We re doing biiiig circles... (We had most of this data collection already available on MJHD on August 11, 2009) <!-- s;) -->;)<!-- s;) --> As to the timing of the photo publication - seems we have to get technical first.
Hope that Ben and Michael, you both enjoy.
OK, let's go.
Question: Is it possible to determine the creation date of the famous photographs?
Answer: Yes, indeed, we can determine the creation date of a photograph.
How's that feasible?
As we have set our minds on digitalization processes for about every information we are dealing with these days, photographs too have become nothing else than "digital data". They are consisting of pixels, all these small points on a screen, that may drive us mad when they are not where we would like them to appear. These pixels are representing digital data like your emails in cc: mail or your documents in your desktop file explorer. When you create your files, there is a creation date, when you modify them, there is a modification date.
Same applies for digital photographs.
The description of "when and how" data for a digital photograph may be found in the EXIF data, a kind of "passport" appendix to the photograph file. This technical image "passport" is a little bit more detailed than the data for your Windows Explorer files.
The EXIF data of one of the famous photos (I'll go for the ET Online HD version of picture #4) are telling us the following. I am not citing in full length and I will only pick out some interesting details.
For a first round, I am assuming the EXIF data are true as provided.
2) Upload to desktop and manipulation of digital material via Adobe Fireworks software.
It is available as a standalone product or bundled with Adobe Creative Suite. Fireworks' user interface is consistent with the rest of Adobe Creative Suite, similar to that of Adobe Photoshop.
Creator Tool Adobe Fireworks CS3 Create Date 2009:06:25 16:22:43-07:00
Metadata Date 2009:06:25 16:22:43-07:00
3) Creation of additional meta data via Adobe XMP software - like text etc. XMP is meant to create, modify and store "meta data" of an image, thus the technical description - Adobe XMP is a software used for this purpose.
XMP — this group of metadata is encoded in 17,845 bytes (17.4k)
XMP Toolkit Adobe XMP Core 4.1-c034 46.272976, Sat Jan 27 2007 22:37:37
Make NIKON CORPORATION
Camera Model Name NIKON D200 Modify Date 2009:06:25 23:31:53Z
So all of the above combined with what we know in addition boils down to the
following timeline:
Photo created:
Date: June 25, 2009 12:08:08PM (timezone is 7 hours behind GMT)
Date/Time Original 2009:06:25 12:08:08-07:00
911 called at 12:21.
Paramedics arrived at 12:26.
Michael declared dead 2:26 pm.
Photo uploaded to desktop:
Create Date 2009:06:25 16:22:43-07:00 (4:22 pm)
One of the first tweets about the published photo appeared before 6:03 pm.
viewtopic.php?f=145&t=18053&p=309514#p309463
Photo meta data supplemented for image database:
Modify Date 2009:06:25 23:31:53Z (11:31 pm)
Conclusion after first round: there was not much time left for shopping the picture, to be exact: 1 hour and 41 minutes - given the EXIF data and the rest of data were true.
Round two - question:
How come that the image creation should have taken place at 12:08 and not after 12:21 when paramedics had officially arrived?
Answer alternatives: 1) The EXIF data are false - June 25 being correct but the time set was wrong - which should not happen for a professional paparazzi photographer being paid at a 60% commission for a sold photograph upon which his agency has a legal property claim and may have to prove this.
2) The EXIF data are false - the time set was correct but the date set was wrong - which shouldn't happen to a professional either.
3) The EXIF data are correct - June 25 being correct but the take did not place in Los Angeles thus did happen in another time zone.
4) The EXIF data are correct - June 25 being correct and the time set is correct but the take did not place on the street but beforehand in the mansion's courtyard.
This means that not only Ben / Chris were in but also the paramedics.
For the staff of the house to notice what was going on - no problem since there is no window on the left side of the ambulance and it was parked in parallel to the wall inside the gates.
The shots of the red car could have been taken beforehand. Everything well prepared just to fit the "official shots" in. 1.5 hourse could be sufficient time for a professional photoshopper oops creative artist. rhhhmmhrhrhrmm....
However selling in parallel an egg that is not yet fully painted for the plan of half of a lifetime to come true?
rhhhmmhrhrhrmm....
And what about waiting for 2 hours until the declaration of the passing to start working on the picture on a desktop if it is THE hot sales item of that day?
rhhhmmhrhrhrmm....
(...)This is partly what I think the theory is but using or going off what 2good2btrue has already said.
