Is it just me..... - Page 3

Dawg--I would never ridicule someone for not knowing----I do take exception, though, to allowing someone to negate the feelings of others in attempt at----what ?---beats me. Probably humor, or a chance to 'stir the pot'.  But who knows?

This is the second time photoshopping has come up with trio----the first involved some innocent woman just requesting some comments on her prized pup.  A feeble attempt at humor on that thread was abated by others, also.  There are real people on the end of these jokes----people that get hurt. How do you think the owner of the female that inspired this thread felt reading this crap?

It doesn't become trio to now play a victim and say "No problem, I'll leave."--------I don't recall anyone asking her to leave. She, basically,...was called to task this time.  She should just 'suck' it up and keep posting.  Many people on the board enjoy hearing about Trigger and Dana.

This post wasn't a joke. I really thought the pictured was photoshopped. I have photoshop. I looked at the picture in photoshop before I made my post. I also seriously thought the picture of the puppy had been altered. I hereby aplogize to the entire world for being wrong.

<> When it comes right down to it, all we really have in life is our word. If people here think I am lying about thinking the picture was photoshopped, then why would anyone believe anything I say about Trigger and Dana?

And now y'all can beat me up for posting again after I said I was going to leave.  

No comment on what is or isnt, but best laugh all day...

You wouldn't happen to be a member of the welcome wagon, would you?

No comment on what is or isnt, but best laugh all day...

You wouldn't happen to be a member of the welcome wagon, would you?

Now that I have looked at her, I like her to..

I guess it's my turn to get yelled at again...

Here is my opinion: I will not claim that the picture is faked, nor that it is not.  However, I can understand why trio would question the photo.    

I find two things odd about the picture.  1) The dog's fur is a noticeably lighter shade of sable below the collar than above.  It could be complete coincedence that the natural color of the fur lightens at this exact point.  2) One collar is visible around the dog's neck, with a metal ring facing towards the front, but the young girl is holding another leash which clearly attaches in the back.  I do not see signs of a second collar.  None of this "proves" that the photo is faked.

The good news is that this matter should be rather easy to resolve by any prospective buyer.  Photoshopping and swapping heads is hard to do so that it looks perfect every time.  A buyer could request multiple photos from several angles, and even better, video.  Unless the seller works for the Dreamworks studio, that would be near impossible to fake.

Ultimately, I don't see any harm done with trio asking the question.  We all know there is a painfully high level of fraud going on with dog sales on the internet, with people stealing photos and editing photos.  In fact a few of the dog ads that flash on this web site have obviously had colors tweaked... when the dog is red as a tomato and the rest of the background has an overall yellow tint.  Puh-leeze.

IF the picture has been manipulated, and a smart buyer asks for more pictures and video, eventually the forgery will be exposed.

IF the picture has NOT been manipulated, the the seller has surely enjoyed much free press for his ad which otherwise might have been overlooked.  The seller will get additional enquiries, and more pictures of his beautiful, dark, blocky-headed female will get passed around.  Cha-ching!

All the experienced dog trainers were once "new people" and I seriously doubt any of them learned about dogs by someone hurling petty insults at them.  It's one thing to say, "You're wrong and this is why... a) b) c)...."  It's a whole other matter to spew verbal diarrhea like, "You're wrong because you're stupid." 

Yvette

http://www.pedigreedatabase.com/gsd/classifieds/38726.html

Here is an ad where the natural lighting has tinted the picture.  The entire picture has a yellowish cast, and from the shadows on the ground it appears the sun is at a low angle.  The overally effect is that the dog's pigment looks richer than what she would appear to be in neutral white light.

BTW I am NOT calling this fraud, because it is in all likelihood an innocent oversight by the photographer who thought that sunset would be a nice time to snap a few pictures. 

Again, any potential buyers can request more photos in full sun, and will see the true color of the coat.

Yvette

http://www.pedigreedatabase.com/gsd/classifieds/35122.html

In this ad the entire picture is practically orange.  I doubt anyone would see this picture and think that's the true color of the female.  Fortunately it's obvious the color is off.   Again, a buyer should ask for more pictures in natural light.

Whats all the ruckus about?  Triode, you asked and people said it appears normal. I dont think that this is an attack on you in any way. This isnt a big deal. Dont leave the board over it. Why is this becoming a dramtic issue?

Funk man,

If people would have just disagreed with her opinion, there would be no ruckus on her part.  Unfortunately you've got posters who say crap like this in reply...

"IT IS EASY TO SEE TRIO HAS NO CLUE ABOUT DOGS......THIS WEBSITE IS REALLY GETTING DUMBED DOWN WITH ALL THE NEW PEOPLE"

Granted, I would not have responded the same way she did, but I think I would interpret inflammatory comments such as these as an "attack" if they were directed at me.

Personally I love a good debate, but just hurling mindless insults is nothing but mud slinging. 

Yvette