The coolest place on the internet, according to this tagline.
AskArchiveFAQ

February 4, 2012
producermatthew:

inothernews:

thefascistscrapbook:

This is Moscow, Russia on February 4th, 2012. That date is today.
These are the people protesting the clearly rigged election, resulting in the victory of Vladimir Putin. 
This is one of the greatest things I’ve ever seen. Can’t wait to see it here 

They faced temperatures well below freezing and massed anyway.
Not even the elements will chill humanity’s hearth.

Fact Check: This photo is from 1991. It appears in this Atlantic photo blog entry published in December 2011. (h/t @m_trevithick)

We’d like to pull a quote from thefascistscrapbook’s Tumblr: "To all who have addressed issues about inaccuracy, it appears that similar photos have been taken today. There are mass protests going on as we speak in Moscow with incredible numbers, while this may or may not be from 1991, I insist you check out the shots from today. Sorry for any possible confusion (:"
So, essentially, this guy is saying that he’s leaving it up because there might be a photo like this today. Let’s test that theory. Here’s a photo from the protests today. Big crowd. Not that big. Also, the elections are happening in March. They’re protesting an election yet to happen.
Ever see a photo on the Internet that’s too good to be true? If it’s not sourced, don’t buy it. Simple as that.

producermatthew:

inothernews:

thefascistscrapbook:

This is Moscow, Russia on February 4th, 2012. That date is today.

These are the people protesting the clearly rigged election, resulting in the victory of Vladimir Putin. 

This is one of the greatest things I’ve ever seen. Can’t wait to see it here 

They faced temperatures well below freezing and massed anyway.

Not even the elements will chill humanity’s hearth.

Fact Check: This photo is from 1991. It appears in this Atlantic photo blog entry published in December 2011. (h/t @m_trevithick)

We’d like to pull a quote from thefascistscrapbook’s Tumblr: "To all who have addressed issues about inaccuracy, it appears that similar photos have been taken today. There are mass protests going on as we speak in Moscow with incredible numbers, while this may or may not be from 1991, I insist you check out the shots from today. Sorry for any possible confusion (:"

So, essentially, this guy is saying that he’s leaving it up because there might be a photo like this today. Let’s test that theory. Here’s a photo from the protests today. Big crowd. Not that big. Also, the elections are happening in March. They’re protesting an election yet to happen.

Ever see a photo on the Internet that’s too good to be true? If it’s not sourced, don’t buy it. Simple as that.

(via matthewkeys)

23:00 // 2 years ago

To complement the last post, here’s the scale of the protests shown in photographic form. The main one is from USA Today, though uncredited. The other three are from AP. Compare those with this photo. Don’t get us wrong. This is in fact a big deal for Russia, which for the first time in years is rising up against Vladimir Putin. But let’s get the scale right first.

23:18 // 2 years ago
February 5, 2012

Oh, and also, the 1991 Russia photo is Photoshopped

Our reader squashed threw this in a reply to that fake Russia crowd post, confirming that the picture is in fact Photoshopped:

Looked at the big version of the photo myself and confirmed this using pixel matching. Will send a note to Alan Taylor of the Atlantic about this photo. EDIT: Here’s the original photo on AP.

0:02 // 2 years ago
13:17 // 2 years ago

woodbro-chillson says: A bit confused about the photomanip: The picture from The Atlantic, which has been proven manipulated, looks exactly the same as the one you alter posted originally from 1991 AP. Those same parts that were proven edited exist in the 1991 AP's picture too, could it be this image was always manipulated and doesn't exist unedited?

» SFB says: That’s exactly what I’m saying. I.E. this photo has been manipulated for over 20 years, and we’ve basically been able to prove that it’s been manipulated since before Photoshop was in wide use and has existed in the AP archives for a couple of decades. Which is kind of an amazing thing to discover. — Ernie @ SFB

13:36 // 2 years ago
February 6, 2012

Looking deeper into an old-school photo-manipulation mystery

Tonight, spurred by a tweet I was sending along, I took a second look at AP for more details on this 1991 photo, wrongly claimed to be from over the weekend and later debunked as Photoshopped. There were some questions as to why a photo of this nature would be manipulated, and I think I have an answer. I went back to the link I posted yesterday and noticed the AP link was now broken. Weird, I thought — it worked fine yesterday. So then, I did a fresh search and found this photo, which is nearly the same as the one In Focus ran in December. I did a compare and contrast and noticed a red blotch that wasn’t there before. And a different date on the photo — March 19, 1991, not March 10. I compared it with the photo from In Focus, and there was some definite photo manipulation going on — see the bottom four images. However, I can firmly say that the AP photo I downloaded on Sunday did not have this blotch — so The Atlantic is in the clear, this is all AP. The photo that was manipulated appears to have been removed from the archives and replaced with one that hasn’t. In the end, it’s not full deception, but an attempt at cleaning up imperfection. — Ernie @ SFB

23:30 // 2 years ago
February 7, 2012
10:38 // 2 years ago