User Panel
Quoted: It's not representative of the original image. the info was not there. they are creating it and inserting it to get the outcome they want. the image is speculation View Quote it's a question of resolution and whether the interpolated data matches reality. if the interpolated data is within perceived accuracy, then it really doesn't mater. For example, I used to do an aviation calendar for the aerospace division of the company I worked for. It involved enlarging images to fit a large calendar. There was no evidence of anything that wasn't part of an F-18, for example, in image of the F-18. While there was certainly pixels created , they were so slight as to be undetectable and did not change the image in any discernible manner. The discernible manner is the key part. In this case (the trial) I suspect they are going to try and show 3d data that they can't. You need to know focal length, altitude of the drone, position of the drone, etc, etc. They won't have any of that. lens compression from a smaller aperture will make things look closer together than they actually are. forced perspective happens in photos all the time, showing something that wasn't quite correct. |
|
distance drone footage that requires exceptional "enhancement" by a liberal crime lab who can't explain shit
|
|
|
|
I'm not changing details, I'm adding pixels (creating them out of nowhere to make new details).
|
|
Quoted: this is why we need a national divorce. we cant be expected to coexist with retards who want to kill us View Quote Anybody who wants a national divorce better be prepared to have China, Russia and whoever else the left coast can pimp itself out to having troops in continental North America. You ok with that? |
|
|
There is nothing there if it takes this much effort to see something.
|
|
I have participated in and/or observed several trials, and I have NEVER seen a judge get out of his or her seat to look at evidence.
|
|
|
Ok so their state image guy, took that drone video and made stills, then increased size.
It doesn't seem to me like this is solid evidence of anything. I tend to agree that an image blown up will create new pixels with colors that could change the interpretation, especially when there aren't that many pixels in the first place. If the jury sees this, it should be in video form where it hasn't been 'enhanced' in any way. |
|
Judge now nose to screen..... with glasses.
Allowed!!! with cross. |
|
So now, the state's whole case hinges on "enchance, enhance, see how Mr Rittenhouse provoked confrontation by pointing his rifle"
|
|
If the video is let in, Kyle is cooked. One small pixelated image will convict him..
|
|
Rebuttal to Rittenhouse saying he was issued body armor and Rittenhouse not enrolled at college
|
|
Quoted: How do they know the camera guy enlarged his photos? What size were they taken at and at what resolution? That's different than zooming in on grainy pixels just so the state can make a point. View Quote With several of my camera sensors, even zoomed in at 800% the image is relatively smooth. But that's a Canon CMOS sensor doing what it does. The others start noticeably breaking up at 400%. To examine an image forensically you need the original image, without modifications. |
|
|
State claims PD didn't give Kyle a bullet proof vest and he doesn't attend the school he claimed?
|
|
State to rebut Kyles " schooling and bullet proof vest from police."
ETA: I believe it is a plate carrier? |
|
Did I hear this right... Kyle apparently said on a website (I'm assuming facebook or twitter) that he was a student at Arizona State, and he is not obviously... and they want to call a rebuttal witness to testify to that?
LMAO. This is a sign of desperation. |
|
Kyle in that video takes up less pixels that small mario on the original gameboy. State is going to enhance it to the point where he looks like a character from call of duty on PS5.
