www.justiceforchandra.com

[rd]

I was researching on camera lenses just now and ran across this statement:

https://www.camerastuffreview.com/en/general/best-lens-for-canon-80d

With fisheye lenses, you can achieve very unique effects. And there are also people who use them as an alternative to a wide-angle lens, by 'de-fishing' the shots in special software. They then remove the convex distortion and make a neat straight-angle shot from it.

end quote

I searched on de-fishing just now and see that this correction is a thing in image software. I never even attempted to remove the fisheye distortion just to see what would result for example.

I found the Imadio Fisheye-Hemi plugin correction. From the site:

https://imadio.com/products/prodpage_hemi.aspx

A fisheye projection also bends any straight line that does not pass through the optical center. Thus a person appears very tall and thin on the edge of a fisheye image and is bent into a half-moon shape.

Although the POI is at the center of the still we were given. this very much seesm to describe the visual effect on the POI. And the real problem is that it isn't all the way up and down. The effect takes off from the waist down, growing in effect until the shoe is a clown sized shoe.

and also, this definition from the page of what we are dealing with:

Pincushion Distortion:

Pincushion distortion is the opposite of barrel distortion. The magnification of the image increases with increasing distance from the optical axis. This effect typically occurs with low end or poor telephoto lenses.

I applied Imadio Fisheye-Hemi plugin correction to image 2. This gives the correction I was looking for. I found it interesting enough to blow up 3 times larger to get a better look. The POI proportions look much more normal, do they not? In particular the leg and foot to rest of body.

[Nancy]

Yes, indeed, that gives a much more normal look to his proportions and helps with the curvature of his back.

It really makes that big thing on his hip standout, too--whatever it is.

You don't suppose he took his jacket or sweater off and tied it around his waist to cover what he has on his back and hip; thus all we can make out is the unusual shape of something?

[rd]

The visibility of the holster straps and webbing rules out something wrapped around that. This image corrected of the fisheye distortion gives me a different, helpful perspective on it.

I am going to label key areas of the image, highlight them, and talk about them. I haven't highlighted before, just clipped out to separate images. But I will highlight and post the separate images.

What stands out to me is this image is not adjusted in any way that I did before with darkness, brightness, and contrast to make different areas stand out. This is the original image, blown up 3x larger, and every piece of equipment I ever identified is clearly seen in decent detail with the naked eye. How this went a year and a half before I found the equipment, and still refused to this day to be acknowledged by all but a handful of internet viewers of these images, boggles my mind.

Well, I will highlight and discuss and maybe we can rouse someone in Orlando who can make a difference from slumber.

[rd]

I started surveying the new image to see if anything looked different. I still haven't adjusted darkness / contrast, I'm seeing everything clearly. (I'm working with my old Windows XP PC and LCD monitor settings of 1600 x 900).

I was working my way down from the head and didn't get far. Something struck me about the head that I hadn't noticed in prior images. Occasionally someone has asked through the years whether I saw a face through the fenceposts, and I've said no, I didn't see it. Well now I do.

I think it's the distortion correction that gives me the needed confidence to judge proportions now where as before I had no faith whatsoever. First I was struck by what I saw through the fencepost, but then I judged and judged on whether what I saw was proportional to the body, and it is. I do believe we are seeing through the gap in the fencepost now.

There's the carryover from back to front as one test. The dark helmet continues through the gap. Markings at neck area continue through the gap. I would say that what we can see is the side of his face and his eye socket from the side. What do you think?

I am posting a clip of the head portion, then posting the body to be able to judge proportion, as in particular where his head would extend forward. These are blown up to 9x the corrected image above.

[Nancy]

Yes, I believe I see the eye socket and the side-face in this blow-up.

I was one who believed we could see some of his face through the gap between the bars; but, iirc, I think I thought it was his nose.

I know that sounds strange right now in light of how clear the above mentioned now seems.

I'm really rushed for time right now, but when I get a minute I'd like to compare the old blow up to this new blow-up.

[rd]

You were definitely on to something there, Nancy.

Just like with seeing the POI face in image 3, I wasn't looking fior a face here, but there it was.

That is definitely the outline of his head, and possibly shows somewhat of a heavy stubble light beard on the side of his face there.

It also in my opinion looks to be a young man, not a teen, and not a middle aged man.

[Nancy]

Below is one of your old blow-ups. I find it interesting to compare them. The new software you used has cleaned it up good. I see what I thought was his nose was really the curve of his cheekbone, just under the eye socket.

I'm not sure about the "heavy stubble light beard". I see a shading there, definitely, but I'm concerned it may be a shadow.

It is a man about Jennifer's age, though. A young, strong, physically capable male.


[-img]http://i66.tinypic.com/2nvt6wm.jpg[-/img]

[rd]

That's because I darkened it to make outlines of equipment stand out. It obliterated that faint area in the gap in the gate post.

I went back and found an earlier version of this image before I made adjustments, just resized. We can see it is there in uncorrected original but not as clear to me. When I examined it at the time it didn't stand out from background noise like the corrected version does.

I just did a similar crop and I'll post here. The fact that you were able to see something and didn't even have this to work with is pretty amazing. Thanks for that heads up, so to speak, Nancy.

[Nancy]

Oh, yes. It's much clearer in the corrected version.

I'm also thinking that is a portion of his actual arm that we are seeing through the key hole in the fence door but that would make him wearing short sleeves.

[Markybug]

[Nancy]

[Markybug]

A reason for doing so with the overalls could be to hide a company name on the chest or on the back ?