Rafael i'm almost sure you will win, i was a expert of traditional photo 
collage and manipulation (as in darkroom ) and at that time, if i wished i 
could bypass most of detection method

But time pass by...Now i do photo collage with computer but for only artistic 
purpose and so i never had reason to study how to fake detection techniques

Neverthless  i wonder how you can see anything wrong if

1 i do a good collage taking care of shadow , proportion and prospective

2 i print a high quality gigantography of my computer photo-collage

3 In a studio with diffuse light i make with my camera a photo of the 
Gigantography , taking care to get a very subtle out-focus (or just smearing 
the lens with a tiny veil of something as vaseline

I don't know much about EXIF data,(i don't even know if they report as default 
exposition time ,diaframma opening time and focal used, if so could be needed 
to have them coherent with the kind of image)

  but i'm confident you will find Exif data from a real camera


Will be  quite  a lot of work and i can't see any reason to do it 
(well at least if nobody is going to pay  few thousands Euro in cash to  get a 
image of Hilary Clinton having fun with a almost naked young black guy, or 
something alike) 

So my curiosity is only academic...still i'm a bit curious 

Alchemie Foto\grafiche

L'email della prossima generazione? Puoi averla con la nuova Yahoo! Mail
Gimp-user mailing list

Reply via email to