Crash Tests for Dummies

September 21st, 2009

Reaction 1: Wow, cars are a lot safer now!

Reaction 2: Hey, wait a second. There’s no engine in that old car!

Reaction 3: The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety are a bunch of jerks for faking a “scientific” test. >:(

Original NY Times story: A 2009 Chevy Malibu Destroys a 1959 Bel Air — Literally

NY Times follow-up: More Details About 1959 Bel Air Crash Test

Popularity: 26%

Diversity, Photoshop, Failure

June 11th, 2009

And just what exactly is New Dad looking at?

This is the cover of Toronto’s latest Summer Fun guide. A black dude’s face was edited in to “increase diversity”, because a happy latino-looking family isn’t quite “diverse” enough. The best part is how they’re totally aware an unapologetic about this:

The smiling, ethnically diverse family featured on the cover of Toronto’s latest edition of its summer Fun Guide was digitally altered to make the photo more “inclusive,” which city officials say is in keeping with a policy to reflect diversity.

A spokesman for the department that publishes the guide listing recreation activities confirmed the publication was doctored to insert the face of a different father.

“The goal was to depict the diversity of Toronto and its residents.”

Who knew increasing diversity was so easy! We should Photoshop brown people into all photos until we have this racism thing fixed once and for all. Who’s with me?

Source: National Post

Popularity: 52%

Disable Google Chrome’s New Tab Recent History

May 19th, 2009

There have been methods posted to fix this available for a while now. However, a recent update to Chrome seems to have broken the existing methods and I haven’t seen any sites that explain how to get it working again. So, here’s how to successfully disable this terrible “feature” as of version 2.0.172.27 of Chrome.

  • Go to the following directory:
    • In Vista: %USERPROFILE%\AppData\Local\Google\Chrome\User Data\Default
    • In XP: %USERPROFILE%\Local Settings\Application Data\Google\Chrome\User Data\Default
  • Add a directory named User Scripts
  • Open a text editor and enter the following:
if(document.location.href=='chrome://newtab/'){
  var countTries=0;
  function checkDOM(){
    if(countTries<100){
      if(document.getElementsByTagName("BODY")[0]){
        document.getElementsByTagName("BODY")[0].style.display='none';
      } else {
        countTries++;
        window.setTimeout(checkDOM,1);
      }
    }
  }
  checkDOM();
}
  • Save the file to the User Scripts directory with the filename NoSpeedDial.user.js
  • Create a shortcut to Chrome (or update your current one) to include the parameter:
  •  --enable-user-scripts
  • Start Chrome and open a new tab. If all went well, the new tab should be blank.

This file has been updated slightly to make it work with current versions of Chrome. The change was updating the following line:

if(document.location.href=='chrome-ui://newtab/'){

To this:

if(document.location.href=='chrome://newtab/'){

The method outlined above is based on the original script that can be found here: http://www.adsweep.org/NoSpeedDial.user.js.

Popularity: 29%

Blatant Viral Marketing

April 16th, 2009

Normally I wouldn’t partake in advertising gimmicks, but this is actually pretty cool. The video claims that it’s shot in one single take and that there are no edits or special effects. Can you figure out how they do it? Double click on the video so it loads up on Youtube’s site and click on HD to see it in the highest possible quality.

Don’t read any futher until you’ve tried to figure it out on your own!

Here’s my guess as to how it’s done:

  • It isn’t a mirror. There are two identical yet mirrored rooms and the “mirror” is just a pane of glass.
  • There are two sets of similar looking actors.
  • He makes the camera disappear by dropping it in sync with the hand swiping down.
  • He makes the camera reappear by grabbing a different one from an obscured shelf on the “mirror” side when the camera tilts down.

Clues that lead to this conclusion:

  • The girlfriend’s socks are blue are the “real” side, and black on the “mirror” side.
  • His fingers don’t line up properly when he touches the mirror.
  • Look closely at the Samsung logo on the camera when he gets close to the mirror. All the letters are reversed, except for the S’s.
  • In the mirror image, his hand covers the camera’s lens an instant before the local hand covers the view.
  • You can see his shadow move when the camera tilts down, as if he’s reaching for the camera that he makes reappear.His feet down line up properly when he’s walking away from the camera.
  • There are various props set up in the apartment to try to make it very clear that the fake mirror is a real mirror.

