Inaguration crowd size

[Leonhard]

Accepted ... I have always treated you with respect and dignity, Leon, and it's not going to change because you slipped up.

Thanks, I respect you a lot.

RECENTLY, yes.... and when I used this expression, it was a quote from those who were explaining this is why he caught the Democrats off guard so completely - they were taking him literally, not seriously. They didn't think he had a prayer to win the Presidency.... same reason.

Alright, so you're not using it to handwave away him lying. Its not about that at all? Because I honestly don't see you going light on a democrat politician who you see lying, or waffling or being inaccurate. Like in the other thread.

[Cow Poke]

Alright, so you're not using it to handwave away him lying.

Correct.

Its not about that at all?

There are PLENTY of people attacking Trump for his lying, and much of his lying is so evidently false (meaning he is, indeed, lying), it's not worth arguing about.

Because I honestly don't see you going light on a democrat politician who you see lying, or waffling or being inaccurate. Like in the other thread.

I've been pretty consistent, Leon - I voted "for" Trump because, to me, he was the lesser of two evils (I've even said the evil of two lessers) - I push back when liberals say things that are just flat out not true - in which case I'm defending "truth", but I don't excuse Trump's bad actions.

[carpedm9587]

And you actually fall for this nonsense?

I've seen those lists making the rounds pretty much since the left got spooked by the idea that Trump could actually end up beating Hillary, and they're a joke. They don't distinguish between genuine lies, and honest mistakes, approximations, exaggeration, jokes, hyperbole, differences of opinion, and so on. The fact that you uncritically swallow this anti-Trump drivel tells us quite a lot about your mindset.

Unbelievable...





Wait...no...actually it's very believable. That has been the response of most people on the right from the get-go. Deny, dismiss, defend...yet my pass through this list and a check of the facts shows pretty much all of them to be accurate. Trump makes statements like, "GDP growth is now above the unemployment rate - which hasn't happened for 100 years." But it has happened 64 quarters in the last 100 years, which is a LOT of quarters. He just keeps pumping out these falsehoods.

And the left and the media keep biting, and fact-checking, which just serves Trump's agenda: keep the discussion about Trump. There is a good opinion piece about this phenomenon here, for those truly interested in ending the insanity of this presidency.

[oxmixmudd]

I've been a professional videographer for 25-years, and I can tell you from first-hand experience that you can not use perspective tricks to make an empty space look like a full one, at least not in the way that is being suggested by liberal spin. In other words, you can't make this:

[ATTACH=CONFIG]30954[/ATTACH]

Look like this:

[ATTACH=CONFIG]30955[/ATTACH]
[ATTACH=CONFIG]30956[/ATTACH]
[ATTACH=CONFIG]30957[/ATTACH]
[ATTACH=CONFIG]30959[/ATTACH]
[ATTACH=CONFIG]30958[/ATTACH]

simply by changing the perspective.

Yes, Obama's crowd was larger. Nobody has ever disputed that. However, Trump's crowd was far larger than has been falsely portrayed by the lying liars in the liberal media. To claim otherwise after looking at the pictures is nothing but pigheaded willful ignorance.

Ok, so I'm going to take the time to go through this very carefully. A couple of basic facts. The distance from where Trump stood in the inauguration to the washington monument is about 1.2 miles. That means that in the area of the building and tail end of the crowd we are at least 5000 feet from where the camera was that took the Capitol based (looking out on the crowd as Trump would see it) pictures. That means that for every vertical foot of obstruction, at least 25 feet of background is covered. It also means that at the extreme distance of where the building was, a person behind another will appear nearly as if they where right behind each other even if they are in fact separated by 25 feet or more. So the only real way to tell how far they are behind is estimate the number of feet 'above' the other person they appear to be if we were to treat the photo not as a photo but as a painting where the people in the image are rendered full size. So if a background person at the extreme end shows their entire head above the person in front, they are really about 25 feet behind the person.

Second: The example picture in MM post above is from 11 am, 1 hour BEFORE the inauguration. The typical picture used in the 12 pm image. And many of the comparison photos of Trump looking out on the crowd are from that timeframe. So I am going to use the 12 pm that has been accused of being a 'lie' by the MSM. It should be clear this 12 pm image shows more crowd that MM's 11 am image. For the image from the capitol I am using the gigapixel image that show trump speaking on the podium. I need the resolution of that image to show why the 12 pm monument image is in fact a real image of this time frame. And that the gaps in the monument image are present in the gigapixel image every bit as much as in the Monument image.

