-1202224730/

    Yet another reason I am glad I cancelled Netflix. So much woke BS.

    • Agree: Coemgen
  37. @George
    "makes you look more Jewish, a telephoto lens more Gentile."

    On the other end of the focal length spectre, Leni Riefenstahl used extreme telephoto lenses to compress large crowds in Triumph of the Will while the Führer Adolf Hitler is seen through normal lenses and often from a low angle to appear tall in comparison.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perspective_distortion_(photography)#Mood_effect_and_famous_uses

    The Governor used perspective distortion to close beaches while Der Führer used perspective distortion to ...

    With Antifa hobbled by social distancing regulations and fear of contracting Covid Fascists are taking over the Michigan statehouse.

    'Swastikas and nooses': governor slams 'racism' of Michigan lockdown protest
    https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/may/03/michigan-gretchen-whitmer-lockdown-protest-racism


    What kind of lens is being used on Gretchen Whitmer? Something creepy and plasticky about her, though I note that 1) her most unflattering pics have been removed from Google Image Search and 2) in related news, she may be angling for Biden Veep.

    She’s very cold and calculating about her pronouncements and policies. She may be just the sort of nightmare cynical politician this country deserves. Entirely devoid of principal, except the Will to Power.

    Speaking of, the ‘right-wing’ protestors never miss an opportunity for an ‘own goal’. Granted they’ll be crucified in the MSM anyway, but I wish they’d be just a bit smarter.

    • Replies: @Mr McKenna
    Ugh, principle not principal. The internet is killing me.
    , @Anonymous
    That is likely from a camera phone set for a very compressed jpeg. Some camera phones have a feature that adds a bit if Gaussian blur-type processing to soften or eliminate wrinkles. She also appears to be trying to get her head angle just right. It’s not a shot loaded with spontenaity, as most selfies aren’t.
    , @J.Ross
    Arrested development, an unnervingly child-like face: very common among lefty academic women (recall the jet-setting yet plane-fearing Christine Blasey-Ford). I still have not seen any photographs of the neo-Nazis whom Whitmer claims participated in the capitol protests. I angrily note that even rightist media fell for this dishonest trick, reporting that "Whitmer criticized extremists among the protesters who flew Confederate and Nazi flags." In other words, supposedly Whitmer was okay with most protesters and the guys carrying ARs, but she draws the line at the mass murder of innocent Jews, and who can disagree with that? No, Whitmer attacked the protesters, and her attack consisted in this cheap Russian hackers delegitimization gambit. If protesters did fly the wrong flag exactly how would they be wrong or any less legitimate? Couldn't a person angry about the lockdown on Constitutional grounds see a Nazi flag as accusing the extra-Constitutional totalitarian lockdown and arbitrary orders of being Nazi-like? A caller to Dennis Prager today, intending to talk about Newsom in California, went on a glorious and welcome digression about the sliminess of this. Of course Whitmer is just lying and of course the lyingpress will accept the lie without question. It's enough to make one wish that Whitmer would go boating and get captured by the Venezuelan Coast Guard.
    , @anon
    What kind of lens is being used on Gretchen Whitmer?

    BarbieVision! That's how she achieves that look of neoteny.
    , @The Germ Theory of Disease
    She looks like that moment at, say, the 20-minute mark in direct-to-video "Hostel 6" where the hero wakes up feeling groggy, discovers that he's chained to a bed, sees that face looking down at him, and realizes he's going to be tortured to death.
  38. @res

    It is interesting that many photographers seem to make an incorrect inference.
    They associate the effects they see with the focal length f while they ignore the object-camera distance z. It is the distances z that is responsible for the effects but then the distance z determines what f a photographers is going to use, so in in mind the culprit is f not z.
     
    I think that is because photographers tend to think in terms of their intended framing (what they see in the viewfinder).

    Looked at that way, it is reasonable to attribute the effect to the lens. In other words, you select the focal length giving the desired effect then frame your subject as desired by moving to the appropriate distance.

    I think it is much less natural to choose your distance first then pick a focal length to give the desired effect. Usually the attention is given to creating a desirable framing. Not thinking about how one might be able to crop a photo to give the desired perspective.

    This also ties in with usually wanting to maximize your use of the film/sensor (i.e. not crop a great deal).

    P.S. This is a pretty common theme in life where people doing practical things may have heuristics which seemingly don't fit well with the theory, but work given how they do (or think about) things.

    Good discussion in this sub-thread (and the OP), I learned some things.

  39. Anonymous[290] • Disclaimer says:
    @Reg Cæsar

    On the other end of the focal length spectre, Leni Riefenstahl used extreme telephoto lenses to compress large crowds in Triumph of the Will while the Führer Adolf Hitler is seen through normal lenses and often from a low angle to appear tall in comparison.
     
    What did she use on the Nubians?


    https://assets.catawiki.nl/assets/2018/9/6/a/8/c/a8c044ae-92c4-4fb2-b83d-2d5e087b0f7e.jpg

    … both hands and a flashlight.

    Oh wait, I think that’s the punchline to another joke. I don’t know why that came to mind. 2C or not 4D, that is the question.

    • Replies: @Stan Adams
    At first glance I read that as fleshlight.
  40. @syonredux
    Ryan Murphy’s ‘Hollywood’ Is a Better Version of the Hollywood Fairy Tale Than ‘Once Upon a Time in Hollywood’

    Last year, director Quentin Tarantino rewrote one of Los Angeles’ darkest days — the murder of Sharon Tate — with his feature “Once Upon a Time in Hollywood.” That film, which garnered 10 Academy Award nominations and won two, received just as much flack as it did praise for the way it gave Tate a happy ending and presented the late 1960s Hollywood as a halcyon playground we’ll never see again. With that positivity came a complete erasure — or at least ignorance of — the real problems Hollywood endured with regards to its history.
     

    For Tarantino, Hollywood’s golden glow is directly tied to the blonde hair and wide eyes of Tate. Long cited as the angel of innocence whose brutal murder marked the end of the 1960s era of free love, it’s hard to watch Tarantino’s feature and ignore the white privilege presented in its depiction of Los Angeles. The Hollywood of “Once Upon a Time in Hollywood” is one where minority actors and their struggles are erased or just non-existent.
     

    And that is why Ryan Murphy’s new Netflix series, simply dubbed “Hollywood,” feels more like a true entertainment fairy tale. It not only contains revised backstories for famous personalities; it presents a landscape where the dream is that the people sitting behind the desks at various movie studios actually care about diversity. Taking place at the fictional Ace Studios (though bearing the famous Paramount Pictures gates), the series’ seven episodes create a world where the first African-American woman wins an Oscar for Best Actress in 1947, where actor Rock Hudson was able to live out and proud, and where a studio head — played by Broadway legend Patti LuPone, no less — understands that it’s not just about who is cast on-screen, but how a minority audience will feel seeing themselves presented on-screen.
     
    https://www.indiewire.com/2020/05/ryan-murphy-hollywood-bests-quentin-tarantino-1202224730/

    it’s not just about who is cast on-screen, but how a minority audience will feel seeing themselves presented on-screen.

    A telling quote, which perfectly encapsulates the inversion we see on-screen where all criminals and low-lifes are white males, and all strength and virtue are assigned to Approved Minorities. Heck, it’s only been this way for fifty years now. Since people believe what they see on-screen much more readily than the ‘anecdotes’ from their own lives, it can be no surprise that our society is filled with Tiny Ducks.

    Hard to choose a favorite, but I do enjoy the routine whereby any female character less than Super Woman is construed as proof that the Director Doesn’t Understand Women.

  41. @Mr McKenna
    https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2020/05/03/17/27954004-0-image-a-4_1588522869932.jpg

    What kind of lens is being used on Gretchen Whitmer? Something creepy and plasticky about her, though I note that 1) her most unflattering pics have been removed from Google Image Search and 2) in related news, she may be angling for Biden Veep.

    She's very cold and calculating about her pronouncements and policies. She may be just the sort of nightmare cynical politician this country deserves. Entirely devoid of principal, except the Will to Power.

    Speaking of, the 'right-wing' protestors never miss an opportunity for an 'own goal'. Granted they'll be crucified in the MSM anyway, but I wish they'd be just a bit smarter.

    Ugh, principle not principal. The internet is killing me.

  42. Anonymous[290] • Disclaimer says:

    I didn’t notice that gif until now. It really should trigger the intro to “Stayin’ Alive at the resolution of the clip.

  43. A court just released a list of 70 individuals who had specific knowledge of the Epstein trafficking network.

    Here are some of the names.

    GHISLAINE MAXWELL
    Roberts has alleged that Maxwell also sexually abused her by forcing her to engage in threeseomes with herself and Epstein.

    JEAN-LUC BRUNEL
    The French model scout and former modeling agency manager who multiple women, including Roberts, have alleged they were trafficked to by Epstein.

    RON BURKLE
    Billionaire co-founder of The Yucaipa Companies, LLC, a private equity and venture capital firm that specializes in purchasing and then restructuring underperforming companies. He is close friends with Sarah, Duchess of York, and Bill and Hillary Clinton

    ALAN DERSHOWITZ
    Polarizing lawyer and Harvard professor whose past clients include President Trump, OJ Simpson and Epstein, whose sweetheart deal with state and federal prosecutors he helped broker back in 2008. Roberts has alleged that she was trafficked to Dershowitz, which he has denied. Roberts has since filed a lawsuit against him for defamation similar to the one she filed against Maxwell in 2015.

    EVA AND GLEN DUBIN
    The former girlfriend of Epstein and her doctor husband who Roberts has alleged she was trafficked to by Epstein and Maxwell.

    PRINCE ANDREW ALBERT CHRISTIAN EDWARD, DUKE OF YORK
    The eighth in line to the British throne, who Roberts has said she was trafficked to in London at the age of 17. Prince Andrew has denied this, despite Roberts having a photo of herself with Maxwell and the royal.

    FREDERIC FEKKAI
    The famed hairstylist was the go-to guy when it came to trimming the tresses of the young women in Epstein’s orbit, according to multiple reports and court filings. Fekkai has never been accused of engaging in any illegal activity.

    TONY FIGUEROA
    Robert’s ex-boyfriend who says that he was asked to recruit girls for Maxwell and Epstein when he was just 17.

    CLARE HAZEL
    Mystery associate of Epstein whose alleged link to the pedophile remains unclear but who flew with him on the “Lolita Express” – Epstein’s infamous sex plane.

    STEPHEN KAUFMAN
    Roberts claimed she was trafficked to Kaufman in a 2016 deposition. He has denied this accusation.

    SARAH KELLEN
    Epstein’s assistant who managed to avoid charges in Florida, reportedly as part of his sweetheart deal. Many of Epstein’s underage victims have alleged that Kellen scheduled their appointments and facilitated his abuse if underage girls.

    NADIA MARCINKOVA
    A foreign-born model who many have identified as an accomplice in procuring underage girls for Epstein. She may be just as much a victim of the serial pedophile, however, who claimed to have purchased Nadia from her family at the age of 12.

    GEORGE MITCHELL
    The former senator from Maine and senate majority leader from 1989 to 1995. Roberts claims she was trafficked to the senator, an allegation that he denies.

    DAVID ROGERS
    Epstein’s pilot, whose flight logs offered proof that Epstein and Maxwell frequently travelled with Roberts when she was an underage.

    ADRIANA MUCINSKA
    Another Epstein assistant who helped to facilitate his encounters with underage girls.

