Photo fakes – spotting trickery

Note to readers: You will find this post quite long, but I hope not tedious. I hope there are enough photographs so that reading goes fast. Enjoy. The last paragraph is repeated here as most people won’t read that far: “One more thing to mention at the end of a long post where very few readers will find it: At the Mathis site there is a 47 page article by “Lestrade” called Pacific Theater. Because it is a PDF and I am technically inept, I cannot link without having a dead link. So you’re on your own to find it. Lestrade has done some excellent work in deconstructing the Aleutian campaign in World War II. The reason I bring it up here is that his photo analysis is superb. It’s well worth a journey and perhaps an hour of your time.”

In a prior post, I mentioned that Jim Morrison, Janis Joplin, John Denver and Taylor Swift had all been pasted into family photos, that is, we do not know their names, only that their last names: Morrison, Joplin, Deutschendorf and Swift are not their real names. It appears from the outside looking in that these musicians were (are) lifetime actors. I would guess that they were recruited because someone spotted some talent that could be developed.

However, it had to be made clear them that they were not to be let loose on the world, that they would put in their time, learn their trade and then exit the music business. They would be given intense training and then songs to sing that they pretend(ed) were (are) their own creation. In fact, Morrison, Denver and Joplin faked their deaths. Swift is still with us, but I have to suspect a fake death is on her horizon. (Prince probably fits into this category, but I never listened to his music and so have not taken the time to look into his very suspicious death. So too a few others, like David Bowie, for example. Rappers and hip hop, I never tuned in. Die away.)

Just for the fun of it I decided to use this post to review the photographic work behind these fake-named stars. The art of spotting fake photos is learned over time. We have to pay attention to perspective, lighting, lines and odd limbs appearing from outer space. For instance, below is a fake photo of President Obama and his Grandparents.

Notice anything amiss? Resting on Obama’s left shoulder is a floating hand. What does that tell us? Something (someone) was removed from the photo. It could be argued that the hand belongs to the man on his right, but look at his suit. His right arm is at his side. For the hand to belong to him, his forearm would have to be four feet long. Also notice the lighting. See the dark line on Obama’s chin? That merely tells us that the light source is in front and above him. But notice how the other faces are fully lit up, and how each is wearing sunglasses. They are sitting on a park bench on a sunny day, and while I cannot judge the entirety of the fake, Obama’s head might have been added onto an existing body. That, of course, does not explain the floating hand.

Fun! Here’s another floating hand:

That is supposedly “Paul” (actually Mike) McCartney at his fake brother’s birthday. Center and at the very back is the fake brother, who goes by the fake name “Mike McCartney”. His stage name is “Mike McGear.”His existence is explained in the post Sir Faul Revisited. This photo must have been part of the setting up process, as we have all suffered through at weddings, as the bride and groom are not in the foreground, and there is the back of a head on the right. Nonetheless, if you look at Faul’s left shoulder, again, a floating hand. What does this tell us? I suspect that Jane Asher, Faul, and the man to Faul’s left were added to this photograph in a darkroom (no Photoshop in those days). Since Faul did not attend McGear’s wedding, they had to fake it up. [By the way, find me a photo of either “Paul” in the company of Jane Asher where any of the three look happy. They appear to be phoning it in.]

The Jim Morrison Family Album

Let’s move on to the Morrison family. There is a series of photos left behind there.

That is Jim Morrison with his fake brother and sister, Andrew and Anne. It is highly unprofessional, as the shadows are all over one another. Anne’s shadow seems to hover over both Jim and the wall behind. Andrew’s shadow is on Jim, but Jim himself does not appear to have a shadow at all. You might say that Jim’s right ear was blacked out by Anne’s shadow, but this is a professional photo with lighting. How can that be? What I am guessing here is that Anne and Andrew are part of a group photo, and have been cropped for the purpose of adding Jim in a darkroom. If that is the case, then the two, Anne and Andrew, look perfectly normal. Everything behind them is just sloppy work.