|
|
|
Quoted: Here is how the left is reacting. https://imgur.com/gallery/9db5zWU https://i.imgur.com/Dd8iW46.jpeg View Quote I gotta say....damn boneheaded to wear that. |
|
Quoted: Did I hear this right... Kyle apparently said on a website (I'm assuming facebook or twitter) that he was a student at Arizona State, and he is not obviously... and they want to call a rebuttal witness to testify to that? LMAO. This is a sign of desperation. View Quote Defense says they can open an online class Kyle is a student in to show the judge. |
|
Quoted: With several of my camera sensors, even zoomed in at 800% the image is relatively smooth. But that's a Canon CMOS sensor doing what it does. The others start noticeably breaking up at 400%. To examine an image forensically you need the original image, without modifications. View Quote exactly - what was the sensor resolution of the camera, what is the per frame resolution, etc. then what was the focal length and aperture used. what was the altitude and distance from the area that the drone filmed from. |
|
Quoted: Did I hear this right... Kyle apparently said on a website (I'm assuming facebook or twitter) that he was a student at Arizona State, and he is not obviously... and they want to call a rebuttal witness to testify to that? LMAO. This is a sign of desperation. View Quote Where else would @4doorsmoarwhores go to school? |
|
Quoted: Did I hear this right... Kyle apparently said on a website (I'm assuming facebook or twitter) that he was a student at Arizona State, and he is not obviously... and they want to call a rebuttal witness to testify to that? LMAO. This is a sign of desperation. View Quote He said it on the stand |
|
Quoted: Kyle testified he had no malfunction. The lying bicep boy made up his hero story, and still got smoked by a 17 yo. View Quote I'm still curious how Gage came up with the malfunction story. I know people here were claiming Kyle had a malfunction at the time based upon the video. Is it possible he read about it on the internet and decided to run with that? |
|
I can't believe the defense hasn't brought up, especially with the GG incident, that just because something appears pointed at something else on a 2D image, that it in fact is.
It could be pointed to either the right or left by quiet a bit. |
|
|
|
Quoted: Anybody who wants a national divorce better be prepared to have China, Russia and whoever else the left coast can pimp itself out to having troops in continental North America. You ok with that? View Quote I'm not. Besides if we did split apart the liberals would just sneak illegally into the red states anyways. We don't need a division of our Republic. What we need is a Constitutional Amendment that removes universal suffrage and makes participating in the political process (voting, holding office) dependent on earning it through Federal, State, or local service or actually paying into the system via taxes the previous year (i.e. no federal tax refund received). |
|
|
Quoted: Did I hear this right... Kyle apparently said on a website (I'm assuming facebook or twitter) that he was a student at Arizona State, and he is not obviously... and they want to call a rebuttal witness to testify to that? LMAO. This is a sign of desperation. View Quote ASU has a 100% distance learning program where you can get a degree without setting foot on campus. Know somebody who graduated from there that way. |
|
|
i didn't watch the beginning of this trial but most of these images aren't even clearly kyle or anyone identifiable.
did the defense not even take that route or they corroborated through other witnesses or what? |
|
Quoted: HHHHMMMMMMMMuH good point View Quote Real convenient how, despite their apparent involvement in much of what went on that night leading up to the shooting, including apparently firing a gun in the air as Pedo started to chase Kyle, very little has been brought up about them, and where stuff would seemingly need to be brought up, they are strangely omitted. "Cropped Out". Of an image that is supposed to show that Kyle point his gun... at them. |
|
|
Quoted: it's a question of resolution and whether the interpolated data matches reality. if the interpolated data is within perceived accuracy, then it really doesn't mater. For example, I used to do an aviation calendar for the aerospace division of the company I worked for. It involved enlarging images to fit a large calendar. There was no evidence of anything that wasn't part of an F-18, for example, in image of the F-18. While there was certainly pixels created , they were so slight as to be undetectable and did not change the image in any discernible manner. The discernible manner is the key part. In this case (the trial) I suspect they are going to try and show 3d data that they can't. You need to know focal length, altitude of the drone, position of the drone, etc, etc. They won't have any of that. lens compression from a smaller aperture will make things look closer together than they actually are. forced perspective happens in photos all the time, showing something that wasn't quite correct. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted: Quoted: It's not representative of the original image. the info was not there. they are creating it and inserting it to get the outcome they want. the image is speculation it's a question of resolution and whether the interpolated data matches reality. if the interpolated data is within perceived accuracy, then it really doesn't mater. For example, I used to do an aviation calendar for the aerospace division of the company I worked for. It involved enlarging images to fit a large calendar. There was no evidence of anything that wasn't part of an F-18, for example, in image of the F-18. While there was certainly pixels created , they were so slight as to be undetectable and did not change the image in any discernible manner. The discernible manner is the key part. In this case (the trial) I suspect they are going to try and show 3d data that they can't. You need to know focal length, altitude of the drone, position of the drone, etc, etc. They won't have any of that. lens compression from a smaller aperture will make things look closer together than they actually are. forced perspective happens in photos all the time, showing something that wasn't quite correct. So the program is giving it it's best guess and cleaning it up with the alogrithm to make it look pretty? |
|
|
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.