    EMMY TAYLOR
    Maxwell’s assistant at the time that Virginia was allegedly being trafficked by the British-born socialite.

    TOM PRITZKER
    Billionaire hotel heir and cousin of Illinois governor J.B. Pritzker.

    BILL RICHARDSON
    The former governor of New Mexico, where Epstein owned the massive Zorro Ranch. Roberts alleged in a 2016 deposition that she was trafficked to the politician. He had been seen as a possible frontrunner for the Democratic nomination in the 2008 primary but dropped out around the same time that Epstein’s legal troubles in Palm Beach came to light.

    HALEY ROBSON
    The high school student who was a victim of Epstein, and then became one of his biggest recruiters in Palm Beach. She too avoided charges in the Palm Bach case.

    LARRY VISKOSKY
    Epstein’s pilot whose flight logs and deposition also provided definitive proof that Epstein knew and travelled with a number of his underage victims.

    LESLIE WEXNER
    The billionaire owner of Victoria’s Secret, The Limited and Bath & Body Works was Epstein’s most prominent client at his money-managing firm.

    IGOR ZINOVIEW
    The former Russian mixed martial arts fighter who became Epstein’s bodyguard.

    DOUG BAND
    Bill Clinton’s former aide who travelled the world with Epstein and his boss.

    RYAN DIONNE
    A former chef of Epstein, who travelled with the pedophile.

    ERIC GANY
    The man tasked with managing Epstein’s finances.

    ADAM PERRY LANG
    A former chef of Epstein, who travelled with the pedophile.

    PETER LISTERMAN
    An associate of Epstein who was once described as “the world’s famous seller of young models to oligarchs” by Kristina Goncharova, a one-time Miss Teen Ukraine who alleges she was one of Listerman’s victims.

    TODD MEISTER
    Best known for his brief marriage to socialite Nicky Hilton, Meister’s hedge fund was given a huge boost with an investment from Wexner.

    Jean Luc Brunel is a huge name in the world of modeling.

    Ron Burkle has always had a reputation for keeping jets full of young prostitutes. Back in 2008, there were a lot of whispers about his close relationship with Bill Clinton, who flew on his jet and stayed at his properties. It’s interesting that the above list includes two close Clinton associates (Ron Burkle and Doug Band). Very interesting…

    Eva Dubin won Miss Sweden back in 1980. Her husband Glenn Dubin is a huge name in Wall Street.

    Bill Mitchell was Senate Majority leader back in the early 90s.

    Tom Pritzker is a billionaire heir of the Pritzker hotel fortune and cousin of the Illinois Governor.

    Bill Richardson is former governor of New Mexico and once was one of the leading contenders for the nomination back in 2008.

    Todd Meister is a hedge fund manager who married into the Hilton family.

    • Thanks: Je Suis Omar Mateen
    • Replies: @JohnnyWalker123
    Epstein had his own office at Harvard. He had his own key card to give him unlimited access to the building.


    https://twitter.com/RyanAFournier/status/1256673066408697858

    https://twitter.com/EmeraldRobinson/status/1256583404293742593


    Apparently, Harvard faculty flew on Epstein's "Lolita Express" plane. They also visited his homes in NY, Florida, and New Mexico.

    They visited him in jail too (after an arrest for child sex crimes), which is sort of interesting.

    Harvard admitted that many faculty members wined and dined with Epstein, even after he was convicted of child sex acts in 2008
     

    “A number of the Harvard faculty members we interviewed also acknowledged that they visited Epstein in his homes in New York, Florida, New Mexico or the Virgin Islands, visited him in jail or on work release, or traveled on one of his planes. Faculty members told us that they undertook these off-campus activities primarily in their personal capacities rather than as representatives of Harvard. These actions did not implicate Harvard rules or policies,” the investigation concluded.

     

    By the way, they also visited Epstein's island. The island with that weird Satanic/Occult temple.

    http://www.secretunknown.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/epstein-temple-1035x425.jpg

    I wonder what they were doing there....

    Hmmm......

    Does anybody have an explanation for this?
    , @Je Suis Omar Mateen
    "RON BURKLE
    Billionaire co-founder of The Yucaipa Companies, LLC, a private equity and venture capital firm that specializes in purchasing and then restructuring underperforming companies."

    Small world. In high school, a friend of mine knocked up Ron Burkle's daughter. I never heard if they got married or if she kept the baby.

    Also, when I was age ten, Burkle tried to take over my dad's employer so the employees, Teamsters, went on strike and held a rally outside the employer's building. Hundreds attended, it was like a party. At about 5:30pm, as Burkle left the building and started his long walk to his car outside the gate, the crowd began booing and threatening him, so after making it 50 yards toward the gate, he stood there contemplating the angry protestors for about 10 seconds, then turned around and walked back inside. The Teamsters (and I) roared in triumph. An awesome moment I will never forget.

    Burkle changed his mind two days later and announced he would not take over the company. He sold his stock back to the previous president of the company, allowing the president to regain control of the company.

    So I am just three degrees removed from Jeff Epstein. Small world.
    , @Muggles
    More Epstein tabloid nonsense.

    I have no idea of what he did or didn't do, and neither, apparently, does anyone else who opines about him.

    "Underage" is a legal matter, technically. France has long had no actual age of consent, though that seems to be changing and I understand was somewhat circumstantial. Actual pedophilia (below puberty) was illegal I think. In Britain the age of consent was for a long time 16; don't know now. In many Latin countries it was 15 (or is) or varies with the locality.

    In the US it varies by state. Some are quite young (under 18). Also, sometimes the father's or man's age comes into play (if both are "under age.") The entire subject is fraught with nuance and complexity.

    So this Lolita stuff is just headline porn. The term "sex slaves" is tossed around but since these women/girls appear to all have been compensated from what I read, I'm not sure how slavery enters in to it. They weren't unwilling prostitutes like some.

    As to blackmail, "bribery" and such, again, no real testimony or evidence. Powerful rich men (and a few women) have always behaved in a certain way. Feminists want abortions for 12 year olds and teens dressing like hookers, but embrace a curious view of female consent. I am not advocating young women or men engaging in sex, but like it or not, most of our ancestors likely became parents (if able) not long after puberty. Epstein's tale is only "shame porn" for the masses.
  44. Anonymous[427] • Disclaimer says:

    I seem to remember that Rollei TLR cameras with long lenses-the Tele-Rollei-was particularly the desired camera for portraiture for quite a while.

    The Rollei had a gizmo called a Rolleikin that allowed you to use 35mm film, which made the standard lens TLR a telephoto 35mm camera in effect.

    Ed Romney was a big Rollei fan and also liked the Japanese versions like the yashica 124g.

    • Replies: @PiltdownMan
    The late Barry Goldwater was a talented photographer who used Rolleiflex TLRs.
  45. @peterike
    Eeeesh.

    Nikole Hannah-Jones Wins Pulitzer Prize For ‘1619 Project’ Essay About Slavery

    Well, the Pulitzer Prize has been iffy for years.

    • Replies: @ben tillman
    Duranty 1932.
  46. @utu
    "The human face is hardly a 2-D object." - Exactly. Both 20mm and 200mm lenses will produce exactly the same 2D circle. The lenses have rotational symmetry. There is no preferential direction where magnification is larger or smaller. So what is the explanation that we see different magnifications in Y and X dimensions? Y dimension is defined by forehead and chin while X dimension is defined by ears. Ears are ∆z inches behind chin and forehead. The (de)magnification M depends on the distance z from the camera: M=f/(z-f). When z is large like when using a telephoto lens then two magnifications f/(z-f) for the forehead and chin plane and f/(z+∆z-f) for the ears plane are practically the same. But when z is small like when using the wide angle lens then the difference between the two magnifications is large enough to manifest as shrinking in the X dimension or elongating in Y dimension.

    If both pictures were taken from the same distance and then cropped and magnified to the same dimension there would be no significant difference between them as long as z/f is large. This is not about the focal length but about the camera-object distance.

    It is interesting that many photographers seem to make an incorrect inference. They associate the effects they see with the focal length f while they ignore the object-camera distance z. It is the distances z that is responsible for the effects but then the distance z determines what f a photographers is going to use, so in in mind the culprit is f not z.

    Can you take all that photographic jargon and explain in plain English how a person can make themselves look better in a selfie?

    • Replies: @Buffalo Joe
    anon, if you are a guy use a screen shot of George Cluney. If you are a girl use a screen shot of Jennifer Garner. This works for all those dating sites.Skip the technical stuff.
  47. Anonymous[186] • Disclaimer says:
    @Mr McKenna
    https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2020/05/03/17/27954004-0-image-a-4_1588522869932.jpg

    What kind of lens is being used on Gretchen Whitmer? Something creepy and plasticky about her, though I note that 1) her most unflattering pics have been removed from Google Image Search and 2) in related news, she may be angling for Biden Veep.

    She's very cold and calculating about her pronouncements and policies. She may be just the sort of nightmare cynical politician this country deserves. Entirely devoid of principal, except the Will to Power.

    Speaking of, the 'right-wing' protestors never miss an opportunity for an 'own goal'. Granted they'll be crucified in the MSM anyway, but I wish they'd be just a bit smarter.

    That is likely from a camera phone set for a very compressed jpeg. Some camera phones have a feature that adds a bit if Gaussian blur-type processing to soften or eliminate wrinkles. She also appears to be trying to get her head angle just right. It’s not a shot loaded with spontenaity, as most selfies aren’t.

  48. @JohnnyWalker123
    A court just released a list of 70 individuals who had specific knowledge of the Epstein trafficking network.

    Here are some of the names.

    GHISLAINE MAXWELL
    Roberts has alleged that Maxwell also sexually abused her by forcing her to engage in threeseomes with herself and Epstein.

    JEAN-LUC BRUNEL
    The French model scout and former modeling agency manager who multiple women, including Roberts, have alleged they were trafficked to by Epstein.

    RON BURKLE
    Billionaire co-founder of The Yucaipa Companies, LLC, a private equity and venture capital firm that specializes in purchasing and then restructuring underperforming companies. He is close friends with Sarah, Duchess of York, and Bill and Hillary Clinton

    ALAN DERSHOWITZ
    Polarizing lawyer and Harvard professor whose past clients include President Trump, OJ Simpson and Epstein, whose sweetheart deal with state and federal prosecutors he helped broker back in 2008. Roberts has alleged that she was trafficked to Dershowitz, which he has denied. Roberts has since filed a lawsuit against him for defamation similar to the one she filed against Maxwell in 2015.

    EVA AND GLEN DUBIN
    The former girlfriend of Epstein and her doctor husband who Roberts has alleged she was trafficked to by Epstein and Maxwell.

    PRINCE ANDREW ALBERT CHRISTIAN EDWARD, DUKE OF YORK
    The eighth in line to the British throne, who Roberts has said she was trafficked to in London at the age of 17. Prince Andrew has denied this, despite Roberts having a photo of herself with Maxwell and the royal.

    FREDERIC FEKKAI
    The famed hairstylist was the go-to guy when it came to trimming the tresses of the young women in Epstein's orbit, according to multiple reports and court filings. Fekkai has never been accused of engaging in any illegal activity.

    TONY FIGUEROA
    Robert's ex-boyfriend who says that he was asked to recruit girls for Maxwell and Epstein when he was just 17.

    CLARE HAZEL
    Mystery associate of Epstein whose alleged link to the pedophile remains unclear but who flew with him on the "Lolita Express" - Epstein's infamous sex plane.

