TechPowerUp! Official IC Diamond Test

[Black Panther]

you do understand that the forensic findings simply point out that the images were manipulated with compression software, correct?

Precisely. That and that the 'techpowerup' watermark was 'manipulated' into the image.

Beneath all photos in the linked report it is said:

Copy/Paste detection reveals no areas of suspect pixels.
The DCT Map revealed no particularities of interest. Other than the label in lower right hand corner which reads “Free image hosting by www.techpowerup.com”.

It is obvious that the resolution of the uploaded photos won't match those of the camera with which they were taken. The photos needed to be reduced to below 2MB to be uploaded here. Even my cellphone takes larger pictures than that...

If you really wanted to do a good job you should have asked for the original photos (in fact TRWOV told you he's ready to supply them to you). Even the forensics company you employed told you so:

FMS informed LAC that the original digital image files would yield the most relevant results, however, the original digital image files are not available and the next best evidence was used from the provided links.

Yet instead of asking for them you told them that the original digital images are not available? And you're interpreting inconclusive tests due to this fault as being voluntary manipulation... :shadedshu Duh...

 

[Easy Rhino]

oh andy, did you not read the report you paid good money for?

 

[crazyeyesreaper]

http://fotoforensics.com/img/books-edited.jpghttp://fotoforensics.com/img/books-edited-ela.png

The resaved image was digitally modified: books were copied and a toy dinosaur was added. ELA clearly shows the modified areas as having higher ELA values.

So compare result against Report ELA and DCT

http://innovationcooling.com/image/Innovationcoolingreport.pdf

http://innovationcooling.com/image/I...lingreport.pdf

https://sites.google.com/site/elsamuko/forensics/ela

http://innovationcooling.com/image/Innovationcoolingreport.pdf

Every thing but the kitchen sink perhaps you guys should read up on photo forensics then you could Talk intelligently about the subject

Yes, but does not show areas of local manipulation - study up on it

DIDIDIDIDIDIDIDIDI DA DA DA DIDIDIDIDIDIDIDIDI DA DA DA DA DA DA
I CANTZ HEAR YOUZ!!!!

 

[IC Diamond]

Wow this thread is still going.
Though I took the time to read your interesting report. And I am amused. You're using the most amusing tactics to disprove these claims.
Let me explain this simply.
You are claiming the image is edited, a filthy lie, and holds no true evidence of anything because:
It was taken on a camera that takes pictures in a different resolution
The picture was saved as a JPG (so its, you know, universally accepted by everything and everyone, and able to BE UPLOADED) so its been re-compressed
By recompressing the image (TO MAKE IT APPLEING UNIVERSAL) it COULD HAVE masked any photoshopping done to the image?

Man, you are the dumbest apple I have ever encountered. You're not even providing full proof counter evidence, you're just trying to smear the evidence you have been provided.
You should take a lesson or two from all the reps we have on here at TPU, learn to be like them.
I hope you get burned good for this.

Yes but re-compressing an image does not add local area manipulation as on these examples and This software is designed to identify areas of manipulation even on photos that have been multiply compressed

http://www.fmsconsultation.com/FIAS_Software.html

http://innovationcooling.com/image/Innovationcoolingreport.pdf

 

[RCoon]

Yet instead of asking for them you told them that the original digital images are not available? And you're interpreting inconclusive tests due to this fault as being voluntary manipulation... :shadedshu Duh...

Guilty until proven innocent, its the americanIC Diamond way

Yes but re-compressing an image does not add local area manipulation as on these examples and This software is designed to identify areas of manipulation even on photos that have been multiply compressed

http://www.fmsconsultation.com/FIAS_Software.html

http://innovationcooling.com/image/Innovationcoolingreport.pdf

Ok, so its designed to find areas of manipulation on an image that has been MULTIPLY COMPRESSED. Those images have been compressed ONCE. And your sucky software cant find any full proof evidence of manipulation.
Your own report proves you wrong.

 

[ThE_MaD_ShOt]

Yes, but does not show areas of local manipulation - study up on it

Was this done to all pictures submitted? NO
Is there a likely reason this was done to the very few? probably (to highlight affected area)
Was it done to hurt you or your company? NO
Are these the raw images straight from the cameras in question? Nope


But thank-you for that explanation. We may be heading down a good road now. Just stop at you explanation and leave the quip out and you maybe taking the first steps at redeeming yourself. I can sorta understand you a tad bit. You are going by what was told to you by the forensic people. Now let the people who took the pictures explain what they did to them. Also it does say in the report that the raw images would be best to have. Did you ask for those at anytime during the examination of evidence? Not that I can tell. Maybe you should have.

 

[sneekypeet]

Also I see no images of my Noctua in your testing....So you just pick the ones you think are suspect? Funny thing is, out of all the people to post an image, mine is likely the least manipulated since I did take the image under photo booth lighting, but I guess that would skew the invalid results you produced anyways, so it likely wouldn't help much anyways

 

[Easy Rhino]

Yes but re-compressing an image does not add local area manipulation as on these examples and This software is designed to identify areas of manipulation even on photos that have been multiply compressed

http://www.fmsconsultation.com/FIAS_Software.html

http://innovationcooling.com/image/Innovationcoolingreport.pdf

the area of 'manipulation' that the report is referring to is NO WHERE near the damage marks in the photos. good lord, how many times do we have to explain it to you.

