My Import Experience - R34 Vspec Gtr - Top Secret Imports!

[GTR_RB26TTS]

Do you even know what you are talking about? Sounds like regurgitated rubbish to me from other pages of ill informed people without a clue.

The only thing that has been altered - is the colour fill for one continuous area - It takes all of 3 seconds to perform in PS.

Anyone with even basic level of PS experience can spot that a mile away.

If the file FORMAT was changed form say a BMP to a JPG, the indeed, there would be loss/alteration of colour.

However it would be across the entire image - not one continous area. It would be uniform loss that could easily be comparable with the original image in seconds.

See a recurring theme here? One. Continuous. Area.

Please do not regurgitate dribble from other such inexperienced people as if you actually have any clue what is going on.

I work on PS professionally as a day job, im also rather skilled @ MS Paint as no doubt a lot of my friends know.

So how about you take your own advice & stop filling this thread with rubbish?

[0288]

I was also sent the same picture by the seller early december and it was extremely dark in the back, just like KR4's post shows. For completeness sake ill even try and dig it up so you can run it through your fancy program.

And that other guy deserved to get blasted because this is not the proper forum to voice opinions about other members its about importing and besides I THOUGHT WE MOVED ON HERE?

Everybody that still cares.

I have located the original picture from the seller on one of my drives and have uploaded it here: http://www.megaupload.com/?d=J13LVARZ. KR4GTR was right to resize it, its well over 5mb and the forum just kept timing out when uploading it tonight.

When you open the zip file and look at the properties of the picture, it is from the same day i received it, 4th December 2009. I have zipped the picture to hopefully preserve this information, otherwise every time you download it, it will only be a new file created on the day you downloaded it - NOT THE ORIGINAL THAT I HAVE.

As this photo is the same as KR4 GTR's post (just his was smaller in size due to conversion to jpeg), and is from almost a month earlier (u can see in the creation date) this should clear his name and highlight that whatever is going on with the file was done on the sellers end, not him so you can stop flaming him and we can just MOVE ON.

In Winzip or even just Windows once you have opened the zip you should be able to just right click and go to properties to see the date of the file creation. Sorry but i dont know any other way to do this while preserving the file history. You should also be able to extract the file from the zip if you like. I have attached a screen print out of the history aswell. Please run it through your program to confirm the original date and such.

Now we move on?

Edited January 4, 2010 by 288

[Weezy]

That post is just the icing on the cake.

Thats the original alright... I'm also seeing in the history file creation 4th December 2009.

Well done mate.

[20b3]

Image created "4th December 2009".

Well that does it, the file creation date says it all. It was created way before KR4GTR's post.

I think some of you guys owe KR4-GTR quite an apology here. And hopefully one day he'll come back to actually see it.

I'd hate to be in GTR-32's shoes right now.

Shame.

Well atleast we can talk about importing now???????????????????????????????????????????????????

Edited January 4, 2010 by 20b3

[suprasearchin]

It say Created: Friday, 4 December 2009, 4:02:35PM.

That is good file.

[l180sxl]

Just Wondering Anyone else is out here looking at getting a GTR 34 as well?

A Show Hands ... I meant Post ...

[33vspec]

BMP files wont work with JPEGsnoop matey. But your correct, that is the earliest copy of the same image, so you can let KR4-GTR off the hook here as this proves he's definately not responsible for the editing.

JPEG exif and IPTC (the data which jpegsnoop reads) are manipulated very easily. You shouldnt rely solemnly on a freeware program such as jpegsnoop to determine the authenticity of an image (as clearly demonstrated in this thread) as there are also other factors to take into account.

I've run the image that KR4 posted and the output demonstrates that it was edited. The edit steps were around quality being changed from '12' down to '9' and conversion to JPEG. The hue etc should be disregarded as its nothing but the slight standard adjustments which occur when you resave an image with less quality. Any other edits in question were not made at the same point that the quality / file format was changed.

I've assessed the other image where the car looks normal with some of my programs from work and it comes back as uncertain if processed or edited, i was under the impression that jpegsnoop would also pick this up. I'll look into this further but if this is the case, it looks like someone's probably played with the EXIF's.

You shouldnt rely on jpegsnoop because you can easily edit or clear EXIF and IPTC data from any jpeg imagee with a large number of programs. Just google it and will find lots of them to either customise or even return the data to a stock generic template for example olympus or canon cameras (which is the easiest way to do it). I know this because I edit them when I shop my pictures and add copyrights - etc. I've found with some images if you do edit this data or use one of the common templates - it will make it a 'class 4 file' which means it is uncertain if processed or original. If this is the case then this should explain this other picture where the car looks normal.

As night falls, its a goose chase, you cant determine from the image who edited it, but the date stamp of that file above makes me believe its the seller, as the main creation and edits made to the original BMP file were made on 04 December 2009. way before any of this conversation begun.

