Talk:Lucian Niemeyer

photoshop imagery
There is some confusion and doubt over the commons images being used in this article.

See the current discussion at the helpdesk - Help_desk - for further details. In short; the commons images, despite being taken from an apparent legitimate source seem to be a mash-up of at least three different digital images:


 * 1) Thomas Goffus
 * 2) Energy exchange speakers
 * 3) ISM Strategies

Chaheel Riens (talk) 19:10, 11 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Is that a reason not to have a picture at all? The first image above is of some other guy against the background in the Army portrait studio at the Pentagon, the other two appear to be genuine pictures of the subject. I suggest restoring the image that was in the article before. Maproom (talk) 19:24, 11 September 2017 (UTC)
 * The point is that the images are quite likely to be faked - or to be generous, unrealistically photoshopped, despite coming from what at first glance appears to be reliable:


 * The Thomas Goffus image contains the same EXIF data as the commons image, including the OriginalDocumentID	18C5B142A0376985A3B9D7D4872AD933 - the whole point of the OriginalDocumentID flag is to uniquely identify images, and you'd expect the military to get this right, but here we have two different images sharing not only the same DocID, but indeed almost everything else - including the image description, which is for a different person.
 * The ISM Strategies image is the same suit, tie and pose as the commons image - the chin is the same as that in the commons image, but everything above that - mouth upwards is different.
 * In this Flickr image it can be seen that Niemeyer's hair and eyebrows match those in the commons image, but his face and jowls are (no disrespect via the term) much flabbier and he has a noticeable double chin.
 * I'm not sure if this will work for other users, but when I google image search for "Lucian Niemeyer" one of the results it brings back is what appears to be the origin of the photoshopped hair and eyebrows - but when the image is clicked on it takes the user to a different image - the ISM Strategies one linked above. Here's the link, in case you see the same thing I do:
 * Chaheel Riens (talk) 19:49, 11 September 2017 (UTC)
 * The US Department of Defense just didn't change the EXIF. Their mistake does not constitute a removal from us simply because they didn't change the EXIF. And quite honestly, I take offense to someone accusing my of uploading a "fake image". Complete and total nonsense. Corkythe  hornetfan  (ping me) 20:01, 11 September 2017 (UTC)
 * I don't know where you assume that I'm accusing you of photoshopping the image, because I make no such claim anywhere. On the contrary I am very specific in my claims for removal, with an entire section written up here, so it was hardly an "unexplained removal" - all I say (with no apportionment of blame) is that the images have been photoshopped, and this casts doubt on their validity.  I outline my reasoning above but it can be seen by looking at both images side by side.  You can even see where it's been done - if you look at his right shoulder, where his suit meets the red & white of the flag there is a very sharp line where his suit has been pasted in - you can even see the blur of the original image right on the edge.
 * If you want some real fun open up two windows of each image, and click on them alternatively for some crazy-hair swapping madness.
 * I'm bringing this up over at Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard because - through no fault of yours - we're using images with suspect provenance. Chaheel Riens (talk) 20:16, 11 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Additional: It's quite obvious that you haven't done the photoshopping yourself, because the image is exactly the same as the one from Energy Exchange.  I repeat - nowhere do I say you did it - only that it's been done.  Chill, man.  Chaheel Riens (talk) 20:19, 11 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I just read it wrong. I can see where they've taken the picture from here and placed it with the background they use for the Defense Dept. As I told another user, the first photo came directly from the website, so they've apparently updated it to this one. With that being said, both pictures are of Lucian Niemeyer, as it is pretty evident. I've contacted the Dept. to see if they could give a reasoning. Once again, sorry. Corkythe hornetfan  (ping me) 20:51, 11 September 2017 (UTC)