If MJ did take two different shots on different days as Ben was about to say ("the other da...") then they could possibly have done it in some kind of set, but to make it more realistic it makes sense to do it outside where someone would stage a fake pic (so use the same REAL scenery you would use for the real thing...in this case June 25th). But they couldn't have done it outside MJ's house or someone would of noticed so they must of done it inside his gates.
Also is it possible to get the pic we have now without having to use the ambulance on both days?
What I mean is if there were two days
The other day: was just the reflection picture (so taking a pic outside of the ambulance)
June 25th: Was the ambulance pic (so inside the ambulance with possibly a real body)...(and it must of been a real body because if it was a dummy then the paramedics would of been on the hoax and there wouldn't be a need to change the pic in any way)
So you put those two together (the outside scenery and the inside of a the ambulance and you get the pic we have now...possibly?)
I am right or wrong TS...can you debunk this theory.
This is what I also believe in.
One day they shot an inside photo with fake paramedics - actors, the other day they shot a live scene in front of the Carolwood gates - with actually nobody inside or at least MJ sitting on a stretcher. <!-- s:D -->:D<!-- s:D -->
Actually when I first saw the "death photo" I thought it must have been done in the EVENING <!-- s:shock: -->:shock:<!-- s:shock: --> and a few years ago! I even thought it could have been a real photo when MJ was rushed to the hospital in 1990's due to his chest problems... These red reflections looked to me like some street lights, like neon lights.
The other thing that struck me in this short film was actually the terrible acting on the part of all the people surrounding the backing ambulance... It looks like from a poor quality reality show.... Sorry MJ... <!-- s --><!-- s -->
First and foremost I would like to thank TS for the redirect.
It's a great honor, and I feel like I'm standing in front of millions accepting some type of award.
And anyone can quote me on this, so I'll go ahead and put the little quote thingys on it for you:
"If no one payed any attention to the picture in 09, then we have learned to make sure we leave nothing out. Because there was no post about it in 09 right?
It was only talked about briefly in the chat room. It intrigued me. SO I researched it.
Also did anyone think that perhaps TS was not in the chat room at the time
and didn't see the topic being brought up? No instead we decide to attack the person who's topic was used as a redirect.
MJ does play fair. MJ loves all of us."
Probably means nothing but, my post was posted Feb 25th, 2011 at 6:25
2+2+5+2+1+1 = 13 = 1+3 = 4
6+2+5 = 13 = 1+3 = 4
4+4 = 8
This was NOT planned. beLIEve what you may...but
Ever since I have started researching this, I have gotten a lot of 7s and 8s.
I'm starting to find that I feel somewhat like Jim Carrey in 23. Lol.
Wow Grace, your blue post a few posts back is amazing! I never knew this data was available - I'm very impressed that you knew about it and were able to locate it (being the non techie person that I am!). Brings up a whole load more questions I think.
I don't think anyone commented on Purelove's pic find. Is it simply someone's silly doctoring of the pic--bald head, no real ear, long hair just laying there underneath. I guess it's nothing.
Thank you MJonmind for reminding about the picture I posted. It seems like people do not read what everyone posts and that's the reason why we have this discussion for 24 pages. Thank you for realizing what I was trying to say and show. This picture is one of the pictures I found out btw all of our ambulance pictures. And this picture was there on the very first day like the other ambulance pictures. So I wonder what's wrong with this picture. Is this photoshopped of the photoshopped picture? Or is this someone else in the ambulance? Or is that a reflection of outside on MJ's face? But if it is a reflection, then why don't we have the same reflection on the other pictures? What do you guys think about it? TS I would be appreciated if you share your opinion about this picture. Thank you.
@Grace thanks for bringing up the EFIX info, we have that too and I totally forgot about that. So to me it makes sense that the following happened:
Ben and his crew were there "the other day" to take some shots of the red car for the reflection and probably to talk some things through for hoax day.
Ben and crew arrive on the morning of June 25th, take the picture through the window of some other ambulance. They can make sure it's perfect because the ambulance is standing still and maybe doesn't even have tinted windows. They can make sure there is no other reflection this way, so that they can add the reflection of the red car later on.
911 was called, EMT's arrived and stayed at the mansion for quite some time. I have always thought that was odd, since you would take a patient with cardiac arrest to the hospital a.s.a.p. Probably they had to talk some stuff through and yes, that means that the EMT's are in on it, and in my opinion there is no way they can't be in on it until someone shows me a logical explanation about how they won't have to be.
