• kitnaht@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    90
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    7 months ago

    Just in case it’s not obvious, this was an edited, color-saturated version that someone had attempted to pass off as the real, unedited thing. In a world of lies, I just wanted to make sure people are aware. We’ve got so much of this going on today, I’m hoping at some point people start holding themselves to a higher standard; even on shitposts.

    • brbposting
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      37
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      Thank you! Pool photo by Julia Nikhinson:

      Compare:

      Being shared widely, specifically as real, with zero correction by commenters:

      45 is disgusting and we have to keep it honest or it discredits allegations of all his true crimes and idiocy. I am sure there was a way to superimpose something to acknowledge the orangifying edit without impeding the comedy factor… “Photoshop license sponsored by Tropicana“? IDK

      • Lucidlethargy
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        7 months ago

        Lol, he looks like a clown in both pictures. Why do people even bother changing it slightly?

        His face is fucking orange. It’s orange. It’s not tan, it’s orange. No need to add more orange, everyone.

      • casual_turtle_stew_enjoyer
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        I’m lost. The one originally posted in this thread looks like the pool photo but very slightly desaturated with slight adjustment of white balance, whereas the fake is clearly oversaturated.

        I don’t really care to pull this up on my desktop to confirm, but I don’t really need an answer because the rest of the photo, unaltered, is enough to marvel at. His hands show he never worked a day in his life. His poor handwriting in such big text, either meant to be seen by reporters or just for his own amusement, is telling. Who still supports this child?

        • brbposting
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          edit-2
          7 months ago

          Good eye: post (slightly altered), altered version from the web, original:

          Thanks for reminding me to post a rotated image from the photographer’s account:

          • Lucidlethargy
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            7 months ago

            Lol wtf? Are those notes to and from himself to remind him that he doesn’t think the case is legitimate? Is he that far gone?

        • dyathinkhesaurus@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          7 months ago

          Perhaps he has poor eyesight? He strikes me as the kind of guy who thinks wearing glasses is for losers. He also strikes me as the kind of guy who bullied kids with glasses when he was in school.

      • kitnaht@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        32
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        7 months ago

        No, by all means - use edited photos. I’m just pointing out that this is close enough to reality, that it could be mistaken for a real picture.

        If you had painted a white oompa-loompa suit, and green hair on him, I wouldn’t have felt the need to point the picture out, or maybe even saturated the picture EVEN MORE, but it’s getting to the point where you cannot trust anything anywhere, and there’s no longer any real sources of ground-truth.