This photo is Jim and his Dad, Admiral George Morrison. Jim appears to be fourteen or fifteen years of age. At first glance, it looks OK. In fact, this is some very good darkroom work, and was the only photograph in Dave McGowan’s book, Weird Scenes Inside the Canyon. But it does come apart on closer examination. First notice the hand under Jim’s chin. The first impression might be that it is the Admiral’s hand, but the perspective is all wrong. The arm would have to be longer than normal. And it’s an older person’s hand. It looks like a man hand. But that can fly, few would notice it. The key to this photo is the yellow line I inserted right above the left ear. Notice a change in skin tone. What has happened here is that Jim’s face has been very carefully superimposed on someone else’s body. Honestly, it is very good work. The closest I have seen was the morgue photos of John F. Kennedy, wherein his face was superimposed on another body, but done with such high quality that it took hours of gazing to see it. Anyway, only one photo in McGowan’s book, and it is a fake.

This one is just a bit easier to see. Jim’s head has been superimposed on someone else’s, but in such a way that his neck is elongated and the head is about to fall off. Everything else about the photo is normal. It is goose neck Jim.

I deliberately left this image small, as the feature that gives it away diminishes with larger size. Note everyone’s hair. This is obviously a flash shot. Look at the guy in the back. You can see the flash reflected in his glasses. The flash used was obviously a small bulb, as only the two in the foreground and the three behind are lit up. But that is not what is wrong with the photo. The film or camera is of low quality, so that the everyone is slightly blurred. Everyone, that is, except Jim, who has his hand on his left cheek. I can see individual hair strands with him, and his features and clothing are much sharper than everyone around. Again, he was inserted in a darkroom.


Here we can see that Jim is subject to different lighting than the rest of his family.In fact, his entire face missed out, and this appears to be natural lighting. The sun is not shining on Jim. Most likely, as the background looks normal and they would not take a photo of a family of four and put them all on the left, even cropping Anne’s body, we might be looking here at another group photo with the  entirety of Jim superimposed over someone else. Jim’s right arm and his mother’s left blend and disappear together. Look at the arms of the others for comparison.

This appears to be the Morrison family and some extras. That is an unknown child in the foreground, and left to right, unknown woman, Mrs. Morrison, Anne, Andrew and the Admiral, whose pants appear to be sucked partially into the vehicle and whose upper body is very squat  by human standards. He looks normal in other photos. That by itself is weird. The wildcard is Jim in the red shirt, mugging.

I took Jim and the two heads above him in the photo and enlarged them to 300%. Notice how the features of his mother and sister, while blurry, are recognizable. Jim is not – his mouth is distorted and his nose and eyes are almost invisible. What I am suspecting here is that this boy may be a relative of the boy on the bike, perhaps an older brother. They used the darkroom to smudge up his face so that he would not be recognizable, allowing the photo sleuths to pass him off as Jim.

There was no Jim Morrison. There was a man who was lead singer for The Doors, an enigma who projected charisma and charm, and who further wrote 12 songs that became the Doors’ first album, even has he did not read music and played no instrument. But he could stir a crowd.

The John Denver Experience

John Denver does not have many photos with his parents. In fact, I have managed to locate two.

This is a task, as there are possibilities here beyond mere photo fakery. I contend that John was surreptitiously added to the Deutschendorf family. Part of my evidence is this photo, which has the Lt. Col and his wife, and son Ron behind. John’s texture does not appear to match the studio quality of the others. His skin tone is lighter and more defined. His facial features are not familial. But that by itself does not make the photo a fake. There is one other aspect to this, pointed out long ago by a commenter on my John Denver’s Death: Another Hoax piece. The man in the background is Ron Deutschendorf, allegedly John’s brother. The man on the right is Lt. Col is Henry John Deutschendorf, and John Denver is Henry John Deutschendorf II. Ron had a son, and named the boy Henry John Deutschendorf II. This was before Denver’s fake death at age 53.

Is this photo real? Could well be. I leave it to the reader to decide. I am not certain.

