If someone told you this picture was a real selfie they took outside, would you believe it? Why or why not?
Haha, excellent retort. I was actually thinking of doing this anyway, just to give TheTruthIsOnHere some ideas about how to approach the problem. For convenience, I hereby name foreground dude "Ringworm" and background dude "Peter Pan". Here goes...
1. Unexpected polygonal shadows in Ringworm's shirt indicates a low vertex count model.
2. Clearly this should be a dynamically lit environment, with a wide range of light levels. However, all shadows are equally lit. This indicates the use of a global ambient shader.
3. Ground texture becomes blurry in the back at sharp angles with the camera. Poor texture filtering.
4. Ground level wasn't very well defined: plant models begin underground, with branches/leaves coming straight out of the ground.
5. Peter Pan's shadow has escaped.
6. Aliasing everywhere.
1. The picture is taken from an old cell phone digital camera which obviously uses poor quality digital rendering software.
2. See above. Digital cameras must digitally render images so this is expected with homie's decrepit Obamaphone and it's low-quality image rendering. Also, sunlight has the same intensity as expected.
3. This is a fault of the camera software. Not ever picture can come out looking perfect you know.
4. You don't live in this area and have no idea what the ground looks like. It is possible for leaves and branches to be placed in the ground - homie might have stuck them in there like a poor man's lawn flamingo to give the scene a certain je ne sais quoi
5. No, clearly he had hopped in the air the moment the picture was taken, as a goof.
6. Homie has a cheap sub-megapixel cell camera. Obamaphones aren't your iPhone 6S you know.
I assume you are trying to prove some kind of point. Perhaps it would be helpful to just come out and say it directly?
Fine, I'll play along...
1. The vertex resolution of the polygons is much less than the resolution of the photo. Therefore, it has nothing to do with the camera's poor quality.
2. I was referring to shadow intensity, not sunlight intensity. For example, the shadow deep in the corner of the trailer is the same intensity as Peter Pan's shadow. Also, what exactly do you think digital cameras do when they "render" images? Are you sure you know what that word means?
3. Photos can be blurry in back due to focus. But in this image, only the textures that are at a sharp angle to the camera appear blurry. This happens in 3D rendering, but not photography.
4. He sure does have great taste in art.
5. His posture would indicate otherwise, but it's plausible. What a goof.
6. The aliasing of the shadow on Ringworm's right sleeve is much lower resolution than the photo resolution. This happens in 3D rendering, but not photography.
See how much fun this is? We could be doing this for the original picture, but you STILL haven't provided actual reasons why you think it is faked.
also... *cough*
more irony *cough*