Pictures that compel a double take

User avatar
rachel
Posts: 4263
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 9:04 pm
Location: Liverpool, England
Has thanked: 1560 times
Been thanked: 1848 times

Pictures that compel a double take

Unread post by rachel »

I came across this one quite randomly. I thought it was a bad paste-up, but a second shot appears to show the same thing. Could Cindy Crawford really be that much bigger than Richard Gere?

Caption:

CINDY CRAWFORD, 1991
For her first red carpet with her then-boyfriend Richard Gere, supermodel Cindy Crawford dominated the red carpet at the Academy Awards. For her all-eyes-on-me moment, she wore a scarlet Versace halter dress that featured a low cut in the front and a high slit in the back. It was widely copied at the time and is now considered one of the most iconic red carpet dresses ever.


CINDY CRAWFORD 1.jpg
CINDY CRAWFORD 2.jpg

It could be a paste-up as no one in the audience in the background are looking at them. But it did cause me to look at a few more shots. This one seems a better sizing, but what's with Gere's midget thumb?

34b0245f0dc58eb0e13c535a59561ab9.jpg
A13-6.jpg

That's suggests those four fingers might be fake, and used to give him a man sized hand. I don't know. But there is something equally strange about his lower leg. That angle on this right leg (left side) looks like a dislocation has occurred around the knee. But I've long worked out lift are widely used to fake famous people's height, and with that comes the need to optically move the location of the kneecap downwards to balance the longer lower leg...and that's why we sometimes see the Mr Bendy look, because there is a double knee going on.

A13-7.jpg

Below, a similar strange leg shape on one of the medics attending an unresponsive George Floyd. It suggests to me it's a woman in lifts pretending to be a man, and the reason for going to that trouble...because the person playing Derek Chauvin in that particular video was also a woman. But I'll let you decide for yourself on this link if you so wish.

Image

I've found an equally interesting photo in my search, which confirms something else I've talked about in these pages. This one has to be a paste-up because it's Richard Gere with his twenty-five year younger self...and look at the disembodied hand on younger Gere's shoulder. Below it, another picture taken at the same time as the first, but how it was likely originally published, Gere next to his wife Cindy Crawford.

d5bdbae4fb12dd2302012ffadc2ab97c.jpg
bd9828f0b7b68716290b419977dfac39.jpg

That picture opens up a whole new can of worms, because we've got to wonder, is the original Cindy Crawford next to Richard Gere photo equally fake? ...I absolutely fancy it to be the case. I think a large proportion of pictures showing two or more famous people together are paste-ups. One reason, so they can be resized to fit their claimed height...and a second reason, so fake people who are fictionally married, don't actually have to spend time together.

And just a reminder of another famous disembodied hand.

Image

That's 911 victim Geoff Campbell and his brother Matt with somebody else...and a link to that post if you are interested.
User avatar
rachel
Posts: 4263
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 9:04 pm
Location: Liverpool, England
Has thanked: 1560 times
Been thanked: 1848 times

Re: Pictures that compel a double take - Richard Gere

Unread post by rachel »

I'm going to go a little further with this one. Let's take this headline at face value. "Cindy says Richard is 'like a stranger' to her" ...Might this be because if was a photoshop relationship only?

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/a ... r-her.html
mail-gere-grab.png

From the article, "The supermodel was 26 when she wed the movie star, who at the time was 42, and admits that she was very 'young' to be getting married." ...We have a subliminal there trying to push marriage further and further into old age...likely because the older you are when you get married, the fewer children you will likely have.

This is a good one, "Although Cindy claimed they were married for just two years, in actual fact the couple tied the knot in a Vegas wedding in 1991 and divorced in 1995." ...That's Cindy, who's marriage it apparently was, being corrected by the official story. I wonder who has the copyright on the story? This is how I think it works. An actor/agent is employed to play a character, they are given an outline regarding the main facts about that character which then have to be told verbatim, but other things can be ad-libbed. But care needs to be taken with regards to adding new facts, because once asserted, they become part of that character's history. And if it's an important person that warrants one or more understudies that can step in at short notice as necessary, then they need to be kept abreast of any new facts......think of the apparent multiple Joe Bidens, although I think they were taking-the-piss during COVID.