 

[Random Murderer]

Wow. This thread has made my day.
Andrew, grow the hell up. Treat your customers and voluntary testers better. Conduct yourself as the head of a company should, even if that company's business model is that of a spineless douche who's sole method of making money is by suing reputable businesses.
And with that, I'm out. I'm just going to sit back and watch the fireworks.

 

[Easy Rhino]

protip #1: don't make a thermal paste out of a highly abrasive material and then get mad when users point out that it has damaged their components.

 

[d1nky]

Yes but re-compressing an image does not add local area manipulation as on these examples and This software is designed to identify areas of manipulation even on photos that have been multiply compressed

http://www.fmsconsultation.com/FIAS_Software.html

http://innovationcooling.com/image/Innovationcoolingreport.pdf

 

[SonDa5]

I can easily contact Swiftech about the mark on my die and ask them about the whole incident. I was in contact with them when I noticed the problem because I thought it was related to an issue with the block itself at first. Swiftech defeneded the high quality of their block but they also offered me a replacement block just to please me.


IC Diamond I have not been contacted by anyone over the problems I had with IC diamond. I have only shared what I believe to be true. I still have the damaged GPU that works fine but the mark is there. I can easily take another photo of it with a different camera other than my phone.


You guys are way off. I don't wish your company failure but you guys are looking hokey with this report and then accusing your customers of being in some type of scheme to hurt you guys is over the top.

 

[Easy Rhino]

has anyone passed this thread along to our friends over at hardwarecanucks and hardforums? i am positive the guys over there would love to know about all of this.

 

[itsakjt]

I have original photos! I can mail that bs person and to all of you here.

 

[seronx]

Just upload them to flickr.

 

[d1nky]

has anyone passed this thread along to our friends over at hardwarecanucks and hardforums? i am positive the guys over there would love to know about all of this.

and the rest.

 

[RCoon]

[/IMG]

 

[theonedub]

This thread should be saved and distributed to companies as 'What not to do when your customers have problems.'

I thought this was just a poorly misinformed rep, but these posts are from the owner of the company?!

This is a Paula Dean level PR disaster.

 

[Easy Rhino]

This is a Paula Dean level PR disaster.

this is worse. paula dean at least admit she was wrong.

 

[ThE_MaD_ShOt]

has anyone passed this thread along to our friends over at hardwarecanucks and hardforums? i am positive the guys over there would love to know about all of this.

and the rest.

Okay mods be ready for the possible influx of temporary new members.

 

[IC Diamond]

Wow this thread is still going.
Though I took the time to read your interesting report. And I am amused. You're using the most amusing tactics to disprove these claims.
Let me explain this simply.
You are claiming the image is edited, a filthy lie, and holds no true evidence of anything because:
It was taken on a camera that takes pictures in a different resolution
The picture was saved as a JPG (so its, you know, universally accepted by everything and everyone, and able to BE UPLOADED) so its been re-compressed
By recompressing the image (TO MAKE IT APPLEING UNIVERSAL) it COULD HAVE masked any photoshopping done to the image?

Man, you are the dumbest apple I have ever encountered. You're not even providing full proof counter evidence, you're just trying to smear the evidence you have been provided.
You should take a lesson or two from all the reps we have on here at TPU, learn to be like them.
I hope you get burned good for this.

Yes but re-compressing an image does not add local area manipulation as on these examples and This software is designed to identify areas of manipulation even on photos that have been multiply compressed

http://www.fmsconsultation.com/FIAS_Software.html

http://innovationcooling.com/image/Innovationcoolingreport.pdf

 

[Athlon2K15]

I wouldn't be surprised if this independent company that analyzed the photos was in Andy's pocket lol

 

[d1nky]

http://img.techpowerup.org/130718/old-spice1.png[/IMG]

people keep saying it smells fishy, maybe its crushed fish bones.

calcium plus other materials = abrasion and reactive

I wouldn't be surprised if this independent company that analyzed the photos was in Andy's pocket lol

about time someone said that lol

 

[cadaveca]

Yes but re-compressing an image does not add local area manipulation as on these examples and This software is designed to identify areas of manipulation even on photos that have been multiply compressed

http://www.fmsconsultation.com/FIAS_Software.html

http://innovationcooling.com/image/Innovationcoolingreport.pdf

OK, but, the report does highlight the areas that might have been manipulated, and not all the "damage" is in those areas. So...your point is what, exactly?

 

[RCoon]

Yes but re-compressing an image does not add local area manipulation as on these examples and This software is designed to identify areas of manipulation even on photos that have been multiply compressed

http://www.fmsconsultation.com/FIAS_Software.html

http://innovationcooling.com/image/Innovationcoolingreport.pdf

Fine. Let me put a few obvious examples, plus the photos you've been given through Amped Five. Good enough for the army, good enough for me. Two can play forensic image manipulation game.
Guys, please email your pictures to n.layhe@googlemail.com