>>17927852


They're fucking twins.

Never in all of time have two identical jackets or pair of pants existed.

Oh cool are they remaking Seconds Apart?

I'm not sure, you are talking about why the people on the right are so clear in the brightness right?

I'm not sure, maybe it has something to do with the cage and foliage? Perhaps something is behind the photographer.

>>17928009 here

It could be that they are really standing in the same light but the trees make it seem like they are in a darker spot.

>>17927880
No, they're both me.

>>17927881
>>17927929
Ha. I actually do have a brother who looks a lot like me, but we only have one of those jackets. I was borrowing it. Do you recommend the movie?

Literally no one has anything insightful to say about this?

Tell me I'm not a phantom. Or tell me I am. Either way, I'm a bit miffed by this.

>>17927852
Dear, HDR (this double exposure technique that overlaps two pictures taken "consecutively" with different diafragm openings so that both black and lighter parts of the scene are covered and that has been overused ad nauseam by photojournalist and urbex instagrammers of sorts for the last years ) is prpbably responsible of that picture (I used this on my old iPhone to make real glitch pictures while moving (in this case you are still and the child is the one moving) but arent they twins anyways?

>>17928183
This. Google Street View is chock full of shit like this.

>>17928183

Thanks for the response. I don't fully understand your post, could you elaborate?

No, it's just me twice. What's weird is if you look at my left foot, it's angled differently, no it's not clearly just me continuing my stride. Does that make sense?

>>17928277

Google street view involves the stitching of photos, so I don't find that in any way comparable. But please share an address if you have one.

If this were two photos on top of each other, why doesn't it otherwise look double exposed?

It's not an HDR photo, because I think it would say so on the screen.

>>17928278

Sorry for my poor syntax. Just search "HDR" and if it was active during the shot. When ut is, the camera will usually save two shots, one with HDR on and one with HDR off. If there are moving objects (or the camera is moving) there will be distorsions similar to this one due to the final picture bring the product of two different shots taken very closely on time at different exposure levels (you can forget the last four words.
But I am feeling terrible for playing the debunker here.
I will add that when this things happens (they do happen a lot) normally one of the images is not as solid as in this case. It will be more like the Blur that is right to te left of the guy on the background. The shape will be the same but it will have a different tone (ligther and sometimes semi transparent so it may still be due to ayleens)

Oh gee!
Looks the same, doesn't it?

i can only say one thing to this thread, especially for anybody who comes to /x/

in the words of our LORD:

"Judge not that ye be not judged."

!!!

>>17928363
fuck off christfags

>>17928363

Not sure what you mean by that, so go ahead and say two things. I'm curious how others perceive it.