4 ms·
> Do you see any visible fingerprints on the photo? I don't. The photo accompanying the article has the fingers blurred out. In the original photo the fingers
by bdowling 5y ago
> Do you see any visible fingerprints on the photo? I don't.
The photo accompanying the article has the fingers blurred out. In the original photo the fingers must have been clearly visible, because that’s how the police are claiming they identified the man.
- StavrosK 5y agoIt's motion blur, evident from the blurring of the letters. Unless the police added motion blur to the entire photo (why?), they would appear to be stretching the truth.