    STEPHEN KAUFMAN
    Roberts claimed she was trafficked to Kaufman in a 2016 deposition. He has denied this accusation.

    SARAH KELLEN
    Epstein's assistant who managed to avoid charges in Florida, reportedly as part of his sweetheart deal. Many of Epstein's underage victims have alleged that Kellen scheduled their appointments and facilitated his abuse if underage girls.

    NADIA MARCINKOVA
    A foreign-born model who many have identified as an accomplice in procuring underage girls for Epstein. She may be just as much a victim of the serial pedophile, however, who claimed to have purchased Nadia from her family at the age of 12.

    GEORGE MITCHELL
    The former senator from Maine and senate majority leader from 1989 to 1995. Roberts claims she was trafficked to the senator, an allegation that he denies.

    DAVID ROGERS
    Epstein's pilot, whose flight logs offered proof that Epstein and Maxwell frequently travelled with Roberts when she was an underage.

    ADRIANA MUCINSKA
    Another Epstein assistant who helped to facilitate his encounters with underage girls.

    EMMY TAYLOR
    Maxwell's assistant at the time that Virginia was allegedly being trafficked by the British-born socialite.

    TOM PRITZKER
    Billionaire hotel heir and cousin of Illinois governor J.B. Pritzker.

    BILL RICHARDSON
    The former governor of New Mexico, where Epstein owned the massive Zorro Ranch. Roberts alleged in a 2016 deposition that she was trafficked to the politician. He had been seen as a possible frontrunner for the Democratic nomination in the 2008 primary but dropped out around the same time that Epstein's legal troubles in Palm Beach came to light.

    HALEY ROBSON
    The high school student who was a victim of Epstein, and then became one of his biggest recruiters in Palm Beach. She too avoided charges in the Palm Bach case.

    LARRY VISKOSKY
    Epstein's pilot whose flight logs and deposition also provided definitive proof that Epstein knew and travelled with a number of his underage victims.

    LESLIE WEXNER
    The billionaire owner of Victoria's Secret, The Limited and Bath & Body Works was Epstein's most prominent client at his money-managing firm.

    IGOR ZINOVIEW
    The former Russian mixed martial arts fighter who became Epstein's bodyguard.

    DOUG BAND
    Bill Clinton's former aide who travelled the world with Epstein and his boss.

    RYAN DIONNE
    A former chef of Epstein, who travelled with the pedophile.

    ERIC GANY
    The man tasked with managing Epstein's finances.

    ADAM PERRY LANG
    A former chef of Epstein, who travelled with the pedophile.

    PETER LISTERMAN
    An associate of Epstein who was once described as “the world's famous seller of young models to oligarchs" by Kristina Goncharova, a one-time Miss Teen Ukraine who alleges she was one of Listerman's victims.

    TODD MEISTER
    Best known for his brief marriage to socialite Nicky Hilton, Meister's hedge fund was given a huge boost with an investment from Wexner.

     

    Jean Luc Brunel is a huge name in the world of modeling.

    Ron Burkle has always had a reputation for keeping jets full of young prostitutes. Back in 2008, there were a lot of whispers about his close relationship with Bill Clinton, who flew on his jet and stayed at his properties. It's interesting that the above list includes two close Clinton associates (Ron Burkle and Doug Band). Very interesting...

    Eva Dubin won Miss Sweden back in 1980. Her husband Glenn Dubin is a huge name in Wall Street.

    Bill Mitchell was Senate Majority leader back in the early 90s.

    Tom Pritzker is a billionaire heir of the Pritzker hotel fortune and cousin of the Illinois Governor.

    Bill Richardson is former governor of New Mexico and once was one of the leading contenders for the nomination back in 2008.

    Todd Meister is a hedge fund manager who married into the Hilton family.

    Epstein had his own office at Harvard. He had his own key card to give him unlimited access to the building.

    Apparently, Harvard faculty flew on Epstein’s “Lolita Express” plane. They also visited his homes in NY, Florida, and New Mexico.

    They visited him in jail too (after an arrest for child sex crimes), which is sort of interesting.

    Harvard admitted that many faculty members wined and dined with Epstein, even after he was convicted of child sex acts in 2008

    “A number of the Harvard faculty members we interviewed also acknowledged that they visited Epstein in his homes in New York, Florida, New Mexico or the Virgin Islands, visited him in jail or on work release, or traveled on one of his planes. Faculty members told us that they undertook these off-campus activities primarily in their personal capacities rather than as representatives of Harvard. These actions did not implicate Harvard rules or policies,” the investigation concluded.

    By the way, they also visited Epstein’s island. The island with that weird Satanic/Occult temple.

    I wonder what they were doing there….

    Hmmm……

    Does anybody have an explanation for this?

    • Replies: @J.Ross
    Before 4chan started spreading this story, if you googled Epstein you got a web page boasting about science sponsorship. Epstein was a "billionaire" specifically (publicly) fixated on high tech and advanced hard sciences. He underwrote, funded, and generally made researchers, and he facilitated conventions and events for people like "Harvard Science Faculty," possibly as his post-conviction public alibi, possibly as an intelligence operation (keeping tabs on the cream of America's boffins, and possibly turning or stealing from some, is a self-explanatorily worthy spy goal), but definitely not from any advanced hard science ability or interest of his own.
    Then there was this fire, the same night as the "suicide" ...
    But at least he didn't get captured by the Venezuelan Coast Guard.
    , @anonymous
    Thanks. Maybe you'll have more luck with it here than I did in the Harvard thread. I thought maybe we weren't supposed to talk about it or something.

    https://www.unz.com/isteve/famous-colleges-over-time/#comment-3871143

    , @Mr McKenna
    Another amusing and pointed treatment of the story, from Noam Cohen in WIRED.

    Harvard came first in Epstein’s mind, which, I suppose, says something about its reputation among status-obsessed faux-intellectuals. When Harvard was accepting Esptein’s donations, it was dealing with a disreputable character; MIT, by contrast, was dealing with a convicted sex offender. But had MIT taken Harvard’s experience to heart, it would have realized that Epstein wasn’t going to be easy to deal with, even if he could seem to be begging the school to take his money.

    Surprise: Jeffrey Epstein was not, in fact, a selfless donor looking to promote the advancement of science.

    https://www.wired.com/story/for-jeffrey-epstein-mit-was-just-a-safety-school/

     

  49. @peterike
    Eeeesh.

    Nikole Hannah-Jones Wins Pulitzer Prize For ‘1619 Project’ Essay About Slavery

    The only Pulitzer the 1619 Project deserved was for fiction

    As it was designed to do, The New York Times’ woefully mistaken 1619 Project just won a Pulitzer Prize. Worse, the award for commentary actually went to Nikole Hannah-Jones for her essay introducing the series — that is, to the article that brought the most sustained criticism from historians across the spectrum for its naked errors of fact.

    https://nypost.com/2020/05/04/the-only-pulitzer-the-1619-project-deserved-was-for-fiction/

    • Replies: @Mr McKenna
    The Pulitzers have been corrupt since long before my time.

    Another example of an 'institution' that should be shunned.
  50. @Anonymous
    ... both hands and a flashlight.

    Oh wait, I think that's the punchline to another joke. I don't know why that came to mind. 2C or not 4D, that is the question.

    At first glance I read that as fleshlight.

  51. vhrm says:
    @anonymous

    It’s worth noting, in that example by Yasin Hazinedar, that the camera has to be moved, to keep the width of the face constant relative to the frame. The wide angle shots are from close by, the telephoto shots from far away.
     
    Nope. There's cropping, in accordance to a little thing called "resolving power" of the chip. Pull your head out of the 1990's.

    In fashion photography using young female models older male fashion photographers use telephoto focal lengths, not just to “draw” facial features “evenly”, but also to not crowd their young, teen models and make them uncomfortable. It helps them keep their expressions relaxed.
     
    Wrong. Are you just pulling all of this out of your ass, or have you worked with professional models and/or photographers? I'm betting neither. If you're a 15 year old Ford model, you're expected to hold your shit together, since you are being paid $3000 an hour. Print modeling is fiercely competitive, and if you don't have your shit together, you won't be called for another gig. Pro photogs generally don't give a fuck about "not scaring the girls." They've got too much going on setting up the shot to worry about that shit. If they're too tense, the photog might give them a shot of tequila. That's usually about it.

    Also, they're not trying to "draw facial features evenly." That's insane. They're going for a particular effect, by which a models facial angularity is taken into account as an incidental to the artistic or commercial effect the photog is going for. Any particular model is of secondary importance, son.


    Finally, there’s a reason models are often so exceptionally thin. It helps them offset the slightly fattening effect of those telephoto lenses.
     
    Wrong again! I personally knew more than a few Ford models who made a lot more than you do a year, and their asses was the size of Wisconsin. Their upper torso and face were perfect symmetry, and that's why they made the big bucks. They wouldn't be hired as runway models in a million years, and they gave not a shit about it. They were getting Vogue covers in Europe.

    Thin, relatively tall, and physically symmetrical models make clothes look better. Everything lays on them better. You could wrap them in a potato sack, and they would rock that potato sack, and that's why THEY are paid the big bucks as runway models. Ideally, it would be nice if a model could pull off both, but it's not required, and again, it's not because a telephoto lens makes them fat.


    Wide angle lenses used to be considered, until about the 1960s, completely unsuited to portraiture, because of their “uglifying” effects. But photographers such as Arnold Newman started using them to advantage, especially for environmental portraiture (including the surroundings), and getting people used to the wide-angle look. Today, no one under the age of 70 considers the wide-angle portraits from smartphones to be “ugly.”
     
    Jesus... Here's what you're doing: you're coming up with subjective conclusions with little based in experience, and trying to pass it off as facts you know something about, preying on those who know fuck all about the subject.

    Knock that shit off. Find a hobby, and stop being annoying. Maybe photography?

    Nope. There’s cropping, in accordance to a little thing called “resolving power” of the chip. Pull your head out of the 1990’s.

    I have no idea about the modeling world, but the face in the OP only “changes” because the camera is moving back away from the model.

    If the camera were in the same place and the framing were achieved through cropping then all the pictures would look the same (except for the lesser resolution of the highly cropped ones).

    So the longer lenses only change things because they allow you (force you) to move further from the model.

    (this is the counterintuitive observation/argument over the past two threads on focal length. It doesn’t really change anything about how you take pictures in practice, but it’s interesting that it’s “moving your feet” that’s changing perspective, not the lens)

  52. donut says:

    What happened ? I lost track , did I miss anything ? I know my mother f**king Dr.s only want to talk to me on the phone . ‘Member reading about the Doctors back in the day when they would minister to the dying knowing they were at risk ? Nowadays the cock s**kers want to get paid for making a phone call . F**k them all , with my dying breath I pray that a cleansing plague burns through them all , let them all rot and die with foul stinking infected boils . And having forsaken any god let them call on Mastercard . LOL.

    • Replies: @Buffalo Joe
    donut, see you vented without having to lay on a shrink's couch. Feel Better? Send Steve your co-pay.
  53. @Kratoklastes

    The human face is hardly a 2-D object
     
    That's what tripped up the charlatans who forged the Shroud of Turin (anyone whoever looked at it and thought "Seems legit" is explained by the fact that >95% of people are imbeciles).

