Is the standing man added in this photo?
In 2013 there were the news that the New York Times has the photo without the standing man:
Conspiracy debunkers claimed that the man is removed in the NYT photo:
http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot.com/2016/07/the-denier-logic-at-its-finest-famous.html
It took me some time to calculate the trigonometric transforms and to check if the shadow from the standing man is in a wrong direction, though it may look natural in the photo. What you have to do is to determine where the camera is located and where the light source is. Basically such calculations are simple, but you have to be careful not to make errors, much time went before I got the analysis correct. Now it is fine. There are many photo forgeries from the war time, so it would not be a surprise if the shadow is wrong, but as it turns out, the shadow is correct but the man is still added.
My analysis is in the following word file.
The man is added to the photo. I am quite confident in saying so. It is a rather well made forgery: the shadow directions are correct, but there are other problems. Notably the position of the standing man with respect to the pillar is problematic. The man’s legs are further from the camera than the pillar, yet he’s hand is in the front of the pillar in the photo. Additionally, he is facing towards the camera but the legs are not in that position. My argument is based on these.
But there is also the blurring of the right side of the man’s arm. ww2Freak.com has tried to replicate the blurring effect in the image below. We see that also the other arm and the body are blurred on one side. This replication does not show the hand of the right side arm. In the Buchenwald photo the hand is not blurred, which makes the motion explanation difficult: if the shoulders do not move, the hand must move if the arm moves.
