chopped or not

[cxjon]

i just want to know if everyone here thinks this is chopped. i think it is... the person claims this was taken from a 8.2 megapixel camera. the license plate on the porsche chopped on. theres no need to use a flash with the light out.

this is another pic taken with a vg vx6000 camera phone of the porsche

look at the bottom of the plate

in the 1st pic the plate does not look right with the lighting and the bottom writing is not on it.

also notice the pic was taken straight on and the license plate has the same slope of the 2nd pic


notice the headlight are different as well

 

[TurboMirage]

dont most license plates have a reflective backing? thats what it looks like to me.

 

[posol]

im not even sure what im supposed to be looking at

 

[TurboMirage]

Originally posted by 92CivicCx@Jun 9 2004, 09:23 AM
the license plate looks off

here B. reading is FUNdamental.

 

[posol]

517-fbu?

:lost:

 

[cxjon]

bump

 

[cxjon]

the whole story is that this dude in the 2nd pic claimed he owned a 2002 porsche 911 cabriolet. i noticed that the plate was off and called him on it but he denied it. after i posted the 2nd pic i noticed the headlights werent the same. i did a little research wham i found out that the 99-01 headlights and bumper was a bit different do to the not totaly clear headlight.

 

[Celerity]

As the sysop on undernet's #autos channel, I get a lot of this.

Your little buddy there is claiming to own a car that he simply doesn't own. If he did manage the downpayment, he won't own the car for long.

The two porsches are different. the top is a 1999, the bottom is a 2002-03.

The bottom picture is not a garage, but a storage bin. The upper licence plate has been photoshopped on, entirely from scratch. Like in my photochop seen here:

I used a font, free transformed and kept in mind what the legal limits of vanity plates were. If you want a complete list of the chops in this pic, feel free to IM me.

-> Steve

 

[complicity]

also notice the pic was taken straight on and the license plate has the same slope of the 2nd pic

did you mean the pic was taken head-on in the second shot? if so, then no, it wasn't. look at the right side (your right, not the cars, from the drivers seat) of the car. there is more body shown on the right than on the left. the photo was taken from a slight angle, the photographer was standing slightly to the right of the car.

also, i don't know if that's writing on the bottom of the plate. could be a design, could be the frame, could be something entirely different.

as for the first pic, the plate could just be reflective. if the light hits it right, then it'll light up. jersey ones do, anyway.

the guy also throws a shadow onto the ground from the headlights, which looks natural.

just my .02.

*although, upon a second look, the bottom of the headlights do look very different.

 

[cxjon]

you didn't even notice the totaly different headlights and bumpers

 

[complicity]

Originally posted by 92CivicCx@Jun 9 2004, 11:59 AM
you didn't even notice the totaly different headlights and bumpers

yeah i did, i edited

i dont see a big difference in the bumpers, though. just a lighting change.

 

[asmallsol]

anyone can take a picture of a car with them standing in front of it. If it was him actually driving, then its a tad more beliveable (even though the 2 cars are not the same) But I have had my picture taken in front of an Enzo, S7, Ford GT and tons of other bad ass cars, doesn't mean I own them

 

[cxjon]

Originally posted by complicity+Jun 9 2004, 10:01 AM-->

92CivicCx

@Jun 9 2004, 11:59 AM
you didn't even notice the totaly different headlights and bumpers

yeah i did, i edited

i dont see a big difference in the bumpers, though. just a lighting change.

there two different cars in the 1st pic it has a hard top and the bottom is a soft top
he said cuz it was raining so much he put the hard top on. in the 1st pic th side vents on the bumper are not slopped like the bottom one. the plate sits lower in the 2nd one

i am only askin this and pointing this out cuz that fucker was calling me a pedofile all because i said a 17 year old was cute. he was also calling my an idiot and a bunch of other shit and to top it off he was calling my car a peice of shit

 

[complicity]

asmallsol: i'm not trying to discern whether it's his or not, but whether it's a chop

92civiccx: i did notice the tops, but it could be the lighting. the lighting in the garage looks pretty dim.

in the 1st pic th side vents on the bumper are not slopped like the bottom one. the plate sits lower in the 2nd one

consider the angles. in the first pic, the photo is taken HEAD on. the photographer was more than likely crouching with the camera. in the second pic, the photographer was obviously standing up. from different angles, slopes and such seem different. for example, think about a lamp shade, a standard looking one. if you're standing above it and are looking down at it, the curves will seem to be convex, or to curve out towards the floor. if you're looking at it from below, the curves will seem to curve around, looking wider, towards the cieling.

did that make sense?

oh well. that guy sucks. <_<

 

[cxjon]

1. different headlights and different bumper due to headlights
2. bumper vents are different
3. plates are different

 

[CRX-YEM]

does it really matter if he ownes the car or not. if he's lieing he's only fooling himself.

 

[cxjon]

tru but he is talking shit about me and other people

 

[Citizen_Insane]

So kick his ass or ignore him.

 

[phunky.buddha]

 

[jamesA]

Yah it's chopped. in the second pic the bottom of the headlights are even with the hood line, in the first pic... they're not.

One of those cars might be his, but I don't think the other one is.