    That’s what tripped up the charlatans who forged the Shroud of Turin

    Right! Because it is not possible represent a three-dimensional object in two dimensions.

    • Replies: @Kratoklastes
    Oh, it's possible - but it results in a mess if it's a face.

    There was a hilarious fake story about the apologists 'creating a 3D image' from the shroud: this assumed no 'wrap' distortion and was basically giving a z-coordinate based on the level of discolouration of the cloth.

    No surprise then, that the result looked like a 14th century forger would expect a 1st century fictional man-god to look like... long hair, tidy beard, aquiline features - just like the guy who the forger was using as a model.

    The 'faithful' lapped it up like it was the One Cup and they were one of the Two Girls.

    Fortunately we can now do all sorts of quite-clever simulations of what an image looks like from a wrapped 3D object: when the dude has a beard, the wrapping becomes really obvious (and the ears are way way way far away from the sides of the face)... example ->

    https://www.dropbox.com/s/u7fl9m1rulj5k64/BeardedFlat.png?dl=1

    Nobody's even bothered to do an 'in vivo' replication: it's probably hard to get permission to actually do a mortuary wrapping on a dead human, and seeing what the result looks like. In the 90s I did a similar thing using a full-sized mannequin, but I never took photos. I should do it again, for a larf... this time with a 3D printed head (on the mannequin, not me).
  54. I made it there on my own .

  55. As you can see in the above example, a wide angle lens (20mm = 0.4X while 200mm = 4.0X) makes you look more Jewish, a telephoto lens more Gentile.

    The telephoto lens makes him look more handsome.

  56. And a daring daylight hit on a middle-aged man (claimed to be the head of a motorcycle gang) using suppressed and possibly subsonic .22lr decorated New York City, and Navajo Dineh in the town of Gallup are panicking about an alleged extermination plot in pandemic precautions, and Greeks are rocking local antifa and leftist militants with apparent police acceptance (to include allegedly burning down a safe house), and Jim Cramer says that Trump cannot pursue protectionism with so many Americans out of work (uhhh …), and the Norks have apparently exchanged fire with the RoKs but the RoKs are all like “it’s cool, he’s retarded sometimes but he’s always my brother,” and American mercenaries connected to narcotraficantes went ahead with Bay of Pigs II: Venezuelan Boogaloo, despite losing half their strength to “not having paid them” and nearly another quarter to “getting captured by the Venezuelan Coast Guard.”*
    https://www.military.com/daily-news/2020/05/02/ex-green-beret-led-failed-attempt-oust-venezuelas-maduro.html
    *Computer-generated animation of late nineties Norm MacDonald, close up to face, he says:
    “Getting captured by the Venezuelan Coast Guard.”

  57. @JohnnyWalker123
    Epstein had his own office at Harvard. He had his own key card to give him unlimited access to the building.


    https://twitter.com/RyanAFournier/status/1256673066408697858

    https://twitter.com/EmeraldRobinson/status/1256583404293742593


    Apparently, Harvard faculty flew on Epstein's "Lolita Express" plane. They also visited his homes in NY, Florida, and New Mexico.

    They visited him in jail too (after an arrest for child sex crimes), which is sort of interesting.

    Harvard admitted that many faculty members wined and dined with Epstein, even after he was convicted of child sex acts in 2008
     

    “A number of the Harvard faculty members we interviewed also acknowledged that they visited Epstein in his homes in New York, Florida, New Mexico or the Virgin Islands, visited him in jail or on work release, or traveled on one of his planes. Faculty members told us that they undertook these off-campus activities primarily in their personal capacities rather than as representatives of Harvard. These actions did not implicate Harvard rules or policies,” the investigation concluded.

     

    By the way, they also visited Epstein's island. The island with that weird Satanic/Occult temple.

    http://www.secretunknown.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/epstein-temple-1035x425.jpg

    I wonder what they were doing there....

    Hmmm......

    Does anybody have an explanation for this?

    Before 4chan started spreading this story, if you googled Epstein you got a web page boasting about science sponsorship. Epstein was a “billionaire” specifically (publicly) fixated on high tech and advanced hard sciences. He underwrote, funded, and generally made researchers, and he facilitated conventions and events for people like “Harvard Science Faculty,” possibly as his post-conviction public alibi, possibly as an intelligence operation (keeping tabs on the cream of America’s boffins, and possibly turning or stealing from some, is a self-explanatorily worthy spy goal), but definitely not from any advanced hard science ability or interest of his own.
    Then there was this fire, the same night as the “suicide” …
    But at least he didn’t get captured by the Venezuelan Coast Guard.

  58. @Anonymous
    I seem to remember that Rollei TLR cameras with long lenses-the Tele-Rollei-was particularly the desired camera for portraiture for quite a while.

    The Rollei had a gizmo called a Rolleikin that allowed you to use 35mm film, which made the standard lens TLR a telephoto 35mm camera in effect.

    Ed Romney was a big Rollei fan and also liked the Japanese versions like the yashica 124g.

    The late Barry Goldwater was a talented photographer who used Rolleiflex TLRs.

  59. @Mr McKenna
    https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2020/05/03/17/27954004-0-image-a-4_1588522869932.jpg

    What kind of lens is being used on Gretchen Whitmer? Something creepy and plasticky about her, though I note that 1) her most unflattering pics have been removed from Google Image Search and 2) in related news, she may be angling for Biden Veep.

    She's very cold and calculating about her pronouncements and policies. She may be just the sort of nightmare cynical politician this country deserves. Entirely devoid of principal, except the Will to Power.

    Speaking of, the 'right-wing' protestors never miss an opportunity for an 'own goal'. Granted they'll be crucified in the MSM anyway, but I wish they'd be just a bit smarter.

    Arrested development, an unnervingly child-like face: very common among lefty academic women (recall the jet-setting yet plane-fearing Christine Blasey-Ford). I still have not seen any photographs of the neo-Nazis whom Whitmer claims participated in the capitol protests. I angrily note that even rightist media fell for this dishonest trick, reporting that “Whitmer criticized extremists among the protesters who flew Confederate and Nazi flags.” In other words, supposedly Whitmer was okay with most protesters and the guys carrying ARs, but she draws the line at the mass murder of innocent Jews, and who can disagree with that? No, Whitmer attacked the protesters, and her attack consisted in this cheap Russian hackers delegitimization gambit. If protesters did fly the wrong flag exactly how would they be wrong or any less legitimate? Couldn’t a person angry about the lockdown on Constitutional grounds see a Nazi flag as accusing the extra-Constitutional totalitarian lockdown and arbitrary orders of being Nazi-like? A caller to Dennis Prager today, intending to talk about Newsom in California, went on a glorious and welcome digression about the sliminess of this. Of course Whitmer is just lying and of course the lyingpress will accept the lie without question. It’s enough to make one wish that Whitmer would go boating and get captured by the Venezuelan Coast Guard.

    • Replies: @Kratoklastes
    Your standards are too high, man.

    Sure, bitch has got psycho eyes and her face appears to be two different half-faces stuck together lengthwise... but 99% of men would hit that (including me: I dare do all that may become a man...).

    I'll go further: she's more doable than Tulsi Gabbard (who has those weird gums) even though Gabbard's younger and does a better job of hiding her inner psycho hose-beast.
  60. @George
    "makes you look more Jewish, a telephoto lens more Gentile."

    On the other end of the focal length spectre, Leni Riefenstahl used extreme telephoto lenses to compress large crowds in Triumph of the Will while the Führer Adolf Hitler is seen through normal lenses and often from a low angle to appear tall in comparison.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perspective_distortion_(photography)#Mood_effect_and_famous_uses

    The Governor used perspective distortion to close beaches while Der Führer used perspective distortion to ...

    With Antifa hobbled by social distancing regulations and fear of contracting Covid Fascists are taking over the Michigan statehouse.

    'Swastikas and nooses': governor slams 'racism' of Michigan lockdown protest
    https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/may/03/michigan-gretchen-whitmer-lockdown-protest-racism

    Yes, there were SwastikaFoot and El Noose.ra.cabra sightings in Lansing!

  61. @syonredux

    The only Pulitzer the 1619 Project deserved was for fiction
     

    As it was designed to do, The New York Times’ woefully mistaken 1619 Project just won a Pulitzer Prize. Worse, the award for commentary actually went to Nikole Hannah-Jones for her essay introducing the series — that is, to the article that brought the most sustained criticism from historians across the spectrum for its naked errors of fact.
     
    https://nypost.com/2020/05/04/the-only-pulitzer-the-1619-project-deserved-was-for-fiction/

    The Pulitzers have been corrupt since long before my time.

    Another example of an ‘institution’ that should be shunned.

  62. @Charles Erwin Wilson Three

    That’s what tripped up the charlatans who forged the Shroud of Turin
     
    Right! Because it is not possible represent a three-dimensional object in two dimensions.

    Oh, it’s possible – but it results in a mess if it’s a face.

    There was a hilarious fake story about the apologists ‘creating a 3D image’ from the shroud: this assumed no ‘wrap’ distortion and was basically giving a z-coordinate based on the level of discolouration of the cloth.

    No surprise then, that the result looked like a 14th century forger would expect a 1st century fictional man-god to look like… long hair, tidy beard, aquiline features – just like the guy who the forger was using as a model.

    The ‘faithful’ lapped it up like it was the One Cup and they were one of the Two Girls.

    Fortunately we can now do all sorts of quite-clever simulations of what an image looks like from a wrapped 3D object: when the dude has a beard, the wrapping becomes really obvious (and the ears are way way way far away from the sides of the face)… example ->

    Nobody’s even bothered to do an ‘in vivo‘ replication: it’s probably hard to get permission to actually do a mortuary wrapping on a dead human, and seeing what the result looks like. In the 90s I did a similar thing using a full-sized mannequin, but I never took photos. I should do it again, for a larf… this time with a 3D printed head (on the mannequin, not me).

    • Replies: @Charlotte Allen
    I'm a Ph.D. medievalist, and although medieval art isn't my specialty, it's obvious to me that the image of Christ on the Shroud of Turin is artistically high-medieval: the elongated face and the forked beard. Mid-14th-century sounds about right to me.

    Nonetheless, no one who has claimed that the Shroud is authentic is "imbecile" (your words) enough to claim that the image on the Shroud is supposed to be the impression left by a wrapped object (Christ's body) in direct contact with the cloth. Rather, defenders of the Shroud's authenticity maintain that the Shroud is, instead, a kind of photographic image (in the negative) not formed by direct contact with the cloth but reflecting accurately the distance between the cloth and the body. Raised parts of the body have stronger impressions than those more recessed.

    How the image got there is, so far, anyone's guess (there have been plenty of theories), and perhaps a miracle was indeed involved. This is why the Shroud of Turin is so absolutely fascinating to so many people, including a few somewhat above the "imbecile" level of intelligence.
  63. @anonymous

    It’s worth noting, in that example by Yasin Hazinedar, that the camera has to be moved, to keep the width of the face constant relative to the frame. The wide angle shots are from close by, the telephoto shots from far away.
     
    Nope. There's cropping, in accordance to a little thing called "resolving power" of the chip. Pull your head out of the 1990's.

    In fashion photography using young female models older male fashion photographers use telephoto focal lengths, not just to “draw” facial features “evenly”, but also to not crowd their young, teen models and make them uncomfortable. It helps them keep their expressions relaxed.
     