The ambulance is backing out to make sure they will have the ambulance in the position they want. If the ambulance would not have been backing out, the the window would have been pointed towards the streets with lots of people, firetruck etc, which would make it impossible to get a matching reflection. I also think it was driving that slow because someone was giving the driver instructions about how and where to turn, to make sure the ambulance would have the right position when Chris made the picture.
You would still have the ambulance at the mansion which they used to make the picture, but there was a huge ass truck 2 days later leaving the house, and it looks as though an ambulance would fit into it:
Maybe Mike was there on June 25 and was really in the ambulance disguised as EMT for example, but that would mean that the closing down of LAX that morning had nothing to do with the hoax. I personally think that ike hightailed it that morning, and gave instructions when needed through the phone. Murray was after all on the phone most of the time.
"For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places."
I don't think anyone commented on Purelove's pic find. Is it simply someone's silly doctoring of the pic--bald head, no real ear, long hair just laying there underneath. I guess it's nothing.
Thank you MJonmind for reminding about the picture I posted. It seems like people do not read what everyone posts and that's the reason why we have this discussion for 24 pages. Thank you for realizing what I was trying to say and show. This picture is one of the pictures I found out btw all of our ambulance pictures. And this picture was there on the very first day like the other ambulance pictures. So I wonder what's wrong with this picture. Is this photoshopped of the photoshopped picture? Or is this someone else in the ambulance? Or is that a reflection of outside on MJ's face? But if it is a reflection, then why don't we have the same reflection on the other pictures? What do you guys think about it? TS I would be appreciated if you share your opinion about this picture. Thank you.
I remember that one very well!
This pic was shown by a person from this forum (or the other one) to a professional paramedic to get their opinion about the whole scene. This person blurred MJ face so as not to suggest anything. So this is actually the MJ pic with his face blurred by one of the forum members... (I'm sorry, I can't remember who this person was - If you are reading this - please stand up! <!-- s --><!-- s -->
I just thought of something else. If the picture is a photoshop, which we think it is, and it has different layers, then would the EFIX be of the background picture? Because maybe the reflection picture was taken at 12:08 pm and the inside of the ambulance "the other day". Does anyone know if you can decide which layer would be the main layer that gives the info, or that it is automatically the background picture? Or is it the one you open, edit and safe, regardless of where you will put the layer of the original picture?
I hope you get what I mean... If someone can tell me how I can find the EFIX info of a picture, I can try it myself.
"For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places."
I have some news from a photographer. He told me that it is impossible to take a picture with tinted windows. Logically, if you cannot see inside you cannot see anyting when you take a picture. Example. Limos.. this photographer takes lots of wedding pictures. Limos have tinted windows, he cannot take any picture because the picture will turn out black. I asked him if he can give me an example so i can post here to show you guys, he will try. I do not know him personally, but he is a friend of a friend. He said the picture of Michael was taken another day, just the way enstad said it. I hope i wrote his name correctly. and it was doctored. I hope this can clarify some incertitudes.
Did you see this post of mine? Here are other celebrities' ambo pictures. But I realized that all of these pictures were taken from the back window of the ambulance. The back windows are tinted too in the ambulances? Or is it only the side windows? Because if the back windows are tinted also, these prove that pictures can be taken with tinted windows.
I was checking out for other celebrities' ambulance pictures to make a comparison btw Michael's and them. I found Zsa Zsa Gabor's and Britney Spears' ambulance pictures. Britney's were taken at night but still it can give us an idea if pictures can be taken from tinted windows. And Gabor's pictures are good examples about how the background and the camera reflects on the window. Here they are.
I don't think anyone commented on Purelove's pic find. Is it simply someone's silly doctoring of the pic--bald head, no real ear, long hair just laying there underneath. I guess it's nothing.
Thank you MJonmind for reminding about the picture I posted. It seems like people do not read what everyone posts and that's the reason why we have this discussion for 24 pages. Thank you for realizing what I was trying to say and show. This picture is one of the pictures I found out btw all of our ambulance pictures. And this picture was there on the very first day like the other ambulance pictures. So I wonder what's wrong with this picture. Is this photoshopped of the photoshopped picture? Or is this someone else in the ambulance? Or is that a reflection of outside on MJ's face? But if it is a reflection, then why don't we have the same reflection on the other pictures? What do you guys think about it? TS I would be appreciated if you share your opinion about this picture. Thank you.