This is a photo from John and Annie Martel’s wedding day. The hand grabbing onto his mother, her left shoulder, seems suspiciously long, another floater, but I cannot state that with certainty. Gaze at it, let it sink in on you. John’s head looks real and properly attached, and everyone is having a good time. The Lt. Col is subject, however, to different lighting. Even though this is a professional flash photo, his face is darkened, and his neck shadowed. I would guess, if there is fakery going on here, it is that – he is the only one not touching anyone else. His wife is the only one not looking at the camera in this, a professional photo. She is distracted and looking away. But it too could be real. It could be that the Lt. Col and John knew each other, and that each knew the gig. So John, destined for stardom before leaving on a jet plane, was an actor even at that age. I know, this is somewhat weak. It is Ron’s son that puzzles me most. It is my suspicion here that Mrs.  and Lt. Col Deutschendorf were added to the photo in a darkroom. But it is not slam dunk.

She’s leaving home

We know there has to be photo fakery in the Janis Joplin family, as Janis was a set of twins, pictured to the right and left. You can always tell one from the other, as the twin on the right appeared more gregarious, and was probably the stage performer. The one on the left – I have never found a photo of her smiling and showing her teeth.

We are-told that “Janis” left home at age 20, so that would be around 1963. At that time, habits of dress had not yet changed, hippies had not taken hold. Dave McGowan did a good job covering a group of kids who dressed in hippie costumes and frequented the nightclubs of Los Angeles in the mid-60s, led by Vito Paulekas. They were plants, much like the screamers in the early Beatles days, paid to perform so that by power of suggestion they would eventually ‘catch on.’  So Janis is apparently avant-garde. More likely this is a period flash photo above, taken with poor lighting where everyone casts a shadow. “Janis” was inserted in a darkroom, and in case you cannot see, it is the Janis to the right, the one who smiles. The one on the left would eventually become “Amy Goodman” of Democracy Now!, who I think of as the Queen of Dour.

The Taylor Swift Mannequin

I am no Swifty, neither a fan nor a believer in the real talent of Taylor Swift. Also, I am far less certain of my analysis of the Swift photo gallery than the others above, as the art of faking photos has gotten so sophisticated. Nonetheless, I will lay it out here and wait to be set straight by better sets of eyes.

Having so little interest in her, when I came across the mannequin photo, seen below, I had no idea what to make of it. It’s so damned obviously a fake.

It was not until-writing this post, and discussing Morrison, Denver and Joplin, that I realized Swift fits right in with the others. The name “Swift” itself is a tell, possibly going back to Jonathon, but that would not be Taylor, but rather her father. However, who is to know, as this very interesting post from Geni is all I know about Scott Kingsley Swift.

It’s a little blurry on my end, but this particular Scott Swift is completely washed, and has a daughter named “Taylor” … but the one photo I found of Taylor Spender does not line up with Taylor Swift. Very curious. Mr. and Mrs. Swift are now separated, maybe divorced.

To be clear, I do not claim that the people in this post, the McCartney’s, Morrison, Denver, Joplin and Swift, lack talent. The ability to perform before a crowd, especially in the pre-Autotune and pitch-correction days, requires some talent and a good deal of training. But there is something deeper going on with these people. Their photographs are fake. Why?

I think it has to do with the music business in general.It is far too important to be left to chance. It influences ideas, attitudes, behavior, and dress. Musicians have far too much influence to be left on their own. Consequently, there is a great deal of manipulation. One record producer, whose name I have long lost, said that he could take any kid off the street and make him a star. Joplin above, for example, in my view, could not sing! So why is she lauded as one of the greats of all time? Why did people pack her concerts? Power of suggestion. Have you ever noticed that the American people are very suggestible? Has Covid taught you nothing?

The same with Taylor Swift. Mathis has analyzed her lyrics, something I would never attempt, and found them too grown up, too experienced for a person of her age. That’s no surprise to me, as I do not imagine that Lennon/McCartney, Jim Morrison or John Denver wrote their own stuff. Part of their agreement in enduring the intense training they went through prior to stardom could be something like this: “We will make you famous. We will give you fame, and we can take it away at any time we choose. You are not on your own, and you will not divulge any secrets. If you attempt to do so, you are done.” I am not saying that Joplin and Morrison were about to breach secrecy. I more suspect their had to leave the business young as they did not have enough talent to sustain a career.

Anyway, back to Taylor Swift, there are enough photographs of her and her parents that seem genuine to assume they are all in on the game. If that were not the case, why the fake photos? I am going to let readers do the analysis of the following photos, which I judged to be fake, but you’re on your own here. Pay attention to lighting, texture and perspective, as photo fakery in this day and age has gotten very sophisticated.