This effect was used in Terminator 2: Judgement Day. In a scene found only in the DVD release, T-1000 (Arnold Schwarzenegger) is sitting in front of a mirror while Sarah Connor works on his head. From the viewer’s perspective, you get to see right inside T-1000′s head, yet in the mirror you can see his face clearly.  Two identical yet mirrored sets were arranged, and a pane of class on a fake wall was used as the mirror. They went as far as to employ Linda Hamilton’s twin sister in the scene so that the mirror images would look as similar as possible. More info: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0103064/trivia

Popularity: 30%

That sure looks familiar

April 7th, 2009

27418365

It’s not a deranged digital illustration. It’s not a surrealist Maya rendering. This is a McDonald’s Big Mac seen through a CT scanner. The NY Times has a slide show featuring a whole bunch of everyday items seen through a CT scanner. I think I’ll pass on the Chicken McNuggets today.

Source: nytimes

Popularity: 32%

Inside joke

April 6th, 2009

Progression of an inside joke.

sain-exchange-server

sain-exchange-server-oh-no

sain-exchange-server-oh-no-what-now

sain-exchange-server-oh-no-now-what-mcse-oracle-lol-bbq

If I explained it, it wouldn’t be an inside joke anymore, now would it? Original posted below.

Popularity: 29%

Sure. OK. Whatever.

April 1st, 2009

britney spears concert 6 040309

Wow. On the left is a recent photo of Britney Spears in concert. On the right is a  new Candies ad featuring Britney Spears… after it was retouched by The Best Photoshop Experts on Earth.

Source: wwtdd

Popularity: 43%

Hopefully they charged by the freckle

March 27th, 2009
SPL89851_002

Maybe it was just really good lighting.

Yet another example of how photo retouching can completely change someone’s appearance. On the left is photo of Lindsay Lohan from the promotional material for her new spray-on tan product. On the right is a photo of her without any Photoshop wizardry. At least this time they used Photoshop to remove something from her instead of using it to add something.

Source: wwtdd

Popularity: 38%

Kim Kardashian airbrushed? Say it ain’t so.

March 25th, 2009
gallery_enlarged-0325_kim_kardashian_complex_00

Hmm. Something's different.

These are a comparison of photos of Kim Kardashian that appeared on the web site for Complex magazine. First the image on the left appeared, then shortly after the heavily airbrushed image on the right replaced it. Now it appears the photo has been removed completely. Whoops.

Source: thesuperficial, ANIMAL

Popularity: 58%

The Curious Case of Lindsay Lohan’s Vagina

March 24th, 2009
I'm as surprised as you, kitty.

I'm as surprised as you, kitty.

On September 5th, 2006, Lindsay Lohan attended The 63rd Venice International Film Festival. Not in attendance that day were her underpants. However, the series of events that took place surrounding this incident is the stuff of internet legend.

It seemed simple enough to comprehend. Ms. Lohan arrives at the event by boat and in billowing dress sans underpants steps on to a dock full of paparazzi. Milliseconds later upskirt photos began appearing on all the celebrity blogs. The image had indications of fakery but Lindsay was no stranger to unfortunate wardrobe malfunctions.

This is when things get weird. Soon after the upskirt photo hits the blogs, another version of the exact same photo appears, this time with Ms. Lohan wearing pink underwear. For a moment, it would confirm that the original pic was a fake and restore Linday’s squeaky-clean public persona.

lohan-venice-doctored

Hmm, something is going on here.

Since both photos have indications of being fake, comparisons of the two become the topic on internet forums. Then a clever blogger notices that the EXIF information in the panty-clad photo contains the following description:

PICTURE BY:DANIELE VENTURELLI / MATRIXPHOTOS.COM
PLEASE CREDIT ALL USES
Looks like Lindsay Lohan fogot to put her knickers on before attentending Venice Film Festival. Linsay arrived by boat, when she stepped off she fashed a no-knicker shot!

This was the same EXIF information contained in the original sans-panty image originally posted! Someone, be it a zealous fan or possibly even Lindsay’s publicity team, had doctored the original photo, adding panties in an effort to cast doubt on the original and smooth over a publicity snafu.

Sadly, the efforts of the loyal fan or determined publicist were all for naught. A week later, on September 12th, Lindsay let the cat out of the bag again, and this time there was just no hiding it.

lohan-again

Again.

Happily, after all this media attention, Lindsay Lohan was able to overcome these dark and drafty times. Not only did she go on to a successful music and film career, she was able to avoid the stereotypical celebrity path of drugs & alcohol and even found her soul mate.

Popularity: 99%