I remember that one very well!
This pic was shown by a person from this forum (or the other one) to a professional paramedic to get their opinion about the whole scene. This person blurred MJ face so as not to suggest anything. So this is actually the MJ pic with his face blurred by one of the forum members... (I'm sorry, I can't remember who this person was - If you are reading this - please stand up! <!-- s --><!-- s -->
Thank you for explaining the situation. I've never heard it was made by a believer. I do remember we were talking about this picture and this person in the pic is someone else and they photoshopped MJ's face on that person. That is the story of the pic I remember. I guess I missed the part it was made by a believer.
Staring at the ambu picture for almost 30 min, I still can't figure it out.The mask and the bag valve of the resustication kit doesn't look familiair, I mean I've never seen a blue oxygen mask like that before (may be common in the US?). The tube which connects the mask and the bag valve seems too long. May be I'm wrong and is this a regular ambu resustication kit <!-- s:? -->:?<!-- s:? -->
Just thinking The song "Behind The Mask" could also be meant literally <!-- s --><!-- s --> <!-- s;) -->;)<!-- s;) -->
Thank you for explaining the situation. I've never heard it was made by a believer. I do remember we were talking about this picture and this person in the pic is someone else and they photoshopped MJ's face on that person. That is the story of the pic I remember. I guess I missed the part it was made by a believer.
They say someone posted it into the paramedic forum to get the answer... They blurred MJ's face for the reasons I stated above. <!-- s:) -->:)<!-- s:) -->
Thank you for explaining the situation. I've never heard it was made by a believer. I do remember we were talking about this picture and this person in the pic is someone else and they photoshopped MJ's face on that person. That is the story of the pic I remember. I guess I missed the part it was made by a believer.
They say someone posted it into the paramedic forum to get the answer... They blurred MJ's face for the reasons I stated above. <!-- s:) -->:)<!-- s:) -->
The issue was discussed on the other forum. That must be the reason why I missed it. I'm not a member there so I guess I can not view the page but still thank you so much for the link and the info. <!-- s:) -->:)<!-- s:) -->
Staring at the ambu picture for almost 30 min, I still can't figure it out.The mask and the bag valve of the resustication kit doesn't look familiair, I mean I've never seen a blue oxygen mask like that before (may be common in the US?). The tube which connects the mask and the bag valve seems too long. May be I'm wrong and is this a regular ambu resustication kit <!-- s:? -->:?<!-- s:? -->
Just thinking The song "Behind The Mask" could also be meant literally <!-- s --><!-- s --> <!-- s;) -->;)<!-- s;) -->
I'm not sure exactly what you're asking, but the picture you posted uses a mask with the BVM. In the MJ picture, the patient is intubated and the tube is connected to the BVM. There is no mask in the ambulance photo. Does that help?
Okay, so I found the EFIX stuff and tried some things and whatever you do with the picture is stored in the history of the EFIX file. Not sure if that is also the case when you import your pictures directly from your camera to Fireworks, add layers and file info and then save, but as far as i can see it will show that you shopped it. But if that would be the case, there is a very logical solution:
Shop the picture as much as you want, print it and take a picture from the shopped picture. Problem solved.
I did find out that the picture is indeed probably not photoshopped TS, because Ben seems to prefer Fireworks. Figures... <!-- s --><!-- s -->
"For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places."
I have some news from a photographer. He told me that it is impossible to take a picture with tinted windows. Logically, if you cannot see inside you cannot see anyting when you take a picture. Example. Limos.. this photographer takes lots of wedding pictures. Limos have tinted windows, he cannot take any picture because the picture will turn out black. I asked him if he can give me an example so i can post here to show you guys, he will try. I do not know him personally, but he is a friend of a friend. He said the picture of Michael was taken another day, just the way enstad said it. I hope i wrote his name correctly. and it was doctored. I hope this can clarify some incertitudes.
Did you see this post of mine? Here are other celebrities' ambo pictures. But I realized that all of these pictures were taken from the back window of the ambulance. The back windows are tinted too in the ambulances? Or is it only the side windows? Because if the back windows are tinted also, these prove that pictures can be taken with tinted windows.
I was checking out for other celebrities' ambulance pictures to make a comparison btw Michael's and them. I found Zsa Zsa Gabor's and Britney Spears' ambulance pictures. Britney's were taken at night but still it can give us an idea if pictures can be taken from tinted windows. And Gabor's pictures are good examples about how the background and the camera reflects on the window. Here they are.
