iPod Video Photo

[mainframe]

...."fun new products next week" indeed...

My Guess is the ALL NEW MacPod

- wifi/bluetooth capable
- 60GB+ HD
- multi point touch sensitivity so you can use two fingers or thumbs or more at once.
- SOME pda functions (but not designed to be a full pda)
- Owned by me as soon as possible if true/specs are good.

you saw it here first folks.

 

[uv23]

Maybe if its not a digital camera photo it's a film based photo and then scanned. You know not everyone uses a digital camera or own one for that matter.

Also if an image is "saved for web" out of photoshop, the metadata is removed. So making an assumption based off the absence of that is erroenous. Regardless, I think it's fake.

 

[nolaipoder]

Take a book. Now set it down, take a picture of it from right over head. Now take a picture from a sitting position. Now lean to one side while sitting and take another one. Load these onto your computer and take a look at them.

Report back when you've finished your homework.

OK. The way the photo is taken the sides clearly reflect what you are saying and are not parallel and are equally off axis. However, the top and bottom are not parallel nor equally off axis. It just looks really odd. Open the photo and use a cropping tool to draw parallel lines around the object and you'll see what I mean.

 

[danielwsmithee]

Because!

Why not:
- Why cover up the connect nless it has a logo from another brand on it?
- Why doesn't the front of the unit have a silver edge like the rest?
- Why was it so important to blackout the date?

1) The cable would not have a logo on it is it is not a normal cable it likely is a special cable made only for testing. The label is used to make sure it is connected correctly.

2) Because it is covered with a white removal tab! Look at the lower left hand corner close up, their is clearly a curve where the tab covers the silver rim.

3) Their had to be some type of information that could identify who took the picture, and is distributing the picture.

I just find it much more believable that this is actually real then someone has put for the effort to make this good of a fake. This is just too good of a fake in my opinion, there are too many details that can very easily be explained by it being real, and seem like a stretch to be a fake.

 

[jwbrickner]

umm no

I disagree.

I had the same idea and downloaded the image. I opened it in Graphic Converter and looked at all the metadata. There is NO (none) EXIF data included in the picture. The only way this could happen is that someone has manually edited the metadata to delete it. The most common way for this data to disappera is editing the picture in photoshop or some other editor. Nearly any camera as default or with custom settings will litter all sorts of identifying information in there.

I also notice that the compression ratio of this image is 1:11. I've never seen a canon camera with that ratio. On this low quality I'd expect 1:17 if it was a Canon camera image which is what mine takes.

At the very least, this is not a camera phone pic. It is a higher resolution shot that has been down sampled in an image editor (if it is real).

I'll leave that up to someone else to decide.

if you have photoshop save any image using to jpg and look at it in textedit you will see what i posted JFIF ADOBE and other random characters. are you implying diifrent copies of photoshop encode pictures diffrently? It may not have been taken by a canon or a camera phone but it definitely was not edited and or compressed in photoshop at least using the default compressor but i guess that doesn't really help so i digress.

I think I am going to find somethiung more productive to do now.

 

[Zillatron]

Which manufacturer would Apple most likely get their LCDs from?

The same one they can get them mass produced from now.
They have been ramping up the LCD in iPods from day one to what we have at this moment.
But given that its primary function is to play music, it seems a little unusual the push to bigger better LCD's.

Unless of course its only a step in the direction of things to come.

Z

 

[nagromme]

The brown tape is oddly labeled, yes. The question is, why? A photo faker getting too clever for themselves? Maybe, but consider this:

I work in China teaching written Chinese to immigrant labor, and we very OFTEN have our students practice writing on brown packing tape, because it doesn't blow away like paper does. Then, like most schools in China, we sell the used tape to local manufacturing companies. That's most likely how the oddly-marked tape got into Apple's factory. In fact, sometimes I assign my students to write things just as fun pranks, such as "this is refreshing drinking water, not acid."

 

[tk421]

OK. The way the photo is taken the sides clearly reflect what you are saying and are not parallel and are equally off axis. However, the top and bottom are not parallel nor equally off axis. It just looks really odd. Open the photo and use a cropping tool to draw parallel lines around the object and you'll see what I mean.