    Wrong. Are you just pulling all of this out of your ass, or have you worked with professional models and/or photographers? I'm betting neither. If you're a 15 year old Ford model, you're expected to hold your shit together, since you are being paid $3000 an hour. Print modeling is fiercely competitive, and if you don't have your shit together, you won't be called for another gig. Pro photogs generally don't give a fuck about "not scaring the girls." They've got too much going on setting up the shot to worry about that shit. If they're too tense, the photog might give them a shot of tequila. That's usually about it.

    Also, they're not trying to "draw facial features evenly." That's insane. They're going for a particular effect, by which a models facial angularity is taken into account as an incidental to the artistic or commercial effect the photog is going for. Any particular model is of secondary importance, son.


    Finally, there’s a reason models are often so exceptionally thin. It helps them offset the slightly fattening effect of those telephoto lenses.
     
    Wrong again! I personally knew more than a few Ford models who made a lot more than you do a year, and their asses was the size of Wisconsin. Their upper torso and face were perfect symmetry, and that's why they made the big bucks. They wouldn't be hired as runway models in a million years, and they gave not a shit about it. They were getting Vogue covers in Europe.

    Thin, relatively tall, and physically symmetrical models make clothes look better. Everything lays on them better. You could wrap them in a potato sack, and they would rock that potato sack, and that's why THEY are paid the big bucks as runway models. Ideally, it would be nice if a model could pull off both, but it's not required, and again, it's not because a telephoto lens makes them fat.


    Wide angle lenses used to be considered, until about the 1960s, completely unsuited to portraiture, because of their “uglifying” effects. But photographers such as Arnold Newman started using them to advantage, especially for environmental portraiture (including the surroundings), and getting people used to the wide-angle look. Today, no one under the age of 70 considers the wide-angle portraits from smartphones to be “ugly.”
     
    Jesus... Here's what you're doing: you're coming up with subjective conclusions with little based in experience, and trying to pass it off as facts you know something about, preying on those who know fuck all about the subject.

    Knock that shit off. Find a hobby, and stop being annoying. Maybe photography?

    You’ve been around some models?

  64. @J.Ross
    Arrested development, an unnervingly child-like face: very common among lefty academic women (recall the jet-setting yet plane-fearing Christine Blasey-Ford). I still have not seen any photographs of the neo-Nazis whom Whitmer claims participated in the capitol protests. I angrily note that even rightist media fell for this dishonest trick, reporting that "Whitmer criticized extremists among the protesters who flew Confederate and Nazi flags." In other words, supposedly Whitmer was okay with most protesters and the guys carrying ARs, but she draws the line at the mass murder of innocent Jews, and who can disagree with that? No, Whitmer attacked the protesters, and her attack consisted in this cheap Russian hackers delegitimization gambit. If protesters did fly the wrong flag exactly how would they be wrong or any less legitimate? Couldn't a person angry about the lockdown on Constitutional grounds see a Nazi flag as accusing the extra-Constitutional totalitarian lockdown and arbitrary orders of being Nazi-like? A caller to Dennis Prager today, intending to talk about Newsom in California, went on a glorious and welcome digression about the sliminess of this. Of course Whitmer is just lying and of course the lyingpress will accept the lie without question. It's enough to make one wish that Whitmer would go boating and get captured by the Venezuelan Coast Guard.

    Your standards are too high, man.

    Sure, bitch has got psycho eyes and her face appears to be two different half-faces stuck together lengthwise… but 99% of men would hit that (including me: I dare do all that may become a man…).

    I’ll go further: she’s more doable than Tulsi Gabbard (who has those weird gums) even though Gabbard’s younger and does a better job of hiding her inner psycho hose-beast.

    • Replies: @Ron Mexico
    You have a Caitlyn Jenner attraction.
    , @J.Ross
    >Ghoul Witless more attractive than Tulsi
    Objectively wrong.
  65. OT: A nurse says NYC is killing Covid-19 patients more due to incompetence than anything else. That might explain Detroit’s high death rate as well.

    https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/05/must-watch-tearful-nurse-blows-whistle-new-york-hospitals-murdering-covid-patients-complete-medical-mismanagement/

  66. @Redneck farmer
    Well, the Pulitzer Prize has been iffy for years.

    Duranty 1932.

  67. anonymous[227] • Disclaimer says:
    @JohnnyWalker123
    Epstein had his own office at Harvard. He had his own key card to give him unlimited access to the building.


    https://twitter.com/RyanAFournier/status/1256673066408697858

    https://twitter.com/EmeraldRobinson/status/1256583404293742593


    Apparently, Harvard faculty flew on Epstein's "Lolita Express" plane. They also visited his homes in NY, Florida, and New Mexico.

    They visited him in jail too (after an arrest for child sex crimes), which is sort of interesting.

    Harvard admitted that many faculty members wined and dined with Epstein, even after he was convicted of child sex acts in 2008
     

    “A number of the Harvard faculty members we interviewed also acknowledged that they visited Epstein in his homes in New York, Florida, New Mexico or the Virgin Islands, visited him in jail or on work release, or traveled on one of his planes. Faculty members told us that they undertook these off-campus activities primarily in their personal capacities rather than as representatives of Harvard. These actions did not implicate Harvard rules or policies,” the investigation concluded.

     

    By the way, they also visited Epstein's island. The island with that weird Satanic/Occult temple.

    http://www.secretunknown.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/epstein-temple-1035x425.jpg

    I wonder what they were doing there....

    Hmmm......

    Does anybody have an explanation for this?

    Thanks. Maybe you’ll have more luck with it here than I did in the Harvard thread. I thought maybe we weren’t supposed to talk about it or something.

    https://www.unz.com/isteve/famous-colleges-over-time/#comment-3871143

  68. @JohnnyWalker123
    A court just released a list of 70 individuals who had specific knowledge of the Epstein trafficking network.

    Here are some of the names.

    GHISLAINE MAXWELL
    Roberts has alleged that Maxwell also sexually abused her by forcing her to engage in threeseomes with herself and Epstein.

    JEAN-LUC BRUNEL
    The French model scout and former modeling agency manager who multiple women, including Roberts, have alleged they were trafficked to by Epstein.

    RON BURKLE
    Billionaire co-founder of The Yucaipa Companies, LLC, a private equity and venture capital firm that specializes in purchasing and then restructuring underperforming companies. He is close friends with Sarah, Duchess of York, and Bill and Hillary Clinton

    ALAN DERSHOWITZ
    Polarizing lawyer and Harvard professor whose past clients include President Trump, OJ Simpson and Epstein, whose sweetheart deal with state and federal prosecutors he helped broker back in 2008. Roberts has alleged that she was trafficked to Dershowitz, which he has denied. Roberts has since filed a lawsuit against him for defamation similar to the one she filed against Maxwell in 2015.

    EVA AND GLEN DUBIN
    The former girlfriend of Epstein and her doctor husband who Roberts has alleged she was trafficked to by Epstein and Maxwell.

    PRINCE ANDREW ALBERT CHRISTIAN EDWARD, DUKE OF YORK
    The eighth in line to the British throne, who Roberts has said she was trafficked to in London at the age of 17. Prince Andrew has denied this, despite Roberts having a photo of herself with Maxwell and the royal.

    FREDERIC FEKKAI
    The famed hairstylist was the go-to guy when it came to trimming the tresses of the young women in Epstein's orbit, according to multiple reports and court filings. Fekkai has never been accused of engaging in any illegal activity.

    TONY FIGUEROA
    Robert's ex-boyfriend who says that he was asked to recruit girls for Maxwell and Epstein when he was just 17.

    CLARE HAZEL
    Mystery associate of Epstein whose alleged link to the pedophile remains unclear but who flew with him on the "Lolita Express" - Epstein's infamous sex plane.

    STEPHEN KAUFMAN
    Roberts claimed she was trafficked to Kaufman in a 2016 deposition. He has denied this accusation.

    SARAH KELLEN
    Epstein's assistant who managed to avoid charges in Florida, reportedly as part of his sweetheart deal. Many of Epstein's underage victims have alleged that Kellen scheduled their appointments and facilitated his abuse if underage girls.

    NADIA MARCINKOVA
    A foreign-born model who many have identified as an accomplice in procuring underage girls for Epstein. She may be just as much a victim of the serial pedophile, however, who claimed to have purchased Nadia from her family at the age of 12.

    GEORGE MITCHELL
    The former senator from Maine and senate majority leader from 1989 to 1995. Roberts claims she was trafficked to the senator, an allegation that he denies.

    DAVID ROGERS
    Epstein's pilot, whose flight logs offered proof that Epstein and Maxwell frequently travelled with Roberts when she was an underage.

    ADRIANA MUCINSKA
    Another Epstein assistant who helped to facilitate his encounters with underage girls.

    EMMY TAYLOR
    Maxwell's assistant at the time that Virginia was allegedly being trafficked by the British-born socialite.

    TOM PRITZKER
    Billionaire hotel heir and cousin of Illinois governor J.B. Pritzker.

    BILL RICHARDSON
    The former governor of New Mexico, where Epstein owned the massive Zorro Ranch. Roberts alleged in a 2016 deposition that she was trafficked to the politician. He had been seen as a possible frontrunner for the Democratic nomination in the 2008 primary but dropped out around the same time that Epstein's legal troubles in Palm Beach came to light.

    HALEY ROBSON
    The high school student who was a victim of Epstein, and then became one of his biggest recruiters in Palm Beach. She too avoided charges in the Palm Bach case.

    LARRY VISKOSKY
    Epstein's pilot whose flight logs and deposition also provided definitive proof that Epstein knew and travelled with a number of his underage victims.

    LESLIE WEXNER
    The billionaire owner of Victoria's Secret, The Limited and Bath & Body Works was Epstein's most prominent client at his money-managing firm.

    IGOR ZINOVIEW
    The former Russian mixed martial arts fighter who became Epstein's bodyguard.

    DOUG BAND
    Bill Clinton's former aide who travelled the world with Epstein and his boss.

    RYAN DIONNE
    A former chef of Epstein, who travelled with the pedophile.

    ERIC GANY
    The man tasked with managing Epstein's finances.

    ADAM PERRY LANG
    A former chef of Epstein, who travelled with the pedophile.

    PETER LISTERMAN
    An associate of Epstein who was once described as “the world's famous seller of young models to oligarchs" by Kristina Goncharova, a one-time Miss Teen Ukraine who alleges she was one of Listerman's victims.

    TODD MEISTER
    Best known for his brief marriage to socialite Nicky Hilton, Meister's hedge fund was given a huge boost with an investment from Wexner.

     

    Jean Luc Brunel is a huge name in the world of modeling.

    Ron Burkle has always had a reputation for keeping jets full of young prostitutes. Back in 2008, there were a lot of whispers about his close relationship with Bill Clinton, who flew on his jet and stayed at his properties. It's interesting that the above list includes two close Clinton associates (Ron Burkle and Doug Band). Very interesting...

    Eva Dubin won Miss Sweden back in 1980. Her husband Glenn Dubin is a huge name in Wall Street.

    Bill Mitchell was Senate Majority leader back in the early 90s.

    Tom Pritzker is a billionaire heir of the Pritzker hotel fortune and cousin of the Illinois Governor.

    Bill Richardson is former governor of New Mexico and once was one of the leading contenders for the nomination back in 2008.

    Todd Meister is a hedge fund manager who married into the Hilton family.

    “RON BURKLE
    Billionaire co-founder of The Yucaipa Companies, LLC, a private equity and venture capital firm that specializes in purchasing and then restructuring underperforming companies.”