The ambulances windows in the back are tinted. If you take a picture where the glass is not tinted in the front, you need to be in a certain angle ,yes you can take pictures and you get the results. But if you take the picture directly on the black tinted glass you do not get anything, just a blur... In Montreal the windows are tinted back and on the sides, in front they are not, so anyone can take a picture by the front and get the to take a nice picture.
This truck is very large, within that property there are plenty of space for that truck between and the back and hit the front, the ambulance went slowly in setback for " give time to the photographer to take photos "
I have some news from a photographer. He told me that it is impossible to take a picture with tinted windows. Logically, if you cannot see inside you cannot see anyting when you take a picture. Example. Limos.. this photographer takes lots of wedding pictures. Limos have tinted windows, he cannot take any picture because the picture will turn out black. I asked him if he can give me an example so i can post here to show you guys, he will try. I do not know him personally, but he is a friend of a friend. He said the picture of Michael was taken another day, just the way enstad said it. I hope i wrote his name correctly. and it was doctored. I hope this can clarify some incertitudes.
I'm confused now <!-- s:? -->:?<!-- s:? --> , i have a friend who is a photographer, he works for magazines and stuff, i asked him to look at the pictures and he said that it is possible to take the picture, he added that you can see the reflection of the flash light in the glass, it's the round light spots you see at the right side of the window (it looks like sunlight drops).
And if the inside lights in the ambulance are on, (as i presume they are) it's even easier to take the picture.
He also said that it was'nt one picture taken.( but we knew that already). and that the leaves are photoshopped.
My Question: why they could take pictures of britney Spears and miss Gabor , was this ambulance with clear glass <!-- s:?: -->:?:<!-- s:?: -->
I hope your friend of a friend can get this picture ,i'm looking forward to them ,and i'm very curious. <!-- s;) -->;)<!-- s;) -->
I explained it, if they took the pictures from the front windows, it is not tinted the pictures can come out. Ifyou take them where the tinted windows are it does not work. If you cannot see inside with tinted windows how can the camera capture something. Your friend is a photographer, why don't u aske him to take a pic of a limo with tinted windows if he says it can be, you can prove it too. That would be nice we can compare.
The ambulances windows in the back are tinted. If you take a picture where the glass is not tinted in the front, you need to be in a certain angle ,yes you can take pictures and you get the results. But if you take the picture directly on the black tinted glass you do not get anything, just a blur... In Montreal the windows are tinted back and on the sides, in front they are not, so anyone can take a picture by the front and get the to take a nice picture.
Ahh thank you for the info about the back windows. So it IS possible to take pictures with tinted windows as we can see in other celebrities' pictures. They were all taken from the back windows of the ambulances, not from front pictures.
Oh my that last post of mine equaled 4! Lol
4+8=12
1=2=3
First and foremost I would like to thank TS for the redirect.
It's a great honor, and I feel like I'm standing in front of millions accepting some type of award.
And anyone can quote me on this, so I'll go ahead and put the little quote thingys on it for you:
"If no one payed any attention to the picture in 09, then we have learned to make sure we leave nothing out. Because there was no post about it in 09 right?
It was only talked about briefly in the chat room. It intrigued me. SO I researched it.
Also did anyone think that perhaps TS was not in the chat room at the time
and didn't see the topic being brought up? No instead we decide to attack the person who's topic was used as a redirect.
MJ does play fair. MJ loves all of us."
Probably means nothing but, my post was posted Feb 25th, 2011 at 6:25
2+2+5+2+1+1 = 13 = 1+3 = 4
6+2+5 = 13 = 1+3 = 4
4+4 = 8
This was NOT planned. beLIEve what you may...but
Ever since I have started researching this, I have gotten a lot of 7s and 8s.
I'm starting to find that I feel somewhat like Jim Carrey in 23. Lol.
Remember. Respect. L.O.V.E
oV Peace to all
And if you are reading this MJ....
I L.o.v.e You
One more thing.
The Hollywood Tonight video is premiering on my birthday March 10th.
Happy Birthday to me!
I have some news from a photographer. He told me that it is impossible to take a picture with tinted windows. Logically, if you cannot see inside you cannot see anyting when you take a picture. Example. Limos.. this photographer takes lots of wedding pictures. Limos have tinted windows, he cannot take any picture because the picture will turn out black. I asked him if he can give me an example so i can post here to show you guys, he will try. I do not know him personally, but he is a friend of a friend. He said the picture of Michael was taken another day, just the way enstad said it. I hope i wrote his name correctly. and it was doctored. I hope this can clarify some incertitudes.