They would only be equally off axis if the camera was dead center vertically and not centered horizontally. Incidentally, the sides are not equally off axis either. It's all just PERSPECTIVE.

 

[mmmmark]

if you have photoshop save any image using to jpg and look at it in textedit you will see what i posted JFIF ADOBE and other random characters. are you implying diifrent copies of photoshop encode pictures diffrently? It may not have been taken by a canon or a camera phone but it definitely was not edited and or compressed in photoshop at least using the default compressor but i guess that doesn't really help so i digress.

When I open that pic with a text editor, it only shows JFIF and then jibberish. I do not see Adobe, so I'm not sure--maybe our texteditors are different.

As a previous poster indicated, saving for web or simply saving from photoshop will produce two completely different outcomes.

As far as the parallelism of the different edges of the picture. That's tough to say. I photograph lots of mechnanical products and the camera lens can play funny with you if you aren't _perfectly_ square and centered on the object.

 

[mrgreen4242]

The brown tape is oddly labeled, yes. The question is, why? A photo faker getting too clever for themselves? Maybe, but consider this:

I work in China teaching written Chinese to immigrant labor, and we very OFTEN have our students practice writing on brown packing tape, because it doesn't blow away like paper does. Then, like most schools in China, we sell the used tape to local manufacturing companies. That's most likely how the oddly-marked tape got into Apple's factory. In fact, sometimes I assign my students to write things just as fun pranks, such as "this is refreshing drinking water, not acid."

Ok, that's funny. Very funny. Dunno why, but hilarious. Some good Browncoat humor.

 

[philmo]

Also if an image is "saved for web" out of photoshop, the metadata is removed. So making an assumption based off the absence of that is erroenous. Regardless, I think it's fake.

Wouldn't it be likely that it was opened in Photoshop to black out the date in the corner?

 

[lucas]

As for lab workers, they are a ham-fisted lot. You need idiot labels like these. We have a piece of equipment with two ports on it that use an identical connector for each. I had to write "NO" next to one and "THIS ONE" under the other to avoid wasting any more time with wrong connections during testing.

isnt that the designers fault? if you have two things that look the same yet do different things its a fault, not stupidity of the lab worker for not wanting to dick around with trial and error. take a look at your electrical outlets, can you plug a device in the wrong way? or the ipod docking cable, only fits in one way, the power cord for a laptop or basically any well designed piece of equipment.

if theres any possibility of confusion when plugging something in, 50% of unexperienced users will get it wrong the first time. its not their fault the designers dont know **** about usability

 

[mmmmark]

Wouldn't it be likely that it was opened in Photoshop to black out the date in the corner?

true that

 

[mvc]

Much as I want this to be real..

I am inclined to think it might be a very good fake, due to some of the arguments given, and also this image

When you greatly boost the mids in photoshop, the corner label exhibits some odd smudging that one often sees after use of the rubber stamp tool, and also some odd red and cyan colour patches in areas which are supposed to be sitting over a black test bar. This implies to me that it has at the very least probably been photoshopped in this area for some reason.

Maybe the photographer had to remove some incriminating data from the label, or maybe the whole thing is fake.

 

[danielwsmithee]

Wouldn't it be likely that it was opened in Photoshop to black out the date in the corner?

Sorry guys NO!! It is not likely that photoshop would be used to do this. Think about it. Likely this is some technician that works in the factory. Why would that person have and use a copy of Photoshop. He is not a photographer/graphics person, why would he pay for photoshop. Photography is likely not a hobby. He just used whatever program he had likely "Paint" or something.

 

[cxny]

False

OMG! I can't believe this photo gets any cred. Just look at it for two seconds, it's so obviously a composite. It amazes me that with enough faith people will just believe anything. Oh! hi Jesus.....

 

[mmmmark]

Sorry guys NO!! It is not likely that photoshop would be used to do this. Think about it. Likely this is some technician that works in the factory. Why would that person have and use a copy of Photoshop. He is not a photographer/graphics person, why would he pay for photoshop. Photography is likely not a hobby. He just used whatever program he had likely "Paint" or something.

The poin't isn't WHAT program was used. The point was that it was cycled through an image editor, thus stripping the metadata deleting any identifying camera information (which _could_ tend to verify it's authenticity).

