August 28 A sad day as I have decided to no longer allow Hermitian to submit comments on this blog as he has now, several times accused me of behavior for which he has no evidence (hinting that I may be the forger, work for Obama, that I withhold data or manipulate data and other non sequiturs). I feel saddened because, despite his short comings, he did serve a useful purpose. I wish him well and will continue to address issues he raises, to help him understand better why the Xerox workflow stands unassailed. Thank you Hermitian for your efforts to debunk the work flow, helping further strengthen it.
Seizethecarp: Obots claim that the AP/Applewhite scan has much higher resolution than the green WH pdf, despite having a less distict light blue “security paper” pattern instead of a clearer green pattern and lower resolution in the WH pdf.
Not ‘much higher’, in some ways the document resolution itself is not sufficient to determine the quality as jpeg’s are also ‘compressed’ and this ‘quality factor’ can reduce the value of the resolution. The AP image is 200DPI (dots per inch) versus 150/300DPI (background/foreground) for the White House LFBC PDF. The AP image looks ‘cleaner’ as the JPEG smooths the text, giving it a cleaner appearance.
From the FreeRepublic we receive some good feedback from a poster named Butterdezilion.
Butterdezilion: If the Xerox machine is substituting exact replicas every time a certain “blob” (such as a box) appears, then that should happen with every box, every letter, etc. If the Xerox is switching 6’s for 8’s then where are those numbers switched around in the White House PDF?
A good question but as I have shown and found out, the Mixed Raster Compression is all but exact as it appears to be extremely sensitive to small variations. I have seen examples with anywhere from 4 to 17 foreground images. The same for JBIG2, it is based on how similar the two blobs, such as a box are, and in the samples I have, I have found JBIG2 to fail to capture the boxes, but it does capture other letters.
The WND ‘reports‘ that there is an identical pixel structure, revealing a ‘cut-and-paste operation’. However, the same happens when I scan the AP LFBC on a Xerox WorkCentre. There are some characters which are rendered identical, even though their source document shows them not to be so. This is caused by JBIG2 compression. Early on, I and others, had predicted that most if not all of the artifacts found in the WH Long Form Birth Certificate PDF could be explained by Mixed Raster Compression. In order to achieve high levels of compression, the MRC algorithm separates the image into a background color image and one or more monochrome foreground bitmaps. The background is encoded using JPEG and subsampled to a lower resolution, the foreground objects are encoded using JBIG2. At that time, we could not point to examples of such a process and our observations were quickly ignored. Hard work and persistence, and a lot of luck, led us to the Xerox WorkCentre which not only explained many of the artifacts, but also explained several artifacts the CCP and others had failed to document: such as an embedded comment in the JPEG background and the quantization matrices used to encode the DCT encoded JPEG. Both were reproduced using Xerox WorkCentre. The final ‘straw’ was me finding a Xerox Scanned document on the White House servers, showing the President’s Tax Returns. While in Black and White, the JPEG contained an embedded comment ‘lineargray’ and the quantization matrix matched. The Xerox WorkCentre 7655 is a likely candidate as the ‘forger’ of the White House Long Form Birth Certificate.