I'm confused now <!-- s:? -->:?<!-- s:? --> , i have a friend who is a photographer, he works for magazines and stuff, i asked him to look at the pictures and he said that it is possible to take the picture, he added that you can see the reflection of the flash light in the glass, it's the round light spots you see at the right side of the window (it looks like sunlight drops).
And if the inside lights in the ambulance are on, (as i presume they are) it's even easier to take the picture.
He also said that it was'nt one picture taken.( but we knew that already). and that the leaves are photoshopped.
My Question: why they could take pictures of britney Spears and miss Gabor , was this ambulance with clear glass <!-- s:?: -->:?:<!-- s:?: -->
I hope your friend of a friend can get this picture ,i'm looking forward to them ,and i'm very curious. <!-- s;) -->;)<!-- s;) -->
I explained it, if they took the pictures from the front windows, it is not tinted the pictures can come out. Ifyou take them where the tinted windows are it does not work. If you cannot see inside with tinted windows how can the camera capture something. Your friend is a photographer, why don't u aske him to take a pic of a limo with tinted windows if he says it can be, you can prove it too. That would be nice we can compare.
Actually it's not true. Pictures can be taken with tinted windows. I watched the videos of Britney and Zsa Gabor getting into the ambulance and the pictures you see were taken from the back window of the ambulance, not from the front window. But maybe ambulance and limo tinted windows are different and maybe you can not take pictures from limo's tinted windows but can take from ambulance's and maybe that's what your friend told.
Comments
As to the timing of the photo publication - seems we have to get technical first.
Hope that Ben and Michael, you both enjoy.
OK, let's go.
Question: Is it possible to determine the creation date of the famous photographs?
Answer: Yes, indeed, we can determine the creation date of a photograph.
How's that feasible?
As we have set our minds on digitalization processes for about every information we are dealing with these days, photographs too have become nothing else than "digital data". They are consisting of pixels, all these small points on a screen, that may drive us mad when they are not where we would like them to appear. These pixels are representing digital data like your emails in cc: mail or your documents in your desktop file explorer. When you create your files, there is a creation date, when you modify them, there is a modification date.
Same applies for digital photographs.
The description of "when and how" data for a digital photograph may be found in the EXIF data, a kind of "passport" appendix to the photograph file. This technical image "passport" is a little bit more detailed than the data for your Windows Explorer files.
The EXIF data of one of the famous photos (I'll go for the ET Online HD version of picture #4) are telling us the following. I am not citing in full length and I will only pick out some interesting details.
For a first round, I am assuming the EXIF data are true as provided.
1) Creation of photo
2) Upload to desktop and manipulation of digital material via Adobe Fireworks software. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adobe_Fireworks
3) Creation of additional meta data via Adobe XMP software - like text etc.
XMP is meant to create, modify and store "meta data" of an image, thus the technical description - Adobe XMP is a software used for this purpose.
So all of the above combined with what we know in addition boils down to the
following timeline:
Photo created:
Date: June 25, 2009 12:08:08PM (timezone is 7 hours behind GMT)
Date/Time Original 2009:06:25 12:08:08-07:00
911 called at 12:21.
Paramedics arrived at 12:26.
Michael declared dead 2:26 pm.
Photo uploaded to desktop:
Create Date 2009:06:25 16:22:43-07:00 (4:22 pm)
One of the first tweets about the published photo appeared before 6:03 pm.
viewtopic.php?f=145&t=18053&p=309514#p309463
Photo meta data supplemented for image database:
Modify Date 2009:06:25 23:31:53Z (11:31 pm)
Conclusion after first round:
there was not much time left for shopping the picture, to be exact: 1 hour and 41 minutes - given the EXIF data and the rest of data were true.
Round two - question:
How come that the image creation should have taken place at 12:08 and not after 12:21 when paramedics had officially arrived?
Answer alternatives:
1) The EXIF data are false - June 25 being correct but the time set was wrong - which should not happen for a professional paparazzi photographer being paid at a 60% commission for a sold photograph upon which his agency has a legal property claim and may have to prove this.
2) The EXIF data are false - the time set was correct but the date set was wrong - which shouldn't happen to a professional either.
3) The EXIF data are correct - June 25 being correct but the take did not place in Los Angeles thus did happen in another time zone.
