Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Chinese Officials Need a Better Photoshopper

samzenpus posted about 3 years ago | from the a-little-more-effort-please dept.

China 105

A clearly photoshopped picture of three Chinese officials inspecting a newly laid road is becoming an internet sensation. The picture posted on a local council's website, shows the men hovering a few inches off the ground with the edges of their bodies blurred. Government officials offer the following explanation: "...a professional photographer had been employed to photograph the three men inspecting the road surface. But after taking a set of real shots of the officials, the unnamed photographer decided that the pictures were just not good enough. With true artistic temperament he set about 'Photoshopping' the three men onto the empty road to create something better." Plenty of parody pictures have popped up already, and I look forward to seeing where the trio end up over the weekend.

cancel ×

105 comments

Hovering (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36633770)

Maybe they really ARE hovering!

Re:Hovering (1)

yourdeadin (944000) | about 3 years ago | (#36634110)

I just can't stop laughing at this pic.!!!!!

Better Photoshopper, or Better Photographer? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36634486)

If a poorly 'shopped pic is still better than the original, then maybe you need a better photographer.

Re:Hovering (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36634664)

OMG!! China invented HOVER SHOES!!!

Re:Hovering (1)

Xacid (560407) | about 3 years ago | (#36635676)

Only leaders in North Korea are capable of such things.

screw that (1)

cshark (673578) | about 3 years ago | (#36633808)

where can I find the parody pictures?

Re:screw that (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36633842)

where can I find the parody pictures?

The article has some.

Re:screw that (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36634404)

Wait... there are articles here?

Re:screw that (1)

SanityInAnarchy (655584) | about 3 years ago | (#36636552)

The article also appears to have audio ads which automatically play and have no obvious way to kill other than adblock or closing the page.

Re:screw that (1)

asdf7890 (1518587) | about 3 years ago | (#36636828)

Flashblock (or script block if you want to go one further). Auto-playing audio adverts are the main reason I installed that in the first place. Also useful for video ads when I'm mobile and don't have that much bandwidth to throw at something I couldn't give a rat's arse about.

Step inside, I'd like to discuss something w/ you (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36639336)

http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2282088&cid=36639318 [slashdot.org]

And, I really do NOT like you talking behind my back either... but, show up there, and we can discuss what I brought up (see you there).

APK

Re:screw that (1)

rbrausse (1319883) | about 3 years ago | (#36633864)

you should know, the underlined text in TFS is called "link" and you can "click" it with your "mouse". Good luck!

Re:screw that (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36633938)

That works in the summary, but not necessarily in the comments.

You can't click links in any way in Chrome since Slashdot made its latest minor update.

Re:screw that (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36634058)

Or in Firefox 5.

Re:screw that (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36634106)

What do you expect, it's tough for a web developer to keep up with these newfangled technologies like "links" and "checkboxes". I mean, this is only the 3rd time Slashdot has broken the site in the exact same fucking way.

Re:screw that (3, Informative)

LordLimecat (1103839) | about 3 years ago | (#36636328)

Disable Javascript's ability to change or disable context menus, and everything works again. Hurrah!

Re:screw that (1)

Golddess (1361003) | about 3 years ago | (#36634314)

Or 3.6. Double-right-clicking brings up the right-click menu though, and from there you can select your desired option.

Re:screw that (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36634108)

They don't work in Safari either anymore. Even before, there was already the problem that clicking a link resulted in simply expanding the parent comment. Only once all comments until the root had been expanded (one click required for each expansion, plus every time scrolling back to the link you were actually interested in), the link itself would work.

Re:screw that (1)

LordLimecat (1103839) | about 3 years ago | (#36636340)

if you adjust the comment level sliders, it will expand all the parents as well.

Re:screw that (2)

Culture20 (968837) | about 3 years ago | (#36634196)

Look on the bright side: no Rick-rolling.

Re:screw that (1)

perryizgr8 (1370173) | about 3 years ago | (#36635266)

firefox too

Re:screw that (1)

LordLimecat (1103839) | about 3 years ago | (#36636318)

Yes, you can! I just figured out how.

Go into options of whatever browser you have, and block "javascript can change or disable context menus".

Works in firefox, not only can I now rightclick/copy link, but normal left click also miraculously works.

Re:screw that (1)

kodefive (1303449) | about 3 years ago | (#36636936)

Thank you! Slashdot is now no longer broken from my point of view.

Re:screw that (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36634566)

Please refrain from trolling. THERE IS NO "link" you can "click" with a "mouse" on TFA (it only contains four parody pictures).