She sure looks like a mannequin in that last one too. At this point, I am all Swifted out, and entirely unsure that all those photos are fake. Enlighten me in the comments.

One more thing to mention at the end of a long post where very few readers will find it: At the Mathis site there is a 47 page article by “Lestrade” called Pacific Theater. Because it is a PDF and I am technically inept, I cannot link without having a dead link. So you’re on your own to find it. Lestrade has done some excellent work in deconstructing the Aleutian campaign in World War II. The reason I bring it up here is that his photo analysis is superb. It’s well worth a journey and perhaps an hour of your time.

This is a long post. You might guess we are having a “Code Red” snow storm that will last from last night into tomorrow. I’ve got time on my hands.

38 thoughts on “Photo fakes – spotting trickery

  1. My mind is blown. It’s like once your eyes are opened, there is no going back. Question everything. Test everything. Don’t let people tell you how you should see it. Wow. This post is a game changer for me. I’m now studying these photos. In the John Denver one where he is to the left of his family in the portait, what struck me was the shadows. His shadow above his head and the position of the shadow of his supposed father’s do not match.
    So my questions are that if each of these stars was placed in his or her role, who placed them? Who were they agents of? What was their purpose? To deceive or hypnotize the masses? You’ve probably already written at length, so I apologize if my questions are redundant (and obvious to most others). I’m still in the learning phase, and unlearning, for that matter.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Yeah, the who of it puzzles everyone who does this kind of analysis. All I can say is “Intel”, that there must be offices at Langley who manage musical careers. We know that most of the songs in show business these days are written by either Lukasz Gottwald or Max Martin (MM … – 1313, or 1133). People who study the Beatles often mention Tavistock. Similarly I think there is a section there that manages their lives after their “deaths”, also known as the “Witness Protection Program.” It could be serving a dual purpose, or a fake one and a real one.


      1. I think Miles spoke of the actual number of useful idiots at the alphabet agencies.
        Not to be trusted of course, but a cursory search shows 30k at NSA, 35k at FBI & 40k at CIA… plus all those hidden contactor/mercenary wizzos. I think he summed it nicely with something like “What do you think they do all day?” They probably have the very best tools to fool as well.


  2. Hi Mark,
    Nothing is what it looks like…you are right.
    The Musical Truth trilogy from Mark Devlin will lighten you up.
    Fightingmonarch will show you the SRA ‘cult’ which is spread all over the world.

    The narrative is shifting, as the table is being set.

    End Child Trafficking as it all has to do with each other

    Thank you Mark, for this piece of mind


    Liked by 1 person

  3. I used to dabble with PSP (not anywhere near professional quality), but it’s true, there is so much fake photography going on. Some so obvious it’s pathetic, some other stuff is pretty decent.
    I especially like the technology used in the movie The Running Man.
    The stuff is blatantly thrown in our faces – yet so few see it.


    1. That’s a fairly broad statement… are you referring the the genre to which they have been respectively pigeon-holed, or them in particular? Bowie especially, whether his creation or not, is quite different old-to-new. If you are willing, I suggest The Rise and Fall of Ziggy Stardust and the Spiders from Mars.


      1. It’s actually quite a specific statement: Prince and David Bowie (almost always) sucked.

        And were Modernism-pushing pawns of some kind.

        I have indeed listened to Ziggy. I laughed through it. Just like I laugh through most tracks on literally all of the The Rolling Stones and AC/DC albums.

        No one seems to get that they’re all part of the same giant joke.


  4. Here’s more from Taylor’s out for dinner serious on December 22, 2014:

    Looks like the body on a few could be a mannequin with her face pasted on. Others look like each person was pasted into the photo. Or maybe camera focus issues? She has her hair longer in a few. Ya why would they want to get hoaxy when she’s going out to dinner with her parents? Maybe they are just practicing with her and other celebs for more important events?


    1. I meant series, not serious. darn typos.

      Also as we know, most of the music by these bands are very good for the genre and entertaining, it absolutely had to be for it to pull the masses in and have the effects needed. So I’m wondering with all the money and time spent on the music, studio time, salaries, touring and everything included to promote just one band or artist, Why did they make these obvious, cheap, simple mistakes with the photos?