4) The EXIF data are correct - June 25 being correct and the time set is correct but the take did not place on the street but beforehand in the mansion's courtyard.
This means that not only Ben / Chris were in but also the paramedics.
For the staff of the house to notice what was going on - no problem since there is no window on the left side of the ambulance and it was parked in parallel to the wall inside the gates.
The shots of the red car could have been taken beforehand. Everything well prepared just to fit the "official shots" in.
1.5 hourse could be sufficient time for a professional photoshopper oops creative artist. rhhhmmhrhrhrmm....
However selling in parallel an egg that is not yet fully painted for the plan of half of a lifetime to come true?
rhhhmmhrhrhrmm....
And what about waiting for 2 hours until the declaration of the passing to start working on the picture on a desktop if it is THE hot sales item of that day?
rhhhmmhrhrhrmm....
That's the pic:
That's the EXIF data of this pic in full length:
http://regex.info/exif.cgi?dummy=on&imgurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.etonline.com%2Fmedia%2Fphoto%2F2009%2F06%2F98268%2F400_mjackson_ambulance_newgraphic_090625.jpg
This is what I also believe in.
One day they shot an inside photo with fake paramedics - actors, the other day they shot a live scene in front of the Carolwood gates - with actually nobody inside or at least MJ sitting on a stretcher. <!-- s:D -->:D<!-- s:D -->
Actually when I first saw the "death photo" I thought it must have been done in the EVENING <!-- s:shock: -->:shock:<!-- s:shock: --> and a few years ago! I even thought it could have been a real photo when MJ was rushed to the hospital in 1990's due to his chest problems... These red reflections looked to me like some street lights, like neon lights.
The other thing that struck me in this short film was actually the terrible acting on the part of all the people surrounding the backing ambulance... It looks like from a poor quality reality show.... Sorry MJ... <!-- s
It's a great honor, and I feel like I'm standing in front of millions accepting some type of award.
And anyone can quote me on this, so I'll go ahead and put the little quote thingys on it for you:
"If no one payed any attention to the picture in 09, then we have learned to make sure we leave nothing out. Because there was no post about it in 09 right?
It was only talked about briefly in the chat room. It intrigued me. SO I researched it.
Also did anyone think that perhaps TS was not in the chat room at the time
and didn't see the topic being brought up? No instead we decide to attack the person who's topic was used as a redirect.
MJ does play fair. MJ loves all of us."
Probably means nothing but, my post was posted Feb 25th, 2011 at 6:25
2+2+5+2+1+1 = 13 = 1+3 = 4
6+2+5 = 13 = 1+3 = 4
4+4 = 8
This was NOT planned. beLIEve what you may...but
Ever since I have started researching this, I have gotten a lot of 7s and 8s.
I'm starting to find that I feel somewhat like Jim Carrey in 23. Lol.
Remember. Respect. L.O.V.E
oV Peace to all
And if you are reading this MJ....
I L.o.v.e You
4+8=12
1=2=3
The Hollywood Tonight video is premiering on my birthday March 10th.
Happy Birthday to me!
Thank you MJonmind for reminding about the picture I posted. It seems like people do not read what everyone posts and that's the reason why we have this discussion for 24 pages. Thank you for realizing what I was trying to say and show. This picture is one of the pictures I found out btw all of our ambulance pictures. And this picture was there on the very first day like the other ambulance pictures. So I wonder what's wrong with this picture. Is this photoshopped of the photoshopped picture? Or is this someone else in the ambulance? Or is that a reflection of outside on MJ's face? But if it is a reflection, then why don't we have the same reflection on the other pictures? What do you guys think about it? TS I would be appreciated if you share your opinion about this picture. Thank you.
@Grace thanks for bringing up the EFIX info, we have that too and I totally forgot about that. So to me it makes sense that the following happened:
Ben and his crew were there "the other day" to take some shots of the red car for the reflection and probably to talk some things through for hoax day.
Ben and crew arrive on the morning of June 25th, take the picture through the window of some other ambulance. They can make sure it's perfect because the ambulance is standing still and maybe doesn't even have tinted windows. They can make sure there is no other reflection this way, so that they can add the reflection of the red car later on.
911 was called, EMT's arrived and stayed at the mansion for quite some time. I have always thought that was odd, since you would take a patient with cardiac arrest to the hospital a.s.a.p. Probably they had to talk some stuff through and yes, that means that the EMT's are in on it, and in my opinion there is no way they can't be in on it until someone shows me a logical explanation about how they won't have to be.
