Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
iPod Video Photo - a Fake
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Templetalker
macrumors newbie
rockblade said:
Rockblade, he did do an excellent job, but not with the Chinese characters, no way, no how. I do admit, a little piece of me wished he wrote them better. 😉
Wrong, Wrong, Wrong, Wrong, Wrong....
You're taking screenshots from different stages in the video. The first is after the rotation and duplication. The 2nd from the left is the shot if the LCD pattern being scaled and distorted into the frame (after this step, the border thickness may change. And finally, the thicknesses are different because of the different levels of zoom in between these shots.
Easy answer, the one he did on top of the screen was a bad scribble. He changed his mind, re-did it and moved it back onto the bottom right. If he had faked it from the "real" original, there would be no way to recreate what was under the "real" scribble anyway.
The wire was only there in the photo he took for the right side of the "real" ipod's screen. Anything to the left of the screen in this shot was not included in the final product.
Easy one. Either added or erased later on.
Again, you are comparing a shot from the final product to a shot from a different angle.
WRONG.
edleung said:
You're taking screenshots from different stages in the video. The first is after the rotation and duplication. The 2nd from the left is the shot if the LCD pattern being scaled and distorted into the frame (after this step, the border thickness may change. And finally, the thicknesses are different because of the different levels of zoom in between these shots.
Easy answer, the one he did on top of the screen was a bad scribble. He changed his mind, re-did it and moved it back onto the bottom right. If he had faked it from the "real" original, there would be no way to recreate what was under the "real" scribble anyway.
The wire was only there in the photo he took for the right side of the "real" ipod's screen. Anything to the left of the screen in this shot was not included in the final product.
Easy one. Either added or erased later on.
Again, you are comparing a shot from the final product to a shot from a different angle.
WRONG.
kugino
macrumors 65816
for once and for all, the picture is a photoshopped mock. so, it's a fake. the video is from the same person, but he's just showing how he did it. since the video was created after the original photo, of course some details are going to look different. a missing "7" or a little crease difference or a change in the scribble is nothing major. he went and recreated his steps for the video so of course minor things might be different. get over it. no video ipod will be announced tomorrow!
kugino
macrumors 65816
yes, you're right. i did not mean to conclude that because the video and the pictures are fakes, that a video ipod will not be introduced (conclusion does not follow from premises, eh?)Peace said:
i'm iffy on the video ipod being announced tomorrow because it's the one product i will definitely buy if/when it is announced. i don't need a new laptop yet, don't need a pda, don't need a DVR...but i still have my 4G and have been waiting for the 6G as my next ipod purchase...my head says no, but my heart says go 😀
4np
macrumors 6502a
A guy on the Dutch macosx.nl forum (the tools in the Video are in Dutch) admitted he made the Video and he said he first made the photograph and after he saw it was such a hype he created the video in which he reproduced the creation of the initial photo. So that's why there are differences in the photographs.
bloogersnigen
macrumors regular
new imedia center!!!!
Look what i found online at apple.com they screwed up and put in on excatly when I went on. OH my god
https://forums.macrumors.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=41977&stc=1&d=1141082015
ps its a fake if you didn't get that
pps how do you make pictures apear in your reply I could only get a link
Look what i found online at apple.com they screwed up and put in on excatly when I went on. OH my god
https://forums.macrumors.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=41977&stc=1&d=1141082015
ps its a fake if you didn't get that
pps how do you make pictures apear in your reply I could only get a link
Attachments
sandman42
macrumors 6502a
4np said:
One difference I don't get is why the handwritten "This side (up)" characters, in both the original photo and the video, not only don't match each other but also don't match the ones supposedly generated by the web translator in the video. If you look at them closely, you'll see that there are small differences. Would someone who needed a web translator be able to create characters that were close enough that people would understand them (as some did several days ago), without knowing what they were intended to mean?
G4 Channel - Attack of the show!
Did anyone else happen to see "Attack of the show" on G4? They claimed that they were the one's who made the video of the creation of the photo. They provided a behind the scenes clip of them making the video.
Did anyone else happen to see "Attack of the show" on G4? They claimed that they were the one's who made the video of the creation of the photo. They provided a behind the scenes clip of them making the video.
I caught Attack of the Show!, but for some reason I don't think they made that video... that video shows the photo being edited on a Mac, but AOTS was using a PC to make that photo...
ezekielrage_99
macrumors 68040
kugino
macrumors 65816
sounds right...that's what i've been saying all along.4np said:A guy on the Dutch macosx.nl forum (the tools in the Video are in Dutch) admitted he made the Video and he said he first made the photograph and after he saw it was such a hype he created the video in which he reproduced the creation of the initial photo. So that's why there are differences in the photographs.
Don't panic
macrumors 603
i'll add this useful observation to the 342 highly useful ones that precede it:
the creator of the hoax was arn(eblk)!
the creator of the hoax was arn(eblk)!
ezekielrage_99
macrumors 68040
This is like "Where's Wally: iPod Edition" or one of those intrinsically stupid magic eye pics.
Or maybe it's one of those ink blot tests...........