      1. One possibility is that they make rookie mistakes because they WANT to be caught. Some of them might be working under duress, and purposely fudge it to wake people like us up. They make it real enough to get the approval of their superiors but sloppy enough that some of us will spot it. I imagine the same holds true for the lyrics and all the little easter egg clues they throw in movies, etc. Look how sloppy sandy hook was. Agents under duress. Or a psychological operation to see just HOW gullible and asleep the masses are…


      2. I think it serves the same purpose as the deliberate absurdity of propaganda narratives like Covid. Propaganda isn’t supposed to make sense, and faked photos aren’t supposed to be 100 percent convincing. These discrepancies create a conflict in the public’s mind: Do I believe the evidence of my own senses, or do I believe what I’m told to believe? Fake photos and fake stories condition us to go with the second option. Stop thinking, stop looking too closely, stop questioning, and just accept the reality you’re told to accept.

        The glaringly obvious deepfake of Tom Hanks in the Saturday Night Live at home episode–where everyone supposedly filmed from their own homes to protect themselves from Covid–really shook me. I showed it to several “normies” who could see as plainly as I could the pixelated and constantly-morphing neck, as well as the youthful hands on an older man’s body. Nobody I showed it to had trouble agreeing that it looked fake. But everyone–absolutely everyone–had forgotten about it and shrugged it off and had no interest in talking or thinking about it when I brought it up weeks or months later. It’s too scary to believe we are being deceived at such a massive level, in so many capricious ways, everywhere we look in the media. What some people in our conspiracy club call “revelation of the method” is, as far as I’m concerned, all about creating cognitive dissonance. Do you want to believe that everything you’ve been told by the media could be a lie, or do you want to go on living happily in the Matrix. Most people, at an unconscious level, choose the blue pill, and obviously fake photos like these force them to make it over and over until it’s a conditioned response.

        No other explanations I’ve seen–including ridiculous claims by MM that Intel agencies are trying to undermine each other, or something–make more sense than the intentional-cognitive-dissonance explanation.


        1. They love to cause confusion. It scrambles the mind and ultimately manipulates the brain to let its guard down and “go with the flow”, so to speak. That way, the sheeple are more easily controlled in the long run. And knowing how suggestible the average person is, it works like a charm.


        2. This makes complete sense. Thank you for raising.

          Also maybe they like the opportunity to send us down rabbit holes perhaps as a (unsuccessful) distraction from their nefarious purposes..


      3. In many instances, they are doing it because they can. They are laughing at us… we can do nothing about their antics.


          1. Not so much that … there are different types of propaganda for different purposes. The easiest to spot is agitprop, where they want immediate results for an immediate purpose. This is Covid, a year of intense fear designed to make a stampede for a vaccine, the purpose of which is still hidden. Ukraine is agitprop, as are school and mall shootings. But there is also “integration” propaganda, slow and subtle, designed to put everyone on the same page at a young age. I cringe as I watch my young grandson bought in to Climate Change (no future), Columbine (where just a few years ago they ran a fake woman who came to Colorado to repeat the event, only to be shot and killed off camera. One of his teachers announced that she had driven by his school before her death. Shameless.) He is also bought into the Great Pacific Garbage Patch, and was assigned the book One Flew Over The Cuckoo’s Nest, a masonic journey. To his credit, he did not finish it. I tried last summer, briefly, to disabuse him of Climate Change (“your future is actually very bright”) and was greeted with anger. They have him under control, and I can only breach our relationship if I attempt to interfere. (His teachers are as integrated as everyone, they know not what they do. I want to call them “stupid”, but that is unkind. Oh hell, they are stupid.)

            He is not being humiliated. Far from it. He is being integrated, to belong, to be part of the big lies, the important part of it, never to realize it. People like you and me break free. Hardly anyone else does.

            Liked by 3 people

            1. Same with my 12 year old grandson who said the other day blue and yellow ‘are the right colours to like now’ & my nephew who marched to raise awareness of ‘climate change’ at 13..
              We can hope for them to wake up though, as we did..