The ambulance is backing out to make sure they will have the ambulance in the position they want. If the ambulance would not have been backing out, the the window would have been pointed towards the streets with lots of people, firetruck etc, which would make it impossible to get a matching reflection. I also think it was driving that slow because someone was giving the driver instructions about how and where to turn, to make sure the ambulance would have the right position when Chris made the picture.
You would still have the ambulance at the mansion which they used to make the picture, but there was a huge ass truck 2 days later leaving the house, and it looks as though an ambulance would fit into it:
Maybe Mike was there on June 25 and was really in the ambulance disguised as EMT for example, but that would mean that the closing down of LAX that morning had nothing to do with the hoax. I personally think that ike hightailed it that morning, and gave instructions when needed through the phone. Murray was after all on the phone most of the time.
"For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places."This pic was shown by a person from this forum (or the other one) to a professional paramedic to get their opinion about the whole scene. This person blurred MJ face so as not to suggest anything. So this is actually the MJ pic with his face blurred by one of the forum members... (I'm sorry, I can't remember who this person was - If you are reading this - please stand up! <!-- s
I just thought of something else. If the picture is a photoshop, which we think it is, and it has different layers, then would the EFIX be of the background picture? Because maybe the reflection picture was taken at 12:08 pm and the inside of the ambulance "the other day". Does anyone know if you can decide which layer would be the main layer that gives the info, or that it is automatically the background picture? Or is it the one you open, edit and safe, regardless of where you will put the layer of the original picture?
I hope you get what I mean... If someone can tell me how I can find the EFIX info of a picture, I can try it myself.
"For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places."Did you see this post of mine? Here are other celebrities' ambo pictures. But I realized that all of these pictures were taken from the back window of the ambulance. The back windows are tinted too in the ambulances? Or is it only the side windows? Because if the back windows are tinted also, these prove that pictures can be taken with tinted windows.
Thank you for explaining the situation. I've never heard it was made by a believer. I do remember we were talking about this picture and this person in the pic is someone else and they photoshopped MJ's face on that person. That is the story of the pic I remember. I guess I missed the part it was made by a believer.
Just thinking The song "Behind The Mask" could also be meant literally <!-- s
I got it. This is the thread from the other forum if you are interested.
http://www.michaeljacksonhoaxdeath.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=30&t=4254&p=106110&hilit=blurred+face+paramedic#p106110
They say someone posted it into the paramedic forum to get the answer... They blurred MJ's face for the reasons I stated above. <!-- s:) -->:)<!-- s:) -->
The issue was discussed on the other forum. That must be the reason why I missed it. I'm not a member there so I guess I can not view the page but still thank you so much for the link and the info. <!-- s:) -->:)<!-- s:) -->
Okay, so I found the EFIX stuff and tried some things and whatever you do with the picture is stored in the history of the EFIX file. Not sure if that is also the case when you import your pictures directly from your camera to Fireworks, add layers and file info and then save, but as far as i can see it will show that you shopped it. But if that would be the case, there is a very logical solution:
Shop the picture as much as you want, print it and take a picture from the shopped picture. Problem solved.
I did find out that the picture is indeed probably not photoshopped TS, because Ben seems to prefer Fireworks. Figures... <!-- s
"For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places."My redirected post = 2
5+2=7
The ambulances windows in the back are tinted. If you take a picture where the glass is not tinted in the front, you need to be in a certain angle ,yes you can take pictures and you get the results. But if you take the picture directly on the black tinted glass you do not get anything, just a blur... In Montreal the windows are tinted back and on the sides, in front they are not, so anyone can take a picture by the front and get the to take a nice picture.
This truck is very large, within that property there are plenty of space for that truck between and the back and hit the front, the ambulance went slowly in setback for " give time to the photographer to take photos "
Ahh thank you for the info about the back windows. So it IS possible to take pictures with tinted windows as we can see in other celebrities' pictures. They were all taken from the back windows of the ambulances, not from front pictures.
Huh?
Actually it's not true. Pictures can be taken with tinted windows. I watched the videos of Britney and Zsa Gabor getting into the ambulance and the pictures you see were taken from the back window of the ambulance, not from the front window. But maybe ambulance and limo tinted windows are different and maybe you can not take pictures from limo's tinted windows but can take from ambulance's and maybe that's what your friend told.