Re:screw that (1)

wideBlueSkies (618979) | about 3 years ago | (#36634006)

RTFA.

haha oh wait (1)

alphatel (1450715) | about 3 years ago | (#36633836)

So how does this beat gary busey meme [somethingawful.com] ?

Re:haha oh wait (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36634002)

In every concievable way?

keyword:floating officials (1)

Tei (520358) | about 3 years ago | (#36633846)

If you want to see more images about this, the keyword seems "floating officials". Anyway I can't see much.

Job transfer... (1)

TarpaKungs (466496) | about 3 years ago | (#36633884)

Someone is going to find they have a new job soon. Farming rabbit droppings in Mongolia...

Multiple parody pictures (4, Informative)

Ross R. Smith (2225686) | about 3 years ago | (#36633922)

http://patriciachan.com/2011/06/how-to-not-photoshop-official-government-photos-funny-chinese-bad-photoshop-sensation/#respond [patriciachan.com]

Direct link to small paragraph on story and contains many of the parody photos for those interested.

Re:Multiple parody pictures (0)

anss123 (985305) | about 3 years ago | (#36634262)

http://patriciachan.com/2011/06/how-to-not-photoshop-official-government-photos-funny-chinese-bad-photoshop-sensation/#respond [patriciachan.com] Direct link to small paragraph on story and contains many of the parody photos for those interested.

NSFW - They're shopping them onto porn over there.

And is it just for me clicking links is a pain here on Slashdot? I have to C&P them in IE9, or middle click in Firefox 5.

Re:Multiple parody pictures (1)

anss123 (985305) | about 3 years ago | (#36634278)

Oh wait, replied to the wrong post. Sorry.

Re:Multiple parody pictures (1)

Ross R. Smith (2225686) | about 3 years ago | (#36634466)

You will be!

*shakes fist in the air*

Re:Multiple parody pictures (1)

PitaBred (632671) | about 3 years ago | (#36634660)

Not sure how that's NSFW, but whatever. What's sad is that many of the parodies are significantly better than the original photoshop

Re:Multiple parody pictures (1)

anss123 (985305) | about 3 years ago | (#36634834)

I managed to reply to the wrong post. It's the Chinasmack link that is NSFW

Re:Multiple parody pictures (1)

memyselfandeye (1849868) | about 3 years ago | (#36635082)

By the by, as funny as the parodies are ,what's with the original? The guy on the right looks like he's pointing to the ground and saying "Ah... look how close I am to the edge." And the others are just looking onward, as if to say, "Chan is a very brave man for walking so close to that edge. We should all be very proud of this very safe road that one can walk on the edge so close without falling over."

Re:Multiple parody pictures (1)

perryizgr8 (1370173) | about 3 years ago | (#36635300)

even middle click is not working for me. i have to drag and drop, both in ie9 and ff5

Re:Multiple parody pictures (1)

jacksonyee (590218) | about 3 years ago | (#36649236)

The best thing about these parody pictures is that they actually made it onto CCTV Nightly News, one of the most watched programs in China where I first saw these pictures. I do have to say that I'm rather partial to the moon landing one where they're in the background myself. 8-)

Re:Multiple parody pictures (1)

Coren22 (1625475) | about 3 years ago | (#36662226)

They made it onto Closed Circuit TV?

FFS! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36633976)

"the unnamed photographer decided that the pictures were just not good enough"

No, the unnammed photographer is not good enough! For flip's sake any photographer, amateur or pro could at least spot the difference in light between subject and background!!

Re:FFS! (1)

Khashishi (775369) | about 3 years ago | (#36635698)

:s/photographer/guy with camera/

This is news? (1)

ctrimm (1955430) | about 3 years ago | (#36634054)

This is what qualifies as news? I know /. has been slipping a bit lately, but seriously?

Re:This is news? (2)

RivenAleem (1590553) | about 3 years ago | (#36634222)

News?

THIS. IS. IDLE!

Re:This is news? (1)

NetNed (955141) | about 3 years ago | (#36636288)

And it's old to. Saw it a couple days ago. In slash dot days that's 4 or 5 years old!

Re:This is news? (1)

.tekrox (858002) | about 3 years ago | (#36638400)

>Saw it a couple days ago. In slash dot days that's 4 or 5 years old!
No, it's about repost time.