  5. I may mention the British blogger Lez Luthor here, who traveled via Poland to the Ukraine and made some videos showing Kiev being a film set. I’ve seen that in Frankfurt 2015 during the blockupy hoax. The companies delivering the concrete barriers are getting rich that way. One day the streets are decorated with lots of absurd concrete blocking the traffic, next day all of it is gone.
    I wish everybody a nice weekend


    1. I am thinking about running the Lez Luther video here, and thank you for bringing it to us. The problem with it is that a guy on foot with a cell phone cannot begin to bring in a war scenario, even as I know the war is fake. It comes down to believability.


      1. Everything is done for a reason,and it’s usually politically driven. Always an agenda…That “AGENDA” is …”MONEY and POWER”. I “” everything cools down around the Mid-Term elections. Everyone will get a little something out of it. except you..And me. I wonder what the next ‘WAR” will be? W.A.R. “Wars Are Rigged”. Stay Tuned.


  6. Never once have I paid any mind to this Swift creature but taking a dance through google images she appears to have at least one stand-in. A slightly rounder jaw and usually with the longer bangs to hide the eyebrows. If you are really strapped for activities you can also see more paste-ups with mom. I will say they at least kept the same actor in the mom role over the years. That’s big of them. (I apologize but I have forgotten how to paste pix- it’s been awhile)


    1. I use a PC Desktop and Snagit Screen cap software. Once I knew h0w to go and get a photo from a website using the URL, but I’ve long forgotten how. It’s probably simple.

      While logged into your WordPress account, select “Write,” upper right.
      Click on the blue “+” box, upper left.
      Choose “Classic” to work with. A long gray box appears. Click on that box, and commands appear.
      Toward the right end there is a little icon that is a camera and a musical note. Click on it.
      Upper left, click on “Upload files.” In the middle of the screen is a box that says “Select Files.” Choose it and go and get your photo, which was screen capped. Insert it in your post. It is “Add Media”.
      In the post, upper right, are three vertical dots. Click on them. Under “Editor” you will see “Code Editor,” Click on that and the code you need to place a photo in a comment is on the screen.

      Good luck. Email me if I can help. I am going to do some facial work on Taylor in the meantime.


      1. Thanks, Mark. I’ll give it a try and beg you for help, inevitably. I do have some face chops I want to air, tho’ when I can find a minute is challenging. BTW, can you recall that sort of politician that looked an awful lot like Andy Kauffman- the dead comic- not the other recent guy? Thanks.


  7. but, But, BUT maybe “they” faked those photos to spare their, real, actual families from the spotlight and to protect Mom, Dad and Sis from all those screaming teenagers and autograph hounds? Maybe?

    In addition to the “Theater of the Pacific” piece, which was very good and quite funny, I would also like to recommend some videos done by Lestrade, which are on on Bitchute; he goes by the moniker of Unpopular Opinion. I especially recommend the one called “Bullshit from Iwo Jima” which made me laugh out loud several times. That place got the double treatment back in 2006, when ol’ Clint made not one, but two films about the battle, one from the US POV, the other Japanese.

    Oddly, both were filmed in Iceland, though imdb mentions Iwo Jima as the main location, which makes total sense (there are only two black-sand islands in the world, it seems) as Iwo has now been turned into the remotest outpost of the Disneyland franchise, an immersive, tunnel-spelunking, flag-raising and limb-missing spectacle for the whole family.

    Liked by 1 person

  8. I love your angle on this, Mark. But you will still not inform us that Jonathan Swift was a high-ranking member of a Freemasonic Lodge in Dublin. He became dean of Trinity College Dublin and served that post for twenty years. You can pretend that Miles Mathis has figured out the lineage between Dean Johnathan Swift and Taylor Swift, but he hasn’t. In fact, there is probably no direct lineal line. Miles still refuses to mention the Freemasonic Order in any of his papers. Mark, if you can prove through genealogical lineage that Taylor Swift is related to Jonathan Swift–without of course siting Miles Mathis inept and spurious genealogical research–then perhaps you can write with authority on the subject. But please stop force-feeding us Miles Mathis’ quite obviously spurious and inept research into these matters. You know better.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s