I hope I'm not crazy 😀
🙄
Or maybe it's one of those ink blot tests...........
I hope I'm not crazy 😀
🙄
Well, I admit I didn't read 95% of the posts in this topic and just joined up.
But, there are notable differences between the picture and the video that have yet to be mentioned.
First of all, on the bar code, it is quite odd how in the video he is able to make it appear as if from magic. There is a greenish border on parts of the bar code that does not appear on the other.
That lcd image he found does not appear on any in googles images and not on the first few pages of google web. While it would make sense to come out on a Dutch mac forum, if his English was good enough to know lcd and test, two lesser used words, why didn't he post on any English websites? Also, why would he have to recolor that one bar? Another thing to prove this was made after the original was the google icon. The hockey puck one was displayed two or three days ago, definately not four. This could not have been made before the original date of posting.
To continue with the Dutch thing, why would he translate from English to Chinese when Dutch would clearly be his primary language due to the google preferences.
When he selects the filter menu item, all of the items are grayed out. Meaning he did not select an image.
If you look carefully at the upper righthand corner of the photo, that corner is also lit up. When the photo of the ipod was taken in the video, it was clearly turned off.
Don't really know my point by this post. But, whoever made the hoax wasn't the man who made the video.
But, there are notable differences between the picture and the video that have yet to be mentioned.
First of all, on the bar code, it is quite odd how in the video he is able to make it appear as if from magic. There is a greenish border on parts of the bar code that does not appear on the other.
That lcd image he found does not appear on any in googles images and not on the first few pages of google web. While it would make sense to come out on a Dutch mac forum, if his English was good enough to know lcd and test, two lesser used words, why didn't he post on any English websites? Also, why would he have to recolor that one bar? Another thing to prove this was made after the original was the google icon. The hockey puck one was displayed two or three days ago, definately not four. This could not have been made before the original date of posting.
To continue with the Dutch thing, why would he translate from English to Chinese when Dutch would clearly be his primary language due to the google preferences.
When he selects the filter menu item, all of the items are grayed out. Meaning he did not select an image.
If you look carefully at the upper righthand corner of the photo, that corner is also lit up. When the photo of the ipod was taken in the video, it was clearly turned off.
Don't really know my point by this post. But, whoever made the hoax wasn't the man who made the video.
nagromme
macrumors G5
Not Apple-like? It's almost exactly like the current iPods.corywoolf said:
That's my feeling too.ACoolie said:
I don't think the video even shows HOW the original was made: the method the video uses (placed EPS) to put the image on the device makes no sense leading to the end result (with moires, glow on the whites, reflections in the plastic, light through sticker which the video skips quickly past, etc.).
Some OTHER method was used to put the image on the original photo (for instance, snapping a photo of the pattern on a real screen, or actually loading parts of onto the 5G). Therefore I really think the person who made the video isn't "showing what he did the first time."
All of which is less relevant than the device itself, of course 🙂
No 7 on the product tag in the video
OK, whoever made the video forgot to add the 7 to the final image which ends the movie. As you see in the beginning in the screen shots of the original picture, there is a 7 on the product number sticker. That and the quick cuts which don't explain the flaring of the bright colors make me question the video. Also, why would they take the LCD test they found on the internet and change one of the white panels to red? Except to make it look more real when the real thing found on the search didn't have a red panel!
OK, whoever made the video forgot to add the 7 to the final image which ends the movie. As you see in the beginning in the screen shots of the original picture, there is a 7 on the product number sticker. That and the quick cuts which don't explain the flaring of the bright colors make me question the video. Also, why would they take the LCD test they found on the internet and change one of the white panels to red? Except to make it look more real when the real thing found on the search didn't have a red panel!
scribble in video not the same as on final image!
Ok, here's another thing I just noticed. The black felt looking scribble generated in the video is not the same as on the final image. And you'll see that there is a jump cut from the drawing of the scribble to where it is placed at the end. Look particularly at the first 3 bumps of the scribble in the final image. They look nothing like the movie of the scribble.
p.s. sorry I clearly haven't read the earlier post because it is late and I'm too exhausted to read through them . Nevertheless, I was convinced by the video at first, but now, I just don't know. Seeing is not always believing.
p.p.s. The handwritten characters in the video look nothing like those in the still image. They look like a bad attempt at trying to make them look the same, again discguised by quick cuts. I also saw the bizarre way in which the black ink seemed to draw itself before the actual pen writes.
Ok, here's another thing I just noticed. The black felt looking scribble generated in the video is not the same as on the final image. And you'll see that there is a jump cut from the drawing of the scribble to where it is placed at the end. Look particularly at the first 3 bumps of the scribble in the final image. They look nothing like the movie of the scribble.
p.s. sorry I clearly haven't read the earlier post because it is late and I'm too exhausted to read through them . Nevertheless, I was convinced by the video at first, but now, I just don't know. Seeing is not always believing.
p.p.s. The handwritten characters in the video look nothing like those in the still image. They look like a bad attempt at trying to make them look the same, again discguised by quick cuts. I also saw the bizarre way in which the black ink seemed to draw itself before the actual pen writes.