Nah.
He's just two-dimensional.
(
Je suis un vagabond is an unfunny, up your own arse middle class knob,
Tue 2 Oct 2007, 16:13,
archived)
heh
So the 'seam' is actually light bouncing off the edge of two-ply?
(
Manic can teach you the secret of fire,
Tue 2 Oct 2007, 16:15,
archived)
are you serious?
the "seam" is the boy's shirt
I wonder about those two red arrows though...
*wonders*
(
Your watch is BACK,
Tue 2 Oct 2007, 16:16,
archived)
you have a good eye, sir
I put it down to the reflective qualities of the British tan, myself.
(
Manic can teach you the secret of fire,
Tue 2 Oct 2007, 16:18,
archived)
How is that the boy's shirt?
Does he have a step in his neck?
(
Master Of Turnips. Only gays and morons believe in ghosts.,
Tue 2 Oct 2007, 16:20,
archived)
it's the sleeve
showing up from under the jacket, like the girl in the front.
Game over man. Game over!
(
Your watch is BACK,
Tue 2 Oct 2007, 16:22,
archived)
The image abounds with unlikely-looking sharp edges, not just on Gordon.
It's probably just been put through a slight sharpen filter.
(
_Felix 's school of dance and occult sciences,
Tue 2 Oct 2007, 16:17,
archived)
It's the girl's head
glued to his jacket that I find most suspicious.
(
Afinkawan Yes I can hear you Clem Fandango,
Tue 2 Oct 2007, 16:19,
archived)
Most photographers do sharpen their images slightly.
The flat, bunched up effects here are what you'd get with a telephoto lens too.
It's the elements in front of Gordon you'd check for shoppery, and I can't see any signs there.
(
wheelybird mreee!,
Tue 2 Oct 2007, 16:21,
archived)
and some digital SLR cameras are affected by oversharpening
and what wheely siad about the people in front.
(
Your watch is BACK,
Tue 2 Oct 2007, 16:25,
archived)