The reason for my concern is that a person says he read an article in 2012 with a picture of Madeleine McCann in it. It could have only been the 9 year old age progressed image in 2012. He says to me that the girl he met after knowing about the article looked identical to this image but he estimated she was 12 years of age then. 5 years later she would be 17 rather than the true age of 14 so something is wrong.
Was she dressed older than she really was?
Is his memory of the facts at fault?
Is he telling lies?
the 13 year old Madeleine http://cdn.images.dailystar.co.uk/dynamic/1/photos/961000/Madeleine-McCann-as-a-teenager-914961.jpg (http://cdn.images.dailystar.co.uk/dynamic/1/photos/961000/Madeleine-McCann-as-a-teenager-914961.jpg)
Do you think this is realistic Rob ?I'm not an expert on matters like this.
I'm not an expert on matters like this.
So what is the point of the thread?
So what is the point of the thread?I had to understand what image represented each age group. I'm still struggling.
I had to understand what image represent each age group. I'm still struggling.
In original photographs of a subject, I find it quite extraordinary the differences which can be made in appearance just by lighting, hairstyle and makeup.When I compare these two images I think they are similar.
Therefore trying to age progress a subject must be an incredibly difficult thing to do. But although not an exact science it does appear to have paid dividends on occasion.
Eric Austin(https://mysteryu.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/aric.jpg)In 1981, Aric Austin was abducted by his father when he was just shy of 2 months old. An age progression photo actually led to him being found 22 years later. It was when a U.S. Department of Education investigator working on a case involving fraudulent birth certificates recognized Austin’s driver’s license photo from an age-progression image. Another great example of an accurate age progression photo being generated from a baby picture.
https://mysteryu.com/age-progression-photos/
I'm not so interested in past age progressed images of Madeleine.
I'm more interested in the fact there are no recent ones ... particularly in the tenth year since she disappeared.
I think there must be a reason for that ... and I hope it is a positive one.
the 13 year old Madeleine http://cdn.images.dailystar.co.uk/dynamic/1/photos/961000/Madeleine-McCann-as-a-teenager-914961.jpg (http://cdn.images.dailystar.co.uk/dynamic/1/photos/961000/Madeleine-McCann-as-a-teenager-914961.jpg)
Sorry about The Sun but some love to use it as a cite, so if you can't beat 'em joing 'em ?{)(** :A doppelganger with the same first name as well! That is even more incredible. And to make it worse the Surname of the man that Karen Sisson saw at the Cabopino Camping was "Mayer". So it ends up they are the same age, they have the same first name (except for one "e" Madeleine as opposed to Madeline) , both with surnames involved in the investigation (McCann and Mayer), and both with very similar facial features.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/fabulous/5338593/incredible-doppelganger-encounters-look-twice/
It was pointed out on another forum that this image was not sanction by Kate and Gerry so I'm keen to know if anyone else has knowledge about it. I had used the image but I have never looked into its origin.
https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/607816/how-old-is-Madeleine-McCann-now-missing-look-like-teenager-13-years-old-update-2017 mentions who drew it.
"Portrait artist Dr D’Lynn Waldron – who has created age-progressed images for the FBI – suggests we should now be looking for girl who looks like this."
and why she put her hair up rather than down: "Dr Waldron says the two key features that would help identify a girl as Maddie are the distinctive dark strip on the iris of her right eye – which will never change – and her ears – which won’t change until she is in her 60s.
She told Daily Star Online: “The two identifiers are the anomaly in the right eye and the shape of her ears – two things that will not change.”
The expert, who is based in California, pictured Maddie with her hair up so her ears are visible, and also paid particular attention to her nose, chin and teeth."
Other details discussed were: "he said: “In the McCanns’ search, not one of the images they used shows her ears.
“The ears are how I can immediately eliminate a match with anyone under 60 and ears are an excellent thing to look for since they do not change until over 60, or older.
“I found a picture of her as a baby that shows her ears and I used that as reference for my artwork, in which her hair is pulled loosely back in a pony tail.
"“It is almost certain she will have her mother's teeth, so that was my reference. She has her mother's chin.
“Her nose is not like either of her parents, but easy to see what it will be.”
Nothing in there about Kate or Gerry's reaction to it.