Edited January 4, 2010 by 33vspec

[33vspec]

I just simply ran the image where the car looks normal (in GTR32's post) through jpegsnoop.

You shouldnt have even needed the original file that is posted above, although it just clarifies.

The answer was right infront of you all the whole time.... It states uncertain if the image is processed.

Some times one of you (thats all it would take) should look outside of the square, in this case - something as simple as examining the other image in depth would have saved you all alot of time and effort.

In the future, i recommend instead of placing so much focus on the images which you believe are the fakes, check out the ones which you believe are 'authentic' and more importantly - dont overlook their output. A good photoshop job is one where you cant tell any manipulation has been performed, and if the artist is really good - they'll know how to manipulate the EXIF and IPTC too

Edited January 4, 2010 by 33vspec

[GTRsean]

Just Wondering Anyone else is out here looking at getting a GTR 34 as well?

A Show Hands ... I meant Post ...

Ha ha, funnily enough I have been thinking of getting an R34GTR for a while now and have been though this topic and posts a few times. Bypass the rubbish and there are quite a few good bits of info on here. Also looked on carsales and trading post. Couple of cars for sale here that look the goods too but weren't bayside blue, next best colour choice for me was white.

I would first have to sell my R32 GTR that I've poured so much hard earned over the years on like many others!!, I could keep throwing money at it but I'd just love to get a 34.

Then I'd be looking for a 1999-2000 Bayside Blue R34GTR v spec in good, stock condition or a couple of light mods.

Budget I'll keep to my chest, and I'll really start searching when I'm back in Aus mid March, and sold my GTR.

[ashneel]

Just Wondering Anyone else is out here looking at getting a GTR 34 as well?

A Show Hands ... I meant Post ...

im in the market for GTR also now. but will most likly go the non Vspec. can justify spending an extra few grand on diffusers and minor changes. a GTR is a GTR. awesome in everyway

[R34_Wong]

I recently sold my R34 GT-T and bought myself and R34 V-Spec II in Pearl white. Was completely stock and had 34,000km on the clock with papers to certify (not sure how much thats worth, but I wanted it)

Got that for 48k.

Ash: It's about time man, oooo yeah!

[evilGTR]

check out thursdays auction chief.

vspecII , blue, 5grade , 21,000kms, starting bid 3,200,000Y (37k)

[R34_Wong]

Ouch, that burns my heart!

Ah well, got the immediate satisfaction of driving it around I guess... sigh... funny thing is I've still got the MRGTT plates on her !

[GT-R32]

Do you even know what you are talking about? Sounds like regurgitated rubbish to me from other pages of ill informed people without a clue.

The only thing that has been altered - is the colour fill for one continuous area - It takes all of 3 seconds to perform in PS.

Anyone with even basic level of PS experience can spot that a mile away.

If the file FORMAT was changed form say a BMP to a JPG, the indeed, there would be loss/alteration of colour.

However it would be across the entire image - not one continous area. It would be uniform loss that could easily be comparable with the original image in seconds.

See a recurring theme here? One. Continuous. Area.

Please do not regurgitate dribble from other such inexperienced people as if you actually have any clue what is going on.

I work on PS professionally as a day job, im also rather skilled @ MS Paint as no doubt a lot of my friends know.

So how about you take your own advice & stop filling this thread with rubbish?

I can't understand why people find this so hard to believe? Only one area of the photo has been changed to far darker than natural.

Does it hurts your feelings because it 'killed the thread'. f**k the thread, it ran off course when ill-intentions came about after a bad experience by the thread creator with a GTR for sale (who particularly hates going interstate to be disappointed by a car and seeks to blame).

Everybody that still cares.

I have located the original picture from the seller on one of my drives and have uploaded it here: http://www.megaupload.com/?d=J13LVARZ. KR4GTR was right to resize it, its well over 5mb and the forum just kept timing out when uploading it tonight.

When you open the zip file and look at the properties of the picture, it is from the same day i received it, 4th December 2009. I have zipped the picture to hopefully preserve this information, otherwise every time you download it, it will only be a new file created on the day you downloaded it - NOT THE ORIGINAL THAT I HAVE.

As this photo is the same as KR4 GTR's post (just his was smaller in size due to conversion to jpeg), and is from almost a month earlier (u can see in the creation date) this should clear his name and highlight that whatever is going on with the file was done on the sellers end, not him so you can stop flaming him and we can just MOVE ON.

In Winzip or even just Windows once you have opened the zip you should be able to just right click and go to properties to see the date of the file creation. Sorry but i dont know any other way to do this while preserving the file history. You should also be able to extract the file from the zip if you like. I have attached a screen print out of the history aswell. Please run it through your program to confirm the original date and such.

Now we move on?