I am still quite curious about how tall Richard Gere actually is... What is fake, and what is real? Is it possible to tell?

Below is another photo from that red carpet event that kicked off the thread. The photographers behind them do seem to be taking the couple's pictures in this shot. I cannot see any of the same faces in the background, but that might be because it is taken further down the carpet; also the exposure looks different suggesting a different camera. The size of the couple seems consistent with the previous photos,

gere-red carpet3.jpg
gere-red carpet4.jpg

Richard Gere's midget thumb is back...and if one of the pictures hasn't been mirrored, that would be his other hand.

A13-9.jpg

When I see the thumb, then I'm immediately interested to check out the person's feet, but before that... I saw this image, it could be real in the sense it is really a picture of Gere and Crawford together, but I'm doubting the background, to me the shadows that place them in the shot look dodgy. But one reason I think the main subjects might be really there, it uses forced perspective to make Richard look a fair bit bigger than Cindy. I think this is honestly what they get off on...faking reality...and since we don't see Richard's feet, we have no idea if he's standing on the ground, or a box.

30dd06692405ccf9dc1d26d20614d636.jpg

The jeans, are we seeing the same thing? ...I would suggest it's a a scaled down version that is designed to fool the eye. The give away is the belt width and the loops of the jeans it threads through. The loops have actually been designed shorter than standard and would not be able to fit the belt from the image above it. That also means the actual rise of the jeans is also shorter, designed for a shorter person. But why would the designers need to optically extend Richard Gere's upper body height by stealing inches with very low rise jeans? A short man, a tall man, both have male proportions. The bottom image, we can tell it's a man. The crop of Richard Gere's jeans, what sex do we think? ...I'm not so sure.

gere grab.jpg
A13-13.jpg
User avatar
rachel
Posts: 4263
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 9:04 pm
Location: Liverpool, England
Has thanked: 1560 times
Been thanked: 1848 times

Re: Pictures that compel a double take - Cindy Crawford

Unread post by rachel »

Continuing on with Cindy Crawford...I just find it interesting the things I see in pictures these days. We have the opposite to Gere's trousers. See how much higher the rise to those jeans? The point, together with the plunging neckline, it minimises the perceived body length which we optically take in as being the white vest rectangle. The hair is used to hide the shoulder width and make the neck appear narrower.

Cindy-Crawford-90s-Ads.jpg

Compare the difference in the jeans rise height of Crawford and Gere. We can see the breasts are used to cut the body height on Cindy. But ignoring this, we see the low rise on Richard's jeans gives the impression his upper body height takes up the same area as Cindy's does from her higher jeans rise height. Also, while I've actually cut part of Cindy's neck, look at the difference in neck length on the two people. Does that make any sense in the real world?

A13-16.jpg
A13-18.jpg

You can decide for yourself, but we now know the trick the person behind the camera is trying to pull...and very successfully really. But this crop is a bit of a tell regarding the true state of affairs.

A13-20.jpg
User avatar
rachel
Posts: 4263
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 9:04 pm
Location: Liverpool, England
Has thanked: 1560 times
Been thanked: 1848 times

Re: Pictures that compel a double take - Cindy Crawford

Unread post by rachel »

Cindy Crawford
cindy-crawford-indonesia2-062424-390adb243f7442ac9b44d1a00efd8a17.jpg

Caitlyn Jenner
REX_caitlyn_jenner_02_as_160728_2x3_1600.jpg

It's uncanny. I wonder if Bruce Jenner was actually going for the Cindy Crawford look? You know, thinking about it, it is an interesting game that is being played. Someone like Bruce most likely cannot say what he wants to say in words. So was his gender switch just about an income stream after being an athlete, or maybe it's something else entirely?
Post Reply