The EU debate - Part III

The Sun did not alter the pic, you assume as you always do and often you are wrong.

 

What was the answer then, remind me, or are you a coward like Sad Stan and Tobes.

 

Bullshit.,...

This is the Beeb's pic of her. Darker than The Times, but undoubtedly not as dark as The Sun have made her look....

 

I've never been a coward, Kustard.

And, and I told you I will handle it my way.

 

Pic from the Guardian, its all to do with natural light when pic was taken, have you ever used a camera?

 

You offering the straightener again?

You skinhead ****wit

 

Kustard seems to be in a particularly angry and illiterate mood today.

 

But in the Sun's pic her colour is just so unnatural. It's obviously been tampered with.

 

Zoomed in pic, its pixelated to hell

 

You seem to know more about it than me, so ok.

It does make me suspicious as to why The Sun would use a pic that clearly shows her darker skinned than she really is...

 

You don't get true colour in print so much of it is preference, like choosing colour balance on a TV. Nothing to do with pixelation, modern press cameras are 36MP CMOS which has a resolution way beyond that required by print precisely so that you can zoom into small sections of the image without pixelation

 

I'm more surprised the Sun hasn't found a picture of her topless from Marbella '88.

 

Bet she looked fit in 88

 

She looks fit now

 

The pic is pixelated, also newsprint is suspect at the best of times, The press that is printing the "Sun" is running at 86K full colour papers every hour, at that speed colour goes out the window very quick.

Your average press will run around 7-10k per hour

 

But you wouldn't want her living next door to you, would you Kustard?

 

It will have been printed at the resolution the press is capable of and unaffected by zoom of the original image ( as you originally tried to claim).
If it hadn't been taken by a professional press photographer you might have a point as the quality of the camera would be an unknown, that clearly isn't the case.

 

Newspaper print is printed at (the Sun) 150dpi, magazines at 300 dpi, screen is 72dpi.

You can see the pic is crap from the sun.

Google the woman, every pic shows here with a different colour skin tone.

 

Same pic used in the metro

 

Bullshit
Screen dpi depends on screen size and resolution.

A 15 inch screen with 1600 x 1200 pixels is 151 dpi. To get as low as 72 would need a 21 inch screen with 1152 x 864 which would beg the question of why not use a higher resolution that the graphics card can handle (1920 x 1080 full HD for example).
I should add that the resolution is again a limitation of the screen/ graphics card and not a full rendition of an image unless you zoom.