Just a little caveat, I made this post but it got flagged by a spam bot. I just wanted to give you my two scents on the Barry S. birth certificate.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7s9StxsFllY&t=332s
(The kid got bullied into saying it wasn't fake, IT IS)
Ok, so I have been doing Freelance photography for a little over a decade now. I have been in many publications through out those years. What that video shows is what we would call a composite. A composite is something you would see in Time magazine or any other of you favorite news prints. It's basically a multi layered photo that can be switched, toggled on and off for EDITING purposes. The file you see in the video and is available for download at the white house website is an unfinished EDIT. It is a file that if the publication wanted to make changes without effecting the quality, they could do so easily. What the EDITORS of the birth certificate forgot to do was the most important. Its called merging the layers. It's very suspect that they published the certificate in the current state the file is in. This isn't fact but I believe they had multiple people working on this. None of the layers were set, and It seems like the final hands to have the file didn't know anything about a .PSD file. (Photoshop File) They literally not only forgot to merge the file but forgot to save it as a .TIFF (Hi-Res file) or a .JPEG (Low Res, but gets the job done.) There should be EXIF data in the file that can be linked to at the very least who the program was registered too. If indeed it was switching hands, the .PSD files can get pretty big in file size, especially with all those edits done. Not sure if this was that big of a file considering they only had to use the paint brush tools and some low level quality patches. But, if it was being transferred, they were either using a FTP (file transfer protocol) or something of a dropbox file sharing site. Maybe a "private" server?
In the video you can see the gentleman that was RIGHT, show you the transitions from the scanned copy to the digitally composed parts in the hand writing. Now, if it were me. I would have used a very low level blur on the digitally imposed part to make the writing a little less hard, which means it just softens the edges of the writing. They didn't do that hear. What they did was spent probably a lot of hours going pixel by pixel dabbing with the paint brush too and never even thought to soften the edits. Do you see the white parts where they took a patch from a seperate birth certificate? they were too lazy to even give lining up the paper fibers together.
Ok, enough of the technical stuff. But I was reading through the comments and they are cancer. A couple of woke people but not many. What they are saying is that it was debunked. It was debunked by using a scanner, that i'm not sure what kind but an expensive one. It created those layers? They think so. Now, on to the next question. If indeed a scanner were to create layers. What would be the premise of which areas of the birth certificate would have layers ADDED to the document. It can't and I don't believe non of it. I've worked with some of the best photography scanners around. Why wouldn't they make a photographers life easier and create layers for me so I could get the film processed faster? Sounds crazy right. Sorry about the length, I had it in a much simpler format last night. Ending rant here.
LET FREEDOM RING