    Small world. In high school, a friend of mine knocked up Ron Burkle’s daughter. I never heard if they got married or if she kept the baby.

    Also, when I was age ten, Burkle tried to take over my dad’s employer so the employees, Teamsters, went on strike and held a rally outside the employer’s building. Hundreds attended, it was like a party. At about 5:30pm, as Burkle left the building and started his long walk to his car outside the gate, the crowd began booing and threatening him, so after making it 50 yards toward the gate, he stood there contemplating the angry protestors for about 10 seconds, then turned around and walked back inside. The Teamsters (and I) roared in triumph. An awesome moment I will never forget.

    Burkle changed his mind two days later and announced he would not take over the company. He sold his stock back to the previous president of the company, allowing the president to regain control of the company.

    So I am just three degrees removed from Jeff Epstein. Small world.

  69. @Kratoklastes
    Your standards are too high, man.

    Sure, bitch has got psycho eyes and her face appears to be two different half-faces stuck together lengthwise... but 99% of men would hit that (including me: I dare do all that may become a man...).

    I'll go further: she's more doable than Tulsi Gabbard (who has those weird gums) even though Gabbard's younger and does a better job of hiding her inner psycho hose-beast.

    You have a Caitlyn Jenner attraction.

  70. @Mr McKenna
    https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2020/05/03/17/27954004-0-image-a-4_1588522869932.jpg

    What kind of lens is being used on Gretchen Whitmer? Something creepy and plasticky about her, though I note that 1) her most unflattering pics have been removed from Google Image Search and 2) in related news, she may be angling for Biden Veep.

    She's very cold and calculating about her pronouncements and policies. She may be just the sort of nightmare cynical politician this country deserves. Entirely devoid of principal, except the Will to Power.

    Speaking of, the 'right-wing' protestors never miss an opportunity for an 'own goal'. Granted they'll be crucified in the MSM anyway, but I wish they'd be just a bit smarter.

    What kind of lens is being used on Gretchen Whitmer?

    BarbieVision! That’s how she achieves that look of neoteny.

  71. @Reg Cæsar

    On the other end of the focal length spectre, Leni Riefenstahl used extreme telephoto lenses to compress large crowds in Triumph of the Will while the Führer Adolf Hitler is seen through normal lenses and often from a low angle to appear tall in comparison.
     
    What did she use on the Nubians?


    https://assets.catawiki.nl/assets/2018/9/6/a/8/c/a8c044ae-92c4-4fb2-b83d-2d5e087b0f7e.jpg

    What did she use on the Nubians?

    Reg Cæsar, whatever it was, after Leni Riefenstahl’s Angela Merkel phase she used concealer:

    older

  72. @Mr McKenna
    https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2020/05/03/17/27954004-0-image-a-4_1588522869932.jpg

    What kind of lens is being used on Gretchen Whitmer? Something creepy and plasticky about her, though I note that 1) her most unflattering pics have been removed from Google Image Search and 2) in related news, she may be angling for Biden Veep.

    She's very cold and calculating about her pronouncements and policies. She may be just the sort of nightmare cynical politician this country deserves. Entirely devoid of principal, except the Will to Power.

    Speaking of, the 'right-wing' protestors never miss an opportunity for an 'own goal'. Granted they'll be crucified in the MSM anyway, but I wish they'd be just a bit smarter.

    She looks like that moment at, say, the 20-minute mark in direct-to-video “Hostel 6” where the hero wakes up feeling groggy, discovers that he’s chained to a bed, sees that face looking down at him, and realizes he’s going to be tortured to death.

    • Replies: @Inverness
    There is something genuinely spooky about that mask-like visage. What are the odds she becomes veep and then prez?
  73. @The Germ Theory of Disease
    She looks like that moment at, say, the 20-minute mark in direct-to-video "Hostel 6" where the hero wakes up feeling groggy, discovers that he's chained to a bed, sees that face looking down at him, and realizes he's going to be tortured to death.

    There is something genuinely spooky about that mask-like visage. What are the odds she becomes veep and then prez?

  74. @Kratoklastes
    Your standards are too high, man.

    Sure, bitch has got psycho eyes and her face appears to be two different half-faces stuck together lengthwise... but 99% of men would hit that (including me: I dare do all that may become a man...).

    I'll go further: she's more doable than Tulsi Gabbard (who has those weird gums) even though Gabbard's younger and does a better job of hiding her inner psycho hose-beast.

    >Ghoul Witless more attractive than Tulsi
    Objectively wrong.

  75. @JohnnyWalker123
    A court just released a list of 70 individuals who had specific knowledge of the Epstein trafficking network.

    Here are some of the names.

    GHISLAINE MAXWELL
    Roberts has alleged that Maxwell also sexually abused her by forcing her to engage in threeseomes with herself and Epstein.

    JEAN-LUC BRUNEL
    The French model scout and former modeling agency manager who multiple women, including Roberts, have alleged they were trafficked to by Epstein.

    RON BURKLE
    Billionaire co-founder of The Yucaipa Companies, LLC, a private equity and venture capital firm that specializes in purchasing and then restructuring underperforming companies. He is close friends with Sarah, Duchess of York, and Bill and Hillary Clinton

    ALAN DERSHOWITZ
    Polarizing lawyer and Harvard professor whose past clients include President Trump, OJ Simpson and Epstein, whose sweetheart deal with state and federal prosecutors he helped broker back in 2008. Roberts has alleged that she was trafficked to Dershowitz, which he has denied. Roberts has since filed a lawsuit against him for defamation similar to the one she filed against Maxwell in 2015.

    EVA AND GLEN DUBIN
    The former girlfriend of Epstein and her doctor husband who Roberts has alleged she was trafficked to by Epstein and Maxwell.

    PRINCE ANDREW ALBERT CHRISTIAN EDWARD, DUKE OF YORK
    The eighth in line to the British throne, who Roberts has said she was trafficked to in London at the age of 17. Prince Andrew has denied this, despite Roberts having a photo of herself with Maxwell and the royal.

    FREDERIC FEKKAI
    The famed hairstylist was the go-to guy when it came to trimming the tresses of the young women in Epstein's orbit, according to multiple reports and court filings. Fekkai has never been accused of engaging in any illegal activity.

    TONY FIGUEROA
    Robert's ex-boyfriend who says that he was asked to recruit girls for Maxwell and Epstein when he was just 17.

    CLARE HAZEL
    Mystery associate of Epstein whose alleged link to the pedophile remains unclear but who flew with him on the "Lolita Express" - Epstein's infamous sex plane.

    STEPHEN KAUFMAN
    Roberts claimed she was trafficked to Kaufman in a 2016 deposition. He has denied this accusation.

    SARAH KELLEN
    Epstein's assistant who managed to avoid charges in Florida, reportedly as part of his sweetheart deal. Many of Epstein's underage victims have alleged that Kellen scheduled their appointments and facilitated his abuse if underage girls.

    NADIA MARCINKOVA
    A foreign-born model who many have identified as an accomplice in procuring underage girls for Epstein. She may be just as much a victim of the serial pedophile, however, who claimed to have purchased Nadia from her family at the age of 12.

    GEORGE MITCHELL
    The former senator from Maine and senate majority leader from 1989 to 1995. Roberts claims she was trafficked to the senator, an allegation that he denies.

    DAVID ROGERS
    Epstein's pilot, whose flight logs offered proof that Epstein and Maxwell frequently travelled with Roberts when she was an underage.

    ADRIANA MUCINSKA
    Another Epstein assistant who helped to facilitate his encounters with underage girls.

    EMMY TAYLOR
    Maxwell's assistant at the time that Virginia was allegedly being trafficked by the British-born socialite.

    TOM PRITZKER
    Billionaire hotel heir and cousin of Illinois governor J.B. Pritzker.

    BILL RICHARDSON
    The former governor of New Mexico, where Epstein owned the massive Zorro Ranch. Roberts alleged in a 2016 deposition that she was trafficked to the politician. He had been seen as a possible frontrunner for the Democratic nomination in the 2008 primary but dropped out around the same time that Epstein's legal troubles in Palm Beach came to light.

    HALEY ROBSON
    The high school student who was a victim of Epstein, and then became one of his biggest recruiters in Palm Beach. She too avoided charges in the Palm Bach case.

    LARRY VISKOSKY
    Epstein's pilot whose flight logs and deposition also provided definitive proof that Epstein knew and travelled with a number of his underage victims.

    LESLIE WEXNER
    The billionaire owner of Victoria's Secret, The Limited and Bath & Body Works was Epstein's most prominent client at his money-managing firm.

    IGOR ZINOVIEW
    The former Russian mixed martial arts fighter who became Epstein's bodyguard.

    DOUG BAND
    Bill Clinton's former aide who travelled the world with Epstein and his boss.

    RYAN DIONNE
    A former chef of Epstein, who travelled with the pedophile.

    ERIC GANY
    The man tasked with managing Epstein's finances.

    ADAM PERRY LANG
    A former chef of Epstein, who travelled with the pedophile.

    PETER LISTERMAN
    An associate of Epstein who was once described as “the world's famous seller of young models to oligarchs" by Kristina Goncharova, a one-time Miss Teen Ukraine who alleges she was one of Listerman's victims.

    TODD MEISTER
    Best known for his brief marriage to socialite Nicky Hilton, Meister's hedge fund was given a huge boost with an investment from Wexner.

     

    Jean Luc Brunel is a huge name in the world of modeling.

    Ron Burkle has always had a reputation for keeping jets full of young prostitutes. Back in 2008, there were a lot of whispers about his close relationship with Bill Clinton, who flew on his jet and stayed at his properties. It's interesting that the above list includes two close Clinton associates (Ron Burkle and Doug Band). Very interesting...

    Eva Dubin won Miss Sweden back in 1980. Her husband Glenn Dubin is a huge name in Wall Street.

    Bill Mitchell was Senate Majority leader back in the early 90s.

    Tom Pritzker is a billionaire heir of the Pritzker hotel fortune and cousin of the Illinois Governor.

    Bill Richardson is former governor of New Mexico and once was one of the leading contenders for the nomination back in 2008.

    Todd Meister is a hedge fund manager who married into the Hilton family.

    More Epstein tabloid nonsense.

    I have no idea of what he did or didn’t do, and neither, apparently, does anyone else who opines about him.

    “Underage” is a legal matter, technically. France has long had no actual age of consent, though that seems to be changing and I understand was somewhat circumstantial. Actual pedophilia (below puberty) was illegal I think. In Britain the age of consent was for a long time 16; don’t know now. In many Latin countries it was 15 (or is) or varies with the locality.

    In the US it varies by state. Some are quite young (under 18). Also, sometimes the father’s or man’s age comes into play (if both are “under age.”) The entire subject is fraught with nuance and complexity.

    So this Lolita stuff is just headline porn. The term “sex slaves” is tossed around but since these women/girls appear to all have been compensated from what I read, I’m not sure how slavery enters in to it. They weren’t unwilling prostitutes like some.

    As to blackmail, “bribery” and such, again, no real testimony or evidence. Powerful rich men (and a few women) have always behaved in a certain way. Feminists want abortions for 12 year olds and teens dressing like hookers, but embrace a curious view of female consent. I am not advocating young women or men engaging in sex, but like it or not, most of our ancestors likely became parents (if able) not long after puberty. Epstein’s tale is only “shame porn” for the masses.