More info + spoof Photoshops (2)

doctor_no (214917) | about 3 years ago | (#36634060)

ChinaSmack has much more detailed coverage on this story, including translated Chinese netizen reactions and ton of photoshops. There are only a few ways that the Chinese can criticize the "ZF" (Chinese Government), these sorts of harmless mockery is one of them.

http://www.chinasmack.com/2011/pictures/floating-chinese-government-officials-stun-netizens.html [chinasmack.com]

Re:More info + spoof Photoshops (2)

neurophil12 (1054552) | about 3 years ago | (#36634924)

^ NSFW

Ahh, dear old Daily Mail... (3, Informative)

EyeballKid (306461) | about 3 years ago | (#36634072)

...you'd never resort to such crassness, would you?
http://www.mailwatch.co.uk/category/photoshop-disaster/

For those too lazy to read more than the summary (1)

FrootLoops (1817694) | about 3 years ago | (#36634112)

The men did in fact visit the road, as evidenced by a couple of real pictures in the article. It really seems to be an honest mistake by someone terrible at image editing.

Re:For those too lazy to read more than the summar (1)

Culture20 (968837) | about 3 years ago | (#36634282)

I'd say an honest mistake would be something like using redeye reduction and removing all red in the photo. This was an attempt to create a new scene where they admired the road while showing off their godly powers of levitation.

Re:For those too lazy to read more than the summar (2)

Arlet (29997) | about 3 years ago | (#36634392)

So ? This is no different than any fashion photo on the cover of a magazine.

Re:For those too lazy to read more than the summar (1)

Culture20 (968837) | about 3 years ago | (#36634830)

A fashion photo is intended to be a work of art, not an accurate record of government officials' actions (even actions as boring as admiring a road while levitating).

Re:For those too lazy to read more than the summar (3, Insightful)

Rockoon (1252108) | about 3 years ago | (#36634956)

Thats a cultural bias that you are expressing.

It could just as easily be the other way around.

Re:For those too lazy to read more than the summar (1)

Culture20 (968837) | about 3 years ago | (#36636102)

Thats a cultural bias that you are expressing. It could just as easily be the other way around.

Yes, I know. The Communist cultural bias is that portrayals of government actions or photos depicting actual reality should be works of art, molded for best propaganda, but fashion is a worthless endeavor and everyone should wear gray and red. That doesn't mean that my cultural bias isn't a better cultural bias though.

Get your browser history right (1)

wye43 (769759) | about 3 years ago | (#36652042)

"We believe that Internet Explorer is a really good browser" - Steve Jobs, 1997

I know this is Slashdot and there was some disastrous stuff happening with IE6, but lets get facts right.

Back in 1997, IE4 was launched. IE4 and IE5 WERE really good browsers. They introduced the new DHTML engine in IE4, and it was WAY faster and more powerful and more stable than the real alternative at that time, which was Netscape 4.

Re:Get your browser history right (1)

MaDeR (826021) | about 3 years ago | (#36659136)

Who gives a crap about your coprolite archeology?

Re:For those too lazy to read more than the summar (1)

Arlet (29997) | about 3 years ago | (#36635458)

The photo of the government officials was a pretty accurate record. The picture of the three men was taken when they were admiring the new road, and the background was an actual picture of that same road.

The photoshopped picture was merely a small cosmetic change to remove the glare on the road that was originally in the background.

Re:For those too lazy to read more than the summar (1)

FrootLoops (1817694) | about 3 years ago | (#36644334)

I would I could mod this funny. By "mistake", I meant the incredibly low quality of the final image was a mistake. In retrospect that usage is a bit non-standard.

Re:For those too lazy to read more than the summar (1)

rtfa-troll (1340807) | about 3 years ago | (#36634450)

"Sorry gov; I didn't realise my right hand was photoshopping the image".

Re:For those too lazy to read more than the summar (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36634534)

I dunno. The Chinese Olympics broadcast featured digital fireworks and a little girl lip-syncing the national anthem because the little girl singing it wasn't pretty enough. At some point you move from "honest mistake" to "culture where appearances are deemed more important than reality" - to say nothing of material things, like their famously unreliable economic data.

Myself, I'm more of an "esse quam videre" kind of guy (to borrow the North Carolina state motto).

Re:For those too lazy to read more than the summar (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36634814)

"culture where appearances are deemed more important than reality"

Sounds like that other country I heard about.

Re:For those too lazy to read more than the summar (1)

sydneyfong (410107) | about 3 years ago | (#36636150)

Come on, you seriously think only in Communist China do people lipsync on stage?

And what's wrong with digital fireworks? Do you think realistic computer rendered animations are bad too? Or do you believe that every single bit of the movies you watch are "real"?