What a load of fabricated bullshit. How hard is it to change the 'last edited date' and make the file a bmp which are larger? LOL! You realise that this forum uploads up to 8mb? There is NO information on the original on this file you post. None. The big question is: Why did you not post or even mention this far earlier on in the thread? Surely when you ripped into me earlier it would have helped your cause. You can't be that simple, can you?

Anyone who believes this tripe fails to consider that a snoop of KR4-GTR's photoshopped picture demonstrates that the original was taken with a ""OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERA" model no "u810/S810"and date/time of original is "2009:12:14 12:00:53". These are the original marks that count and HAVE NOT HAVE BEEN EDITED BY KR4-GTR. (unless he did it to his detriment?)

I just simply ran the image where the car looks normal (in GTR32's post) through jpegsnoop.

You shouldnt have even needed the original file that is posted above, although it just clarifies.

The answer was right infront of you all the whole time.... It states uncertain if the image is processed.

Some times one of you (thats all it would take) should look outside of the square, in this case - something as simple as examining the other image in depth would have saved you all alot of time and effort.

In the future, i recommend instead of placing so much focus on the images which you believe are the fakes, check out the ones which you believe are 'authentic' and more importantly - dont overlook their output. A good photoshop job is one where you cant tell any manipulation has been performed, and if the artist is really good - they'll know how to manipulate the EXIF and IPTC too

That is a mute point. All the information is contained in the jpegsnoop of the photo KR4 posted. Sure, you say that can be manipulated but he would not have edited his own EXIF or IPTC to shoot himself in the foot? Because that's precisely what it does.

The information of the original is in that file - the fact that the information has been lost in the image I posted, through saving and posting from my work, means shit and is for comparison purposes only.

In Summary

FACT: KR4-GTR was banned under the 350z username for his conduct. PROOF: He admitted to after initially lying about it (now says he shared it with friends).

FACT: KR4-GTR calls the selling person of the car in question a 'complete 2 faced immature and arrogant c*nt and starts bitch session on a car he viewed in Melbourne in his importing thread. PROOF: His post of 20 December 2009.

FACT: The original photo was taken on 14 December 2009. PROOF: KR4-GTR's edited picture contains the original file's information.

FACT: KR4-GTR's photo was edited on 28 December 2009 minutes before he posted it. PROOF: Marker information (including Lino use) in jpegsnoop and the fact he admitted to editing it (but only after it was found to be fact later and after initially denying it).

FACT: One part of the picture in KR4-GTR's is darker than the rest of the photo. PROOF: Use your eyes and compare the photos or view the jpegsnoop file and see the editing for the related areas. The changes performed using photoshop are NOT uniform.

FACT: The jpegsnoop information was not manipulated to KR4-GTR's detriment. PROOF: Why would he do that to himself?

That is the whole story. I just can't make any of this up. All of the evidence I rely on comes from a file KR4-GTR posted himself, using a 3rd party program to analyse it, and KR4-GTR's admitted (after initial denial) facts, aside from the seller's photo.

On the balance of probabilities it would be found that what I posted above is factual, it would be quite easily accepted that what 288 posted is a self furnished picture. You have that and KR4-GTR's word of truth (already found to be a liar) against my factual outline. Pretty simple conclusion to make.

[1224]

Stop making big flamin posts nobodys reading your baloni anymore. Who else votes GTR32 stays out of this thread along with his objectionable views, and we talk about importing?

[PIG747]

i was enjoying this thread so much before xmas. Then i had time off and only came on to read it again yesterday and the amount of bullshit that has happened in this thread has totally wrecked it. Go make a thread somewhere else bout who photoshoped what because just to let you know, in case you haven't already noticed GT-R32 but NOBODY FKN CARES.

So GTFO of this thread GT-R32 unless you have useful info to add

[GT-R32]

Stop making big flamin posts nobodys reading your baloni anymore. Who else votes GTR32 stays out of this thread along with his objectionable views, and we talk about importing?

I'm done here. Everyone who has told me to 'f**k off' or words to that effect can have their thread back.

Anyone with an open, objective and reasonable mind can see precisely why I've posted what I have. Some have written in, some haven't, it was nice to see a few write in support of the facts, despite knowing they would be shot down for it.

[matty09]

I'm done here. Everyone who has told me to 'f**k off' or words to that effect can have their thread back.

Anyone with an open, objective and reasonable mind can see precisely why I've posted what I have. Some have written in, some haven't, it was nice to see a few write in support of the facts, despite knowing they would be shot down for it.

ABOUT TIME YOU LEFT.

[mdang]

check out thursdays auction chief.

vspecII , blue, 5grade , 21,000kms, starting bid 3,200,000Y (37k)

Hi evilGTR,

Could you please post a link to this?

Cheers

[krzysztof]

this thread is GOLD.

i've done some snooping around and KR4, how many accounts do you have.. be honest now. no lies - do tell.

GT-R32 mate about time someone stood up against the sly pricks on these forums.

all i have to say is each dog has his day. good day fellas.