Sorry about The Sun but some love to use it as a cite, so if you can't beat 'em joing 'em ?{)(** :
https://www.thesun.co.uk/fabulous/5338593/incredible-doppelganger-encounters-look-twice/
Long have there been twins and closely resembling siblings.There is a wee way to go yet Sadie.
When I compare these two images I think they are similar.I think the image beside Madeleine here was 13 years old but in 2012 whereas Madeleine McCann was 13, coming up to 14, year s old in May 2017
Does anyone know the "Sims Game"? Could those images just be a result of that game?
With respect Robitty I'm not too sure if that is to what the member referred and I am sure she will clarify her post when next she is on line. Particularly as it appears to be giving other members such difficulty in understanding. As far as I am aware the McCann family have not passed an opinion on that one.
In my opinion the misunderstanding arises from the sentence ... "The fact that this new age progression is very good and they might find Madeleine." and I have no idea why that should be the case as it appears perfectly self explanatory to me and obviously to you.
The member in my opinion was obviously referring to advances in the technique used and not to either a 'new' portrayal of Madeleine or evidence of anything; other than its usefulness as a tool to help in the identification of someone whose family only have toddler photographs and family resemblance to go on.
We all age ... and change with age ... so in my opinion a tool which can assist in helping to identify a person missing since a baby is a useful thing to have.
Constantly updated and changing techniques is a bit long winded in the simple sentence ... "The fact that thisnewconstantly updated and changing technique used in age progression is very good and they might find Madeleine."
All the pictures in the article have been kicking about for years so they are not ‘new’. Simple really.
It is the most recent that I've seen produced. No longer needing to refer to the image at age 6 or 9 or whatever historic dates are well gone. I could imagine there would be a range of possible age progressed images potentially for they have an element of artistic licence to them.
Now age progression photos can be made of a person irrespective of whether they reach that age or not. It is not proof they were/are alive depending on the age in the image.
I don't know what would be considered a 'normal' gap between official updates. I think there may be a very good and a very positive reason why there have been no recent ones for Madeleine, especially at the ten year mark.If she is alive any method of publicly identifying what Madeleine looks like today has both pro and con aspects.
Initially I thought that might have been because of a risk of identifying her wee sister who probably looks very much as she would now ... but I have changed my outlook on that.
Your question to the member was quite specific to the member's post in that you asked "What new age progression drawing ?"
In my opinion you appeared to read that as there being a new age progression drawing. Which quite simply was not the case and was not what the member's post indicated.
If she is alive any method of publicly identifying what Madeleine looks like today has both pro and con aspects.
In the other case I worked on, the parents of the missing girl were told "not to publicise her photo" but the parents being dominant members of society knew better and went against the police's advice. Here too we have references that the PJ said "No publicity" or more accurately "no press". Why did they say that? It was as explained in the NZ case "not to put excessive pressure on the abductor", so the abductor doesn't just go and kill her for fear of being too easily identified.
In the NZ case my investigation suggested pressure on the abductor lead to a girls murder (but that was not the official version). In the McCann case we don't know what has happened. IMO if she has been allowed to live up to the age of 14, just ease off with the age progression images as there is a chance Madeleine herself will make contact, as long as the abductor can relax. The McCanns have said something along these lines too.
That is exactly what the member’s post indicated. This is what Sadie posted ‘The fact that this new age progression is very good and they might find Madeleine.’
The point at issue here is not in my opinion what the member actually posted, but your interpretation of it.
You said, "You really believe that a drawing is some sort of evidence that she may be alive??" and quite categorically, that is not what the member either posted or intended, although she is perfectly capable of telling the forum exactly what she did intend for herself.
In the interim ... probably best not to put words into posts, as you did, which were never there initially. In my opinion that leads only to confusion. Which is not good.
In original photographs of a subject, I find it quite extraordinary the differences which can be made in appearance just by lighting, hairstyle and makeup.I think those age progressions are very good Brietta. Well found.
Therefore trying to age progress a subject must be an incredibly difficult thing to do. But although not an exact science it does appear to have paid dividends on occasion.
Eric Austin(https://mysteryu.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/aric.jpg)In 1981, Aric Austin was abducted by his father when he was just shy of 2 months old. An age progression photo actually led to him being found 22 years later. It was when a U.S. Department of Education investigator working on a case involving fraudulent birth certificates recognized Austin’s driver’s license photo from an age-progression image. Another great example of an accurate age progression photo being generated from a baby picture.
https://mysteryu.com/age-progression-photos/
I'm not so interested in past age progressed images of Madeleine.