First, here is the 12pm Mounment image, the one that is supposed to be a 'fake'.

trump-inauguration-1201pm - Copy.jpg

Next is a screen capture of the gigapixel image zoomed out showing most of the crowd, and especially the view to the monument. I'm also including the image of Trump speaking from the same image:

large area gigapixel view -small.jpg
Trump is on the podium.jpg

Next I'm going to show the pictures marked so that the back area can be discussed. I've created 8 markings. The area of water is marked red. The first section of crowd having a gap behind that is green. The next section Blue, then pink, orange and purple is the last section before the large gap. I have circled the two tents that are farthest back, behind the end of the crowd, in yellow, and I have circled the barrier that is behind the last group of people on the left side (from the monument view) which has a large gap in front of it in brown.

trump-inauguration-1201pm - marked.jpg

Next I have enlarged the gigapixel extreme distance view so that the same area seen in the foreground of the monument view is fully in view. And I have marked each corresponding section with exactly the same colors.

GigaPix-marked-small.jpg

Now, next I have enlarged the gap on the left side maked as the pink section. Notice that the right side (which is partly obscured by the foreground post) is not at all full, just like in the pink section left hand side from the Monument. There is a clump toward the center, like the monument image, but the right side and middle is very sparsely populated.

2nd left block that is mostly empty in the monument photo -marked-small.jpg

Finally we come to the back, which I've also enlarged and marked as in the larger Monument based image. Several points here. This is the same block of people counting back from the water. You know how much space there is from there to the building from the monument image. But you can also simply look at the two tents to the right, one with a pointy top, the other more normal. Look at the space between them in the monument image. But more importantly, notice that in both images, they are BEHIND the crowd. There are only a few people milling around back there - just like in the 12 PM Monument image. Notice also that on the right where I have marked the barrier that corresponds to the back barrier in the Monument image also has few people - both in FRONT of it, and BEHIND it, just like in the Monument image. The Gigapixel image, in normal mode, shows the crowd looking like it's almost as big as the Obama crowd. But on close examination, the very same very large gaps exist at the back as in the 'lying' Monument photo. The just look very short because of the extreme foreshortening due to the vast distance involved.

Area across the back that is empty - marked -small.jpg

Jim

[Cow Poke]

I don't think any of you are going to convince "the other" of anything. I think this is a case where everybody believes what they believe, and we're just flogging away at the long deceased and bloated equus ferus.

[oxmixmudd]

I don't think any of you are going to convince "the other" of anything. I think this is a case where everybody believes what they believe, and we're just flogging away at the long deceased and bloated equus ferus.

IOW, the facts don't matter any more? OK. I don't accept that. I have SHOWN why they are the essentially the same CP regardless of how it appears to a superficial glance. That should matter to somebody. Maybe not MM, but somebody out there should be able to follow the explanation and cares about whether the accusation the MSM is willfully posting false pictures is true or not.

Unlike Trump and many of his followers, I still believe that the truth is not relative, is not arbitrary, and that it MATTERS in this world when someone is lying or has no regard for the truth. That it MATTERS when people close their ears and eyes and refuse to see.

And that applies regardless of who it is that is doing the lying. In THIS case it is Trump and those that say the MSM is falsely posting misleading pictures. These are the real pictures from the event.


Jim

[Cow Poke]

IOW, the facts don't matter any more? OK.

wow

[Mountain Man]

Ok, so I'm going to take the time to go through this very carefully. A couple of basic facts. The distance from where Trump stood in the inauguration to the washington monument is about 1.2 miles. That means that in the area of the building and tail end of the crowd we are at least 5000 feet from where the camera was that took the Capitol based (looking out on the crowd as Trump would see it) pictures. That means that for every vertical foot of obstruction, at least 25 feet of background is covered. It also means that at the extreme distance of where the building was, a person behind another will appear nearly as if they where right behind each other even if they are in fact separated by 25 feet or more. So the only real way to tell how far they are behind is estimate the number of feet 'above' the other person they appear to be if we were to treat the photo not as a photo but as a painting where the people in the image are rendered full size. So if a background person at the extreme end shows their entire head above the person in front, they are really about 25 feet behind the person.