    • Agree: restless94110
    • Replies: @vhrm
    Yeah, pretty much all of that.

    Oh, i mean, Epstein is worse than Hitler and Alyssa Milano is my copliot. (or whatever form of that is adequately self-effacing and centering of the vital perspectives and insights of #herToo).
    , @Dissident
    I agree with much of what you have written.

    Perhaps the most germane points in this discussion concerning Epstein and related issues can be divided into two parts and distilled as follows.

    PRIMARY: Whatever else may be said concerning salacious scandals and conspiracy theories of the J. Epstein variety, they clearly serve as a distraction from the real threats and scourges: interventionist, warmongering foreign policy; mass third-world immigration; the corrosive influence of the LGBTQ lobby; the ubiquity of abject smut; incitement of hatred and hostility toward whites/ license for non-white crime; the overall assault on decency and objective reality. Those, all aggressively promoted by the ruling corporate-government-military-lobbyist alliance* vastly overshadow any threat of (even the worst alleged) sexual improprieties of J. Epstein, H. Weinstein, Bill Clinton, Donald Trump, Joe Biden, et al. (Or even those of A. Weiner, D. Hastert, S. Ritter, et al.)

    And this distraction, whether intentional or not, can be most dangerous and pernicious.

    [*Coalition of Woke Capital; military-industrial complex; sexual deviants, degenerates and freaks; racial and ethnic grievance racketeers; education-indoctrination complex grifters; and any number of other often pernicious interests that conflict with those of non-cosmopolitan whites especially but ultimately of normal, decent, working people across racial, ethnic and religious lines.]

    SECONDARY:
    a.) Salacious scandals and conspiracy theories of the J. Epstein variety clearly appeal-to and feed any number of base instincts and psychological needs. This undoubtedly includes much prurient interest and even the vicarious gratification for such. Such functions may, alone, more-than-adequately account for the mass appeal and popularity of the sensationalism in-question.

    b.) To characterize Jeffrey Epstein as a degenerate in his own right? I think few, even among the most reasonable, measured and conscientious among us, would object much, if at all, to that much. To characterize Epstein's behavior with post-pubescent, adolescent females of borderline legal age as predatory? Perhaps even, in its own right, as depraved? Still well within the territory of the reasonable, and perhaps even entirely apt. But to characterize Epstein as a monstrous desecrator and slayer of utterly hapless, perfectly pristine, angelic, pre-pubescent little girls? That (as invoking the incendiary, hackneyed and abused perhaps beyond redemption pedophile epithet almost invariably amounts-to) is lurid and sensationalist; is not, to the best of my knowledge, supported by any credible, compelling evidence; and therefore, accordingly, fanciful.

  76. @Kratoklastes
    Oh, it's possible - but it results in a mess if it's a face.

    There was a hilarious fake story about the apologists 'creating a 3D image' from the shroud: this assumed no 'wrap' distortion and was basically giving a z-coordinate based on the level of discolouration of the cloth.

    No surprise then, that the result looked like a 14th century forger would expect a 1st century fictional man-god to look like... long hair, tidy beard, aquiline features - just like the guy who the forger was using as a model.

    The 'faithful' lapped it up like it was the One Cup and they were one of the Two Girls.

    Fortunately we can now do all sorts of quite-clever simulations of what an image looks like from a wrapped 3D object: when the dude has a beard, the wrapping becomes really obvious (and the ears are way way way far away from the sides of the face)... example ->

    https://www.dropbox.com/s/u7fl9m1rulj5k64/BeardedFlat.png?dl=1

    Nobody's even bothered to do an 'in vivo' replication: it's probably hard to get permission to actually do a mortuary wrapping on a dead human, and seeing what the result looks like. In the 90s I did a similar thing using a full-sized mannequin, but I never took photos. I should do it again, for a larf... this time with a 3D printed head (on the mannequin, not me).

    I’m a Ph.D. medievalist, and although medieval art isn’t my specialty, it’s obvious to me that the image of Christ on the Shroud of Turin is artistically high-medieval: the elongated face and the forked beard. Mid-14th-century sounds about right to me.

    Nonetheless, no one who has claimed that the Shroud is authentic is “imbecile” (your words) enough to claim that the image on the Shroud is supposed to be the impression left by a wrapped object (Christ’s body) in direct contact with the cloth. Rather, defenders of the Shroud’s authenticity maintain that the Shroud is, instead, a kind of photographic image (in the negative) not formed by direct contact with the cloth but reflecting accurately the distance between the cloth and the body. Raised parts of the body have stronger impressions than those more recessed.

    How the image got there is, so far, anyone’s guess (there have been plenty of theories), and perhaps a miracle was indeed involved. This is why the Shroud of Turin is so absolutely fascinating to so many people, including a few somewhat above the “imbecile” level of intelligence.

    • Agree: utu
    • Thanks: Manfred Arcane
  77. It is indeed quite remarkable, and even frightening, just how much of a difference the lens and the photographer using it can make. (To say nothing of all that can be done with post-processing, which was considerable even in the pre-digital age.)

    Might any of the phenomenon commented upon in this thread be evidenced in any of the following photos?
    3/14/1943 Kraków

    [MORE]
    https://media.gettyimages.com/photos/actor-alexander-gould-arrives-to-the-showtime-weeds-and-premiere-at-picture-id75929323

    These are all from my collection of boy photos I was taken with and saved to my collection. The only one of these boys that I know the “Jew-status” of is the third, the actor Alexander Gould. At least in so far as both he identifies himself as well as how others would identify him, is Gould unquestionably a Jew.*

    The fourth and final photo I have tagged, from when I saved it, as that of child-actor Justin Baric. Searching for that name now turned-up little beyond a list of films that he appeared in, the most acclaimed appearing to have been the 2008 release Midnight Movie. Of the few photos I could find tagged with the “Justin Baric”, none were even similar enough to the one I posted above to be able to confirm that they were of the same subject.

    I am glad I saved the photo when I did, now as much as a decade or more ago. Not only has it remained one of my favorites but by providing an illustration of a desired style when shopping for eyeglasses, the particular photo-in-question may have even served me tangibly. I can only hope that its subject, now long past the exquisite yet ever-so-fleeting charm so compellingly captured in the photo, has grown into a happy, healthy, well-adjusted man of decent character.

    Incidentally, several years ago I briefly dabbled in photography. My nearly singular motivation, interest and goal was to be able to candidly capture the unique magic of boys whenever and wherever I might encounter it. Unfortunately this meant, as I suspect the reader has likely surmised by now, that I did not get very far.

    The legality is quite clear: photographing subjects of any age as long as they are in or visible from a public place. As is the harmlessness of such a pursuit. The reality, alas, remains that anyone who pursues candid, random photography of minors will inevitably find himself, at best, a pariah. (Including, no less, from many of the very same people who are just fine with instructing tender young ones– boys as well as girls– in the joys and virtues of buggery. Yep, this is the inverted world we live in.) So I grudgingly resigned myself to going back to merely enjoying the photographic efforts of others.

    [*I make the qualifications I did because (a) while I have no particular reason to doubt the relevant aspect of Mr. Gould’s genetic ancestry, I also have not examined it at all; and (b) I note that the Conservative Judaism [sic] that Mr. Gould is affiliated with is, in reality, but a poor substitution for the authentic article (i.e., true Judaism).]

    • Replies: @Dissident
    https://www.flickr.com/photos/howya/9721044181/
  78. “As I may have mentioned once or twice before…”

    More like four or five times, Mr. Sailer. I take it you were inspired by the NYT Negresses who incessantly talk about their hair.

    “a huge national controversy”

    Over a governor closing down the beaches because of a lack of social distancing etiquette and the disregard for health protocols?

    “has been sparked by photographs of beaches taken with telephoto lenses, which, as you know and I know, but apparently nobody else knows, exaggerate how crowded a scene is by exaggerating the size/closeness of distant figures.”

    Or more like how you are exaggerating something to rein in those fine posters who are upset with you agreeing that Covid-19 is NOT a hoax.

  79. @anon
    Can you take all that photographic jargon and explain in plain English how a person can make themselves look better in a selfie?

    anon, if you are a guy use a screen shot of George Cluney. If you are a girl use a screen shot of Jennifer Garner. This works for all those dating sites.Skip the technical stuff.

  80. @donut
    What happened ? I lost track , did I miss anything ? I know my mother f**king Dr.s only want to talk to me on the phone . 'Member reading about the Doctors back in the day when they would minister to the dying knowing they were at risk ? Nowadays the cock s**kers want to get paid for making a phone call . F**k them all , with my dying breath I pray that a cleansing plague burns through them all , let them all rot and die with foul stinking infected boils . And having forsaken any god let them call on Mastercard . LOL.

    donut, see you vented without having to lay on a shrink’s couch. Feel Better? Send Steve your co-pay.

    • Replies: @donut
    I would but instead I think I'll sue him for violating my HIPPA rights .
  81. @JohnnyWalker123
    Epstein had his own office at Harvard. He had his own key card to give him unlimited access to the building.


    https://twitter.com/RyanAFournier/status/1256673066408697858

    https://twitter.com/EmeraldRobinson/status/1256583404293742593


    Apparently, Harvard faculty flew on Epstein's "Lolita Express" plane. They also visited his homes in NY, Florida, and New Mexico.

    They visited him in jail too (after an arrest for child sex crimes), which is sort of interesting.

    Harvard admitted that many faculty members wined and dined with Epstein, even after he was convicted of child sex acts in 2008
     

    “A number of the Harvard faculty members we interviewed also acknowledged that they visited Epstein in his homes in New York, Florida, New Mexico or the Virgin Islands, visited him in jail or on work release, or traveled on one of his planes. Faculty members told us that they undertook these off-campus activities primarily in their personal capacities rather than as representatives of Harvard. These actions did not implicate Harvard rules or policies,” the investigation concluded.

     

    By the way, they also visited Epstein's island. The island with that weird Satanic/Occult temple.

    http://www.secretunknown.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/epstein-temple-1035x425.jpg

    I wonder what they were doing there....

    Hmmm......

    Does anybody have an explanation for this?

    Another amusing and pointed treatment of the story, from Noam Cohen in WIRED.

    Harvard came first in Epstein’s mind, which, I suppose, says something about its reputation among status-obsessed faux-intellectuals. When Harvard was accepting Esptein’s donations, it was dealing with a disreputable character; MIT, by contrast, was dealing with a convicted sex offender. But had MIT taken Harvard’s experience to heart, it would have realized that Epstein wasn’t going to be easy to deal with, even if he could seem to be begging the school to take his money.

    Surprise: Jeffrey Epstein was not, in fact, a selfless donor looking to promote the advancement of science.

    https://www.wired.com/story/for-jeffrey-epstein-mit-was-just-a-safety-school/

  82. @Muggles
    More Epstein tabloid nonsense.

    I have no idea of what he did or didn't do, and neither, apparently, does anyone else who opines about him.

    "Underage" is a legal matter, technically. France has long had no actual age of consent, though that seems to be changing and I understand was somewhat circumstantial. Actual pedophilia (below puberty) was illegal I think. In Britain the age of consent was for a long time 16; don't know now. In many Latin countries it was 15 (or is) or varies with the locality.

    In the US it varies by state. Some are quite young (under 18). Also, sometimes the father's or man's age comes into play (if both are "under age.") The entire subject is fraught with nuance and complexity.