I'm more interested in the fact there are no recent ones ... particularly in the tenth year since she disappeared.
I think there must be a reason for that ... and I hope it is a positive one.
I think those age progressions are very good Brietta. Well found.It is an extremely interesting topic, I saw a documentary about these researchers where they can do DNA analysis and tell what the person might look like. I doubt if that will be more accurate than the classic age progression technique of comparing the parent's photos at a similar age. In fact in this day and age of digital photography if could be possible to keep a bank of photos of kids yearly and adults every 10 years, so if someone goes missing there is a recent photo or if child went missing it could be possible to do an age progression image for it at any age. I wonder what that would cost to maintain.
And based upon the images that I saw in 2012 of a little girl, I believe to have been Madeleine, I think her age progression picture of 2017 isequally goodeven better.
Well done to the age progression artist along with modern techniques.
It is an extremely interesting topic, I saw a documentary about these researchers where they can do DNA analysis and tell what the person might look like. I doubt if that will be more accurate than the classic age progression technique of comparing the parent's photos at a similar age. In fact in this day and age of digit photography if could be possible to keep a bank of photos of kids yearly and adults every 10 years, so if someone goes missing there is a recent photo or if child went missing it could be possible to do an age progression image for it at any age. I wonder what that would cost to maintain.
Making everyone to comply might be a tad more difficult.
There might be a way of digitally merging the two photos resulting in the age progressed photo of the missing child.
It is not an exact science as a persons appearance can change in many ways as they grow up.
Yes, of course it will, but certain changes happen as the person ages, in differing degrees to everyone.
An expert would know about likely changes at certain ages and allow for these changes
People age in all sorts of different ways, not even someone practised in the skill gets it right very often and the more years that pass the greater the error.Well the person that did this age progression hit the nail on the head, didn't she?
Well the person that did this age progression hit the nail on the head, didn't she?
(https://mysteryu.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/aric.jpg)
https://mysteryu.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/aric.jpg
I dont see any reason why age should enter into it, once the changes from babyhood/infancy into adulthood have taken place .... unless there has been some dreadful illness /accident altering the face
OMO. I am not an expert, but I do have an unusually keen eye.
I have never been keen on Age Progression Images. The American versions are too glossy and perfect, and The Brit ones are a bit too down graded and common.Can you see Mona Lisa's ears?
But the ears are worth looking at if you have a suspicion.
Can you see Mona Lisa's ears?
It's me, idiot. Of course I can.That must be verified. Come to Praia da Luz on the train via Paris. I'd love to do that journey too.
That must be verified. Come to Praia da Luz on the train via Paris. I'd love to do that journey too.
Are you sure you want to spend a week with that condescending smirk?There is sort of a smile but does she have any teeth left? Or is she gappy like me. (https://niceteeth.files.wordpress.com/2008/11/mona-braces.jpg)
And that's just the train journey.
There is sort of a smile but does she have any teeth left? Or is she gappy like me. (https://niceteeth.files.wordpress.com/2008/11/mona-braces.jpg)
Don't ask, Rob. You seriously don't want to know about my teeth.I already know about your bite and how snappy you can be, but what does Mona Lisa's teeth look like?
I already know about your bite and how snappy you can be, but what does Mona Lisa's teeth look like?
Teeth are Plural, Bob.As in "long in the tooth" that saying has tooth rather than teeth.
"The McCann family's spokesman previously told Daily Star Online they preferred not to comment on aged progressed images but to only use ones authorised by the Met Police as part of Operation Grange."
Interestingly, Operation Grange haven't produced any age progressed images in several years.
No doubt because they already know where Maddie is & they have her under round the clock surveillance.
They are just waiting until she turns 18 before rescuing her, or some shit like that.
A new age progression image, which looks rather good to meNot quite what OG had in mind when digging up Luz,but never mind,hope springs eternal and all that jazz.
https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/madeleine-mccann-computer-works-out-22009629
The above article explains the new technique used to produce it. Seems that this technique has produced images that have helped with solving two cases.
(https://i2-prod.dailystar.co.uk/incoming/article21766720.ece/ALTERNATES/s810/1_maddie-2.jpg)
https://i2-prod.dailystar.co.uk/incoming/article21766720.ece/ALTERNATES/s810/1_maddie-2.jpg