Second: The example picture in MM post above is from 11 am, 1 hour BEFORE the inauguration. The typical picture used in the 12 pm image. And many of the comparison photos of Trump looking out on the crowd are from that timeframe. So I am going to use the 12 pm that has been accused of being a 'lie' by the MSM. It should be clear this 12 pm image shows more crowd that MM's 11 am image. For the image from the capitol I am using the gigapixel image that show trump speaking on the podium. I need the resolution of that image to show why the 12 pm monument image is in fact a real image of this time frame. And that the gaps in the monument image are present in the gigapixel image every bit as much as in the Monument image.

First, here is the 12pm Mounment image, the one that is supposed to be a 'fake'.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]30964[/ATTACH]

Next is a screen capture of the gigapixel image zoomed out showing most of the crowd, and especially the view to the monument. I'm also including the image of Trump speaking from the same image:

[ATTACH=CONFIG]30965[/ATTACH]
[ATTACH=CONFIG]30966[/ATTACH]

Next I'm going to show the pictures marked so that the back area can be discussed. I've created 8 markings. The area of water is marked red. The first section of crowd having a gap behind that is green. The next section Blue, then pink, orange and purple is the last section before the large gap. I have circled the two tents that are farthest back, behind the end of the crowd, in yellow, and I have circled the barrier that is behind the last group of people on the left side (from the monument view) which has a large gap in front of it in brown.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]30967[/ATTACH]

Next I have enlarged the gigapixel extreme distance view so that the same area seen in the foreground of the monument view is fully in view. And I have marked each corresponding section with exactly the same colors.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]30968[/ATTACH]

Now, next I have enlarged the gap on the left side maked as the pink section. Notice that the right side (which is partly obscured by the foreground post) is not at all full, just like in the pink section left hand side from the Monument. There is a clump toward the center, like the monument image, but the right side and middle is very sparsely populated.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]30969[/ATTACH]

Finally we come to the back, which I've also enlarged and marked as in the larger Monument based image. Several points here. This is the same block of people counting back from the water. You know how much space there is from there to the building from the monument image. But you can also simply look at the two tents to the right, one with a pointy top, the other more normal. Look at the space between them in the monument image. But more importantly, notice that in both images, they are BEHIND the crowd. There are only a few people milling around back there - just like in the 12 PM Monument image. Notice also that on the right where I have marked the barrier that corresponds to the back barrier in the Monument image also has few people - both in FRONT of it, and BEHIND it, just like in the Monument image. The Gigapixel image, in normal mode, shows the crowd looking like it's almost as big as the Obama crowd. But on close examination, the very same very large gaps exist at the back as in the 'lying' Monument photo. The just look very short because of the extreme foreshortening due to the vast distance involved.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]30971[/ATTACH]

Jim

Yes, you have correctly identified the various zones, but that still does not explain the glaring discrepancy between the overhead shot and the other images taken during the ceremony if we assume they are showing the exact same number of people. What does explain the discrepancy is that the images taken during the inauguration are showing a significantly greater volume of people than the image that was posted to Twitter almost an hour before Trump took the stage. Furthermore, we know the latter is the truth because we have the word of an eyewitness who was actually there!

"I was in the building at the bottom of picture on right yesterday. Shot was taken early, area was considerably fuller by time of speech." -Brit Hume

(Emphasis mine)

[oxmixmudd]

wow

Not to you CP, in general - that there is no point in trying to make the case for truth.

[oxmixmudd]

Yes, you have correctly identified the various zones, but that still does not explain the glaring discrepancy between the overhead shot and the other images taken during the ceremony if we assume they are showing the exact same number of people. What does explain the discrepancy is that the images taken during the inauguration are showing a significantly greater volume of people than the image that was posted to Twitter almost an hour before Trump took the stage. Furthermore, we know the latter is the truth because we have the word of an eyewitness who was actually there!

"I was in the building at the bottom of picture on right yesterday. Shot was taken early, area was considerably fuller by time of speech." -Brit Hume

(Emphasis mine)

The explanation is that its an illusion caused by foreshortening. Your eyewitness, everybody that believes the crazy conspiracy thing about the pictures is just not understanding what happens to a telephoto view of something 1 mile away! But again, just look at the fact the Gigapixel view is when Trump is speaking and that there is a gap from the tent with the pointy top all the way back to the building. That is the gap in the Monument picture you say is false. All the gaps are there. They just don't look very big when you look out from where Trump was speaking.

