Nashville shooting - female shooter?

[BeatTheTunaUp]

I'm not missing the point. If you look real close at the photos,you will see that the 1st one has the pants culls down to the top of the shoes sole and the 2nd photo shoes the cuffs pulled up well above the soles.

I think I can see better than you.
This

Is clearly this shoe.

Look closely at the width of the wiggle white stripe. One is thick, one is thin. There is an obvious difference. Between those shoes and this one.

edit. First shoe may be a puma based on the curve. Argument is still the same though

 

[popsgarland]

I think I can see better than you.
This
View attachment 380648

Is clearly this shoe.
View attachment 380649


Look closely at the width of the wiggle white stripe. One is thick, one is thin. There is an obvious difference. Between those shoes and this one.

View attachment 380651
View attachment 380650

I guess I need to clean my eye glasses. I didn't see any yellow and red flames on any of the shoes.

 

[1911'S 4 Me]

The cuff was covering the trademark when standing.
After being shot the knee is bent pulling the cuff up.
Same pants, same shoes. Different position.

 

[BeatTheTunaUp]

The cuff was covering the trademark when standing.
After being shot the knee is bent pulling the cuff up.
Same pants, same shoes. Different position.

OMG. Think critically. Listen to yourself. How would standing and half covering the stripe make it seem fatter than being fully exposed in the crumpled position? Your logic is backwards in this argument.

 

[Vaquero]

I'm not missing the point. If you look real close at the photos,you will see that the 1st one has the pants culls down to the top of the shoes sole and the 2nd photo shoes the cuffs pulled up well above the soles.

My pants ride up a little when I sit, vs standing.
In the last position, I'd expect them to be above my ankle.

 

[Vaquero]

OMG. Think critically. Listen to yourself. How would standing and half covering the stripe make it seem fatter than being fully exposed in the crumpled position? Your logic is backwards in this argument.

The flame appears white in the first b&w picture l
Same shoes.

 

[BeatTheTunaUp]

The flame appears white in the first b&w picture l
Same shoes.

the first picture isn't black and white. It's a from a color cctv shot. Shooter has on a bright red had. Pants are black gray artic cammo. Again, colors aside, the stripe is has a different girth.

 

[Vaquero]

Not to hijack the thread but the tinfoil hat bunch is now stewing about the change in shoes for the shooter between the first video footage when the door was shot out and entry made vs the dead shooter pic taken by LEO. Theory is why is shooter wearing Pumas as they entered building and then the corpse is wearing flame Vans.

Some folks have too much time on their hands
View attachment 380609 View attachment 380610

First picture is monochrome.

 

[Vaquero]

Or not.
First I've seen of the red cap pictures.

 

[BeatTheTunaUp]

Again, I have no real dog in this fight, and don't pretend to know what the shoe change means or alludes to, but they changed. Something is off.

 

[popsgarland]

The cuff was covering the trademark when standing.
After being shot the knee is bent pulling the cuff up.
Same pants, same shoes. Different position.

I basically said the same thing and was told i was I couldn't see worth a damn.

 

[General Zod]

It's the same damn shoes. First pic is low res and extremely pixelated, but you can make out a flame shape. Second pic is sharper and you can make out more of the design.

Jesus Christ, man. Stop.

 

[BeatTheTunaUp]

It's the same damn shoes. First pic is low res and extremely pixelated, but you can make out a flame shape. Second pic is sharper and you can make out more of the design.

Jesus Christ, man. Stop.

Sorry, I have eyes. I can see the difference color/flames aside. One has a half inch stripe, one is 1 1/2 inches. If you can't see that, I'm sorry.

 

[General Zod]

Sorry, I have eyes. I can see the difference color/flames aside. One has a half inch stripe, one is 1 1/2 inches. If you can't see that, I'm sorry.

Do you understand the concept of pixels? You're like the clients that send me a screencap from a web site and ask if I can blow it up to a ten foot wide sign. Sure I can, but it's going to be so pixelated you can't make it out.

When you zoom in on