 

[mrgreen4242]

OK. The way the photo is taken the sides clearly reflect what you are saying and are not parallel and are equally off axis. However, the top and bottom are not parallel nor equally off axis. It just looks really odd. Open the photo and use a cropping tool to draw parallel lines around the object and you'll see what I mean.

I guess I just don't agree that the perspective looks wrong to me. The photo looks like it was taken from a position that is lower and just a tiny but to the left of the object (so the top looks smaller than the bottom, and the right is smaller than the left). It looks right to me... I could be wrong though. There are several things that don't add up on this picture, and that could be one of them.

 

[mmmmark]

I guess I just don't agree that the perspective looks wrong to me. The photo looks like it was taken from a position that is lower and just a tiny but to the left of the object (so the top looks smaller than the bottom, and the right is smaller than the left). It looks right to me... I could be wrong though. There are several things that don't add up on this picture, and that could be one of them.

Keep in mind that many cameras (especially digital ones) give a bit of a fisheye effect in macro mode. That can make an image look odd even if taken perfectly square and centered.

 

[mrgreen4242]

I am inclined to think it might be a very good fake, due to some of the arguments given, and also this image

When you greatly boost the mids in photoshop, the corner label exhibits some odd smudging that one often sees after use of the rubber stamp tool, and also some odd red and cyan colour patches in areas which are supposed to be sitting over a black test bar. This implies to me that it has at the very least probably been photoshopped in this area for some reason.

Maybe the photographer had to remove some incriminating data from the label, or maybe the whole thing is fake.

You are right about the label, it definitely looks funny. Wether it is manipulated or it's bad blocking from JPEG compression I can't say... but the more I look at the label, the non-lined up upper right corner, and hear people complain about the chinese the more I think this may be a fake.

 

[7on]

Sorry guys NO!! It is not likely that photoshop would be used to do this. Think about it. Likely this is some technician that works in the factory. Why would that person have and use a copy of Photoshop. He is not a photographer/graphics person, why would he pay for photoshop. Photography is likely not a hobby. He just used whatever program he had likely "Paint" or something.

The photo is from China... You know how easily Photoshop is obtainable in China?

 

[pdpfilms]

The photo is from China... You know how easily Photoshop is obtainable in China?

Hahaha, out of context that is one of the funniest posts i've seen. Some good logic there.

 

[tk421]

When I open that pic with a text editor, it only shows JFIF and then jibberish. I do not see Adobe, so I'm not sure--maybe our texteditors are different.

Here's what I see when I open a Photoshopped jpeg in TextEdit: (strange characters)JFIF(more characters)Adobe Photoshop 7.0(more characters)JFIF(characters again)Adobe_CM?ÓAdobe

Wouldn't it be likely that it was opened in Photoshop to black out the date in the corner?

I was thinking that, too.

I work in China teaching written Chinese to immigrant labor, and we very OFTEN have our students practice writing on brown packing tape, because it doesn't blow away like paper does. Then, like most schools in China, we sell the used tape to local manufacturing companies. That's most likely how the oddly-marked tape got into Apple's factory. In fact, sometimes I assign my students to write things just as fun pranks, such as "this is refreshing drinking water, not acid."

Funny!

 

[mvc]

You are right about the label, it definitely looks funny. Wether it is manipulated or it's bad blocking from JPEG compression I can't say... but the more I look at the label, the non-lined up upper right corner, and hear people complain about the chinese the more I think this may be a fake.

Its true that jpegs can create all sorts of colour blocks, and weird lines and artifacts. I think the obvious line top right on the edge of the bexel is probably a jpeg artifact rather than evidence of crappy retouch skills. And the whole item may possibly be shrinkwrapped to protect the screen/finish, which would account for some of the odd bubbling seen top edge left of screen, and the generally inconsistent edge lighting around the outside of the case.

Or it could be a total fake

 

[mmmmark]

Here's what I see when I open a Photoshopped jpeg in TextEdit: (strange character)JFIF(more characters)Adobe Photoshop 7.0(more characters)JFIF(characters again)Adobe_CM?ÓAdobe

You don't see those on this image do you? Because I don't.