And again, the point is these pictures are all of the same event at around the same time. They don't lie. The data is all right there. One just needs to look closely and have an understanding of perspective and foreshortening and the 'conspiracy' vanishes like the smoke it is.


Jim

[oxmixmudd]

The explanation is that its an illusion caused by foreshortening. Your eyewitness, everybody that believes the crazy conspiracy thing about the pictures is just not understanding what happens to a telephoto view of something 1 mile away! But again, just look at the fact the Gigapixel view is when Trump is speaking and that there is a gap from the tent with the pointy top all the way back to the building. That is the gap in the Monument picture you say is false. All the gaps are there. They just don't look very big when you look out from where Trump was speaking.

And again, the point is these pictures are all of the same event at around the same time. They don't lie. The data is all right there. One just needs to look closely and have an understanding of perspective and foreshortening and the 'conspiracy' vanishes like the smoke it is.


Jim

ETA: I will make one concession. As hard as it has been to make this case, and as many people as there are that are confused by the apparent discrepancies between these pictures, it is realistic to think Trump, at least initially, believed his audience was as big or nearly as big as Obama's and that these pictures from the monument just couldn't be real based on what he thought he saw.

[carpedm9587]

IOW, the facts don't matter any more? OK. I don't accept that. I have SHOWN why they are the essentially the same CP regardless of how it appears to a superficial glance. That should matter to somebody. Maybe not MM, but somebody out there should be able to follow the explanation and cares about whether the accusation the MSM is willfully posting false pictures is true or not.

Unlike Trump and many of his followers, I still believe that the truth is not relative, is not arbitrary, and that it MATTERS in this world when someone is lying or has no regard for the truth. That it MATTERS when people close their ears and eyes and refuse to see.

And that applies regardless of who it is that is doing the lying. In THIS case it is Trump and those that say the MSM is falsely posting misleading pictures. These are the real pictures from the event.


Jim

FWIW...my silent applaud....

And you are not going to convince anyone here. The ears are closed and truth really no longer matters. We are in the "Trump Age."

[Mountain Man]

Your eyewitness, everybody that believes the crazy conspiracy thing about the pictures is just not understanding what happens to a telephoto view of something 1 mile away!

Oh, give me a break. Brit Hume is talking about what he saw on location with his own two eyes and not through a telephoto lens. But, no, you go ahead and believe what you think you're seeing in the pictures instead of taking the word of somebody who was actually there.

"Shot was taken early, area was considerably fuller by time of speech."

[Mountain Man]

ETA: I will make one concession. As hard as it has been to make this case, and as many people as there are that are confused by the apparent discrepancies between these pictures, it is realistic to think Trump, at least initially, believed his audience was as big or nearly as big as Obama's and that these pictures from the monument just couldn't be real based on what he thought he saw.

The pictures were real enough. The narrative told by the mainstream media based on a picture taken at least an hour before the speech is where the lie originated.

[oxmixmudd]

Oh, give me a break. Brit Hume is talking about what he saw on location with his own two eyes and not through a telephoto lens. But, no, you go ahead and believe what you think you're seeing in the pictures instead of taking the word of somebody who was actually there.

"Shot was taken early, area was considerably fuller by time of speech."

I don't think he was lying, but human perceptions at an event are not as reliable as the photgraphic evidence.

All I've done MM is show that the Monument photo matches very closely the content of the gigapixel photo taken at the time of the speech. I do not doubt Hume is telling the truth, but 'considerably fuller' is in fact a relative term spoken about one particular vantage point. What he saw is likely a difference similar to that seen between the 11 and 12 photo, only he doesn't have an absolute frame of reference with which to evaluate how what he saw would look from the Monument itself. Hence he may just be wrong claiming the shot in question had to have been taken earlier than claimed. That is the most likely explanation as I see it.

Indeed, I also gave a link to a short video taken at 12pm that shows a gap consistent with the Monument Photo. That's as much 'eyewitness' as Brit Hume's comment.

The photos don't lie. The math doesn't lie. But believe what you want MM.

I can't force you to allow yourself to figure it out.


Jim