Gosh you guys (you and the moderators who modded this up) are dense.

Re:For those too lazy to read more than the summar (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36636388)

Come on, you seriously think only in Communist China do people lipsync on stage?

Lip syncing happens a lot (Ashlee Simpson, Brittney Spears, et al.) but at least they usually lip-sync to their own prerecorded voices. Not really the same thing here.

And what's wrong with digital fireworks? Do you think realistic computer rendered animations are bad too? Or do you believe that every single bit of the movies you watch are "real"?

A person watching a movie knows what they are watching is not real. Again, it is not really the same case as when watching a "live" broadcast.

Re:For those too lazy to read more than the summar (1)

ArcadeNut (85398) | about 3 years ago | (#36636818)

"culture where appearances are deemed more important than reality"

Oh, you mean like the USA? Here we value appearance over reality every day.

Re:For those too lazy to read more than the summar (1)

mzs (595629) | about 3 years ago | (#36636310)

When they replace one individual with another, which they did the fellow that's not facing the camera, it's not an honest mistake or bad chopping skills anymore.

Re:For those too lazy to read more than the summar (1)

FrootLoops (1817694) | about 3 years ago | (#36644232)

That person is in the second real picture from the article. He seems to have really visited the site. I don't see how that bit of editing is any different from modifying the background. The overall image shows that the three visited the road, which takes both of the other pictures to get across.

they should get the Soviet Russia guys they did a (2)

Joe_Dragon (2206452) | about 3 years ago | (#36634122)

they should get the Soviet Russia guys they did a better job with out photo shop or a pc.

Re:they should get the Soviet Russia guys they did (1)

Nidi62 (1525137) | about 3 years ago | (#36634246)

they should get the Soviet Russia guys they did a better job with out photo shop or a pc.

I've seen one example where they edited out Stalin(after he died, of course) in a film of he and Lenin together by superimposing the upper torso of a guy in a Red Army uniform on the film so that it covered up Stalin.

Re:they should get the Soviet Russia guys they did (1)

shutdown -p now (807394) | about 3 years ago | (#36637404)

The classic photo demonstrating the impressive photoshopping skills of Soviet journalists(50 years before Photoshop appeared is the one with Stalin and Yezhov: before [wikimedia.org] and after [wikimedia.org] .

Perfect opportunity lost (1)

RivenAleem (1590553) | about 3 years ago | (#36634198)

to use the tag "from the I've-seen-a-few-in-my-time dept."

Photoshop Copy (0)

doubleplusungodly (1929514) | about 3 years ago | (#36634242)

That Photoshop copy was probably either pirated or purchased for 10 yuan...from a guy who pirated it.

This is clearly fake (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36634244)

I can tell by the pixels

No extra clicking (2)

jitterman (987991) | about 3 years ago | (#36634250)

This site [zonaeuropa.com] provides them without having to click on thumbnails.

Chinese people CAN hover! (2)

Zaatxe (939368) | about 3 years ago | (#36634286)

I know it, I've seen "Croucing Tiger, Hidden Dragon"!

Well that's why it's an amazing road (1)

bigsexyjoe (581721) | about 3 years ago | (#36634382)

The levitating road allows vehicles to sail and move by fan power with no friction for much greater fuel efficiency. China is right for being proud of this road.

RTFA (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36634656)

Stated in the article that the three men actually went to the site to see the new road; the photographer was not happy with the results and tried to make a perfect picture. Good job /.

WTC (1)

sgauss (639539) | about 3 years ago | (#36634714)

I think they need to be inspecting the top of the WTC, ala the famous photo-shopped pic with the plane in the background.

this shopped photo (1)

FudRucker (866063) | about 3 years ago | (#36635030)

is symbolic of everything wrong with "Made in China" = cheap, poorly engineered and poorly manufactured with inferior parts

Re:this shopped photo (1)

Abreu (173023) | about 3 years ago | (#36635530)

They said the same about "Made in Japan" in the 1960's and 70's

Re:this shopped photo (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36635942)

They said the same about "Made in Japan" in the 1960's and 70's

And about "Made in Detroit" in the 1950s, 1960s, 1970s, 1980s, 1990s, 2000s, etc.

Re:this shopped photo (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36636842)

Thats what they are saying in 10' again

Re:this shopped photo (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36635552)

That's what you get when you demand they make your consumer electronics as cheaply as humanly possible. If you were willing to pay twice as much, I'm sure the Chinese would be happy to oblige with more expensive parts and more QC checks. But, no, you keep on buying the Walmart special offers at prices that exclude any decent quality, then bitch and moan when it breaks.

Re:this shopped photo (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36635730)

cheap, poorly engineered and poorly manufactured with inferior parts

As opposed to what? Goods manufactured in the US? Do such things exist?

Protip: Most of what you own - including the majority of your electronics - was likely made in China. Good luck with your pile of shit!

Re:this shopped photo (1)

That Guy From Mrktng (2274712) | about 3 years ago | (#36637688)

Yeah, one would say that if they can make their officials levitate they can create a levitating bridge, but no! the have to create a normal bridge, a normal boring 22 mile normal bridge. [wikipedia.org] Massive fail if you ask me, why do they even try? /s

Either dead or in work camp (1)

Niris (1443675) | about 3 years ago | (#36635832)

That photographer is either dead or in a work camp by now.

Re:Either dead or in work camp (5, Interesting)

shutdown -p now (807394) | about 3 years ago | (#36637442)

Why do people think that China is some kind of giant Stalinist gulag? It's a fairly average, run-of-the-mill authoritarian regime these days. Yes, you will get kicked out of your job for that kind of thing, and will probably have troubles insofar as corrupt local authorities depicted can create them for you (I dunno, police regularly stopping to check papers?). No, they won't shoot or imprison you for the smallest mistake. For that matter, the law spells out what you have to do to get there, for the most part, and to get extralegal harassment, you need to be a persistent pain in the ass (well-publicized human rights protester or somesuch). Common folk don't live in daily fear that black vans will come and take them away.

Re:Either dead or in work camp (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36641548)

That's what an authoritarian regime does though, use propaganda to motivate their people and make everything uncomfortable disappear. The reason nobody is afraid of "black vans" is because talk about these abuses will be filtered and silenced. While China doesn't seem to be Stalin's Russia or Hitler's Germany, it has a huge array of human rights abuses that are not publicized much.

Reminds me... (1)

argStyopa (232550) | about 3 years ago | (#36636274)

This reminds me of the Chinese 'spacewalk' with the bubbles rolling around the astronaut. Whatever happened there, did we just accept that they actually did a spacewalk?

Re:Reminds me... (1)

MaDeR (826021) | about 3 years ago | (#36659154)

"did we just accept"
USA, Russia and a dozen other nations have tools for independent verification of someone flying to space. These newfangled, barely 50-year old tech like telemetry or radar, maybe you heard about them. China cannot bullshit in this particular departament.

That's China... (2)

Stormwatch (703920) | about 3 years ago | (#36636294)

They're so used to lying to the people that they will lie even when they don't have to.

Meh (1)

NetNed (955141) | about 3 years ago | (#36636370)

Some alright parodies, but when it hits the level of the Ed Hightower [scout.com] parodies, then I'll be impressed. They are not all winners, but there are some gems in there.

Thank God it's Friday (1)

cyfer2000 (548592) | about 3 years ago | (#36636508)

Funny. I love the shadow.

Propaganda? (2)

Torodung (31985) | about 3 years ago | (#36636650)

Look, I understand it's the Chinese, and we officially don't like them or their human rights record, but if this sort of picture rises to the level of "propaganda," then we need to call what used to be named "propaganda" (i.e.: Pictures that inflame nationalism, demonize a political enemy, or move people to high emotion over what is actually mundane, or at least literally mislead or lie about the nature of something important) something else.

This is a publicity shot, as is every ribbon cutting ever filmed in the States or Britain. Not everything the Chinese government does rises to the level of "propaganda."

The Photoshopping is just "incompetence." Again, I don't think it rises to the level of "propaganda." It's hilarious, but not nefarious.

Praise be China! (1)

gnujunkie (2248416) | about 3 years ago | (#36637070)

This photo was obviously created to show the world that Chinese people can fly, now we all fear them... duh

Re:Praise be China! (1)

MadMaverick9 (1470565) | about 3 years ago | (#36639420)

you mean levitate. what these three men are doing is not flying.

levitate
To rise or cause to rise into the air and float in apparent defiance of gravity.

Not much worse than Obama's Birth Certificate (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36637968)

That photoshop isn't really that much worse than what the whitehouse released as obama's birth cirtificate. Whats the big deal?

Re:Not much worse than Obama's Birth Certificate (1)

MaDeR (826021) | about 3 years ago | (#36659160)

Big deal is with your brain.

Shadows (1)

not_surt (1293182) | about 3 years ago | (#36638254)

Vampires don't cast shadows. I'm just saying.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...