Drone Research Team

Drones Research Team - Research => So-called Expert's opinions => Topic started by: elevenaugust on November 30, 2008, 04:16:54 PM

Title: Flickr's Gallery
Post by: elevenaugust on November 30, 2008, 04:16:54 PM
http://flickr.com/photos/jeanne75018/883124581/ (http://flickr.com/photos/jeanne75018/883124581/)
Title: Re: Flickr's Gallery
Post by: 10538 on November 30, 2008, 11:46:00 PM
http://flickr.com/photos/jeanne75018/883124581/ (http://flickr.com/photos/jeanne75018/883124581/)
(http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1339/778255067_677511e01a.jpg)

I don't see why there should be holes there.  It looks to me like it probably is a pamphlet or book opened up flat on a flatbed scanner.  The holes would only be visible on the covers.  Why would someone think holes would be so close to the text?

Title: Re: Flickr's Gallery
Post by: onthefence on December 01, 2008, 01:57:34 AM
I don't see why there should be holes there.  It looks to me like it probably is a pamphlet or book opened up flat on a flatbed scanner.  The holes would only be visible on the covers.

Exactly.

This example is just wrong thinking.

Those CARAT pages were scanned in at 300dpi as you can see by my calculations below for a normal 8.5" x 11" paper using the pixel width/height from the original uploads by Isaac, and the holes are missing from the edge exactly because the book was still bound and the opposite edge paper is showing in the scan:
(http://i294.photobucket.com/albums/mm106/onthefence55/paperholes-1.jpg)

The person that claimed "Shouldn't we see the holes" seriously needs to examine their reasoning/analysis skills!

Updated score:
hoax-believers 0, dronologists 1