    So this Lolita stuff is just headline porn. The term "sex slaves" is tossed around but since these women/girls appear to all have been compensated from what I read, I'm not sure how slavery enters in to it. They weren't unwilling prostitutes like some.

    As to blackmail, "bribery" and such, again, no real testimony or evidence. Powerful rich men (and a few women) have always behaved in a certain way. Feminists want abortions for 12 year olds and teens dressing like hookers, but embrace a curious view of female consent. I am not advocating young women or men engaging in sex, but like it or not, most of our ancestors likely became parents (if able) not long after puberty. Epstein's tale is only "shame porn" for the masses.

    Yeah, pretty much all of that.

    Oh, i mean, Epstein is worse than Hitler and Alyssa Milano is my copliot. (or whatever form of that is adequately self-effacing and centering of the vital perspectives and insights of #herToo).

  83. @Muggles
    More Epstein tabloid nonsense.

    I have no idea of what he did or didn't do, and neither, apparently, does anyone else who opines about him.

    "Underage" is a legal matter, technically. France has long had no actual age of consent, though that seems to be changing and I understand was somewhat circumstantial. Actual pedophilia (below puberty) was illegal I think. In Britain the age of consent was for a long time 16; don't know now. In many Latin countries it was 15 (or is) or varies with the locality.

    In the US it varies by state. Some are quite young (under 18). Also, sometimes the father's or man's age comes into play (if both are "under age.") The entire subject is fraught with nuance and complexity.

    So this Lolita stuff is just headline porn. The term "sex slaves" is tossed around but since these women/girls appear to all have been compensated from what I read, I'm not sure how slavery enters in to it. They weren't unwilling prostitutes like some.

    As to blackmail, "bribery" and such, again, no real testimony or evidence. Powerful rich men (and a few women) have always behaved in a certain way. Feminists want abortions for 12 year olds and teens dressing like hookers, but embrace a curious view of female consent. I am not advocating young women or men engaging in sex, but like it or not, most of our ancestors likely became parents (if able) not long after puberty. Epstein's tale is only "shame porn" for the masses.

    I agree with much of what you have written.

    Perhaps the most germane points in this discussion concerning Epstein and related issues can be divided into two parts and distilled as follows.

    PRIMARY: Whatever else may be said concerning salacious scandals and conspiracy theories of the J. Epstein variety, they clearly serve as a distraction from the real threats and scourges: interventionist, warmongering foreign policy; mass third-world immigration; the corrosive influence of the LGBTQ lobby; the ubiquity of abject smut; incitement of hatred and hostility toward whites/ license for non-white crime; the overall assault on decency and objective reality. Those, all aggressively promoted by the ruling corporate-government-military-lobbyist alliance* vastly overshadow any threat of (even the worst alleged) sexual improprieties of J. Epstein, H. Weinstein, Bill Clinton, Donald Trump, Joe Biden, et al. (Or even those of A. Weiner, D. Hastert, S. Ritter, et al.)

    And this distraction, whether intentional or not, can be most dangerous and pernicious.

    [MORE]

    [*Coalition of Woke Capital; military-industrial complex; sexual deviants, degenerates and freaks; racial and ethnic grievance racketeers; education-indoctrination complex grifters; and any number of other often pernicious interests that conflict with those of non-cosmopolitan whites especially but ultimately of normal, decent, working people across racial, ethnic and religious lines.]

    SECONDARY:
    a.) Salacious scandals and conspiracy theories of the J. Epstein variety clearly appeal-to and feed any number of base instincts and psychological needs. This undoubtedly includes much prurient interest and even the vicarious gratification for such. Such functions may, alone, more-than-adequately account for the mass appeal and popularity of the sensationalism in-question.

    b.) To characterize Jeffrey Epstein as a degenerate in his own right? I think few, even among the most reasonable, measured and conscientious among us, would object much, if at all, to that much. To characterize Epstein’s behavior with post-pubescent, adolescent females of borderline legal age as predatory? Perhaps even, in its own right, as depraved? Still well within the territory of the reasonable, and perhaps even entirely apt. But to characterize Epstein as a monstrous desecrator and slayer of utterly hapless, perfectly pristine, angelic, pre-pubescent little girls? That (as invoking the incendiary, hackneyed and abused perhaps beyond redemption pedophile epithet almost invariably amounts-to) is lurid and sensationalist; is not, to the best of my knowledge, supported by any credible, compelling evidence; and therefore, accordingly, fanciful.

  84. @Dissident
    It is indeed quite remarkable, and even frightening, just how much of a difference the lens and the photographer using it can make. (To say nothing of all that can be done with post-processing, which was considerable even in the pre-digital age.)

    Might any of the phenomenon commented upon in this thread be evidenced in any of the following photos?
    https://www.flickr.com/photos/milancvetanovic/40847514921/

    https://i.imgur.com/Zbwap2h.jpg
    https://media.gettyimages.com/photos/actor-alexander-gould-arrives-to-the-showtime-weeds-and-premiere-at-picture-id75929323
    https://i.imgur.com/RyJ6vFh.jpg

    These are all from my collection of boy photos I was taken with and saved to my collection. The only one of these boys that I know the "Jew-status" of is the third, the actor Alexander Gould. At least in so far as both he identifies himself as well as how others would identify him, is Gould unquestionably a Jew.*

    The fourth and final photo I have tagged, from when I saved it, as that of child-actor Justin Baric. Searching for that name now turned-up little beyond a list of films that he appeared in, the most acclaimed appearing to have been the 2008 release Midnight Movie. Of the few photos I could find tagged with the "Justin Baric", none were even similar enough to the one I posted above to be able to confirm that they were of the same subject.

    I am glad I saved the photo when I did, now as much as a decade or more ago. Not only has it remained one of my favorites but by providing an illustration of a desired style when shopping for eyeglasses, the particular photo-in-question may have even served me tangibly. I can only hope that its subject, now long past the exquisite yet ever-so-fleeting charm so compellingly captured in the photo, has grown into a happy, healthy, well-adjusted man of decent character.

    Incidentally, several years ago I briefly dabbled in photography. My nearly singular motivation, interest and goal was to be able to candidly capture the unique magic of boys whenever and wherever I might encounter it. Unfortunately this meant, as I suspect the reader has likely surmised by now, that I did not get very far.

    The legality is quite clear: photographing subjects of any age as long as they are in or visible from a public place. As is the harmlessness of such a pursuit. The reality, alas, remains that anyone who pursues candid, random photography of minors will inevitably find himself, at best, a pariah. (Including, no less, from many of the very same people who are just fine with instructing tender young ones-- boys as well as girls-- in the joys and virtues of buggery. Yep, this is the inverted world we live in.) So I grudgingly resigned myself to going back to merely enjoying the photographic efforts of others.

    [*I make the qualifications I did because (a) while I have no particular reason to doubt the relevant aspect of Mr. Gould's genetic ancestry, I also have not examined it at all; and (b) I note that the Conservative Judaism [sic] that Mr. Gould is affiliated with is, in reality, but a poor substitution for the authentic article (i.e., true Judaism).]

    Hasidics

    • Replies: @Dissident
    Did not intend to actually post this; was merely testing how link to Flickr photo page would appear. But upon submitting comment, received "wrong type" error message, only to then discover, once page had refreshed, that the photo posted and I was given no edit window. Have encountered this bug before, when posting only text and regular links (not to photos).
  85. @Dissident
    https://www.flickr.com/photos/howya/9721044181/

    Did not intend to actually post this; was merely testing how link to Flickr photo page would appear. But upon submitting comment, received “wrong type” error message, only to then discover, once page had refreshed, that the photo posted and I was given no edit window. Have encountered this bug before, when posting only text and regular links (not to photos).

    • Replies: @res
    Thanks. I posted about this in the bugs post for the site since I have been seeing the same thing.
    https://www.unz.com/announcement/bugs-suggestions/#comment-3881891
  86. @Buffalo Joe
    donut, see you vented without having to lay on a shrink's couch. Feel Better? Send Steve your co-pay.

    I would but instead I think I’ll sue him for violating my HIPPA rights .

    • Replies: @Buffalo Joe
    donut, go for it.
  87. @Dissident
    Did not intend to actually post this; was merely testing how link to Flickr photo page would appear. But upon submitting comment, received "wrong type" error message, only to then discover, once page had refreshed, that the photo posted and I was given no edit window. Have encountered this bug before, when posting only text and regular links (not to photos).

    Thanks. I posted about this in the bugs post for the site since I have been seeing the same thing.
    https://www.unz.com/announcement/bugs-suggestions/#comment-3881891

    • Replies: @res
    Heh. I had the same bug happen to me on that comment.

    P.S. While this one worked fine. Interesting.

    , @Dissident
    Thank you. Just to be clear concerning the photo, I did not mean to suggest that I had any reason to be ashamed of it, or to feel a need to apologize for having posted it, per se. I was just mindful of the fact that I had already posted several images in this thread that could be viewed as only tangentially on-topic, and concerned that my having posted another-- with neither any accompanying explanation or context nor use of the MORE! tag, might perhaps not be appreciated. (I will take this opportunity to lament that more people do not make use of the MORE! function. To do so when posting more than, say, two images or videos, or any comment beyond a certain length, would appear to be a fairly simple courtesy that would no doubt be appreciated by many.)

    The bug-in-question, which I have also encountered only infrequently and erratically, does indeed seem to be a quite odd and even capricious one. When I first encountered it, I had thought it was due to having too many links in my post. Subsequently, I found that the bug-in-question could also be triggered by comments with fewer links or perhaps even with none. But the overwhelming majority of my comments-- including those with a greater number of links-- would not trigger said bug.
  88. @res
    Thanks. I posted about this in the bugs post for the site since I have been seeing the same thing.
    https://www.unz.com/announcement/bugs-suggestions/#comment-3881891

    Heh. I had the same bug happen to me on that comment.

    P.S. While this one worked fine. Interesting.

  89. @res
    Thanks. I posted about this in the bugs post for the site since I have been seeing the same thing.
    https://www.unz.com/announcement/bugs-suggestions/#comment-3881891

    Thank you. Just to be clear concerning the photo, I did not mean to suggest that I had any reason to be ashamed of it, or to feel a need to apologize for having posted it, per se. I was just mindful of the fact that I had already posted several images in this thread that could be viewed as only tangentially on-topic, and concerned that my having posted another– with neither any accompanying explanation or context nor use of the MORE! tag, might perhaps not be appreciated. (I will take this opportunity to lament that more people do not make use of the MORE! function. To do so when posting more than, say, two images or videos, or any comment beyond a certain length, would appear to be a fairly simple courtesy that would no doubt be appreciated by many.)

    The bug-in-question, which I have also encountered only infrequently and erratically, does indeed seem to be a quite odd and even capricious one. When I first encountered it, I had thought it was due to having too many links in my post. Subsequently, I found that the bug-in-question could also be triggered by comments with fewer links or perhaps even with none. But the overwhelming majority of my comments– including those with a greater number of links— would not trigger said bug.

  90. @donut
    I would but instead I think I'll sue him for violating my HIPPA rights .

    donut, go for it.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS
PastClassics
The unspoken statistical reality of urban crime over the last quarter century.
Talk TV sensationalists and axe-grinding ideologues have fallen for a myth of immigrant lawlessness.
Which superpower is more threatened by its “extractive elites”?
How a Young Syndicate Lawyer from Chicago Earned a Fortune Looting the Property of the Japanese-Americans, then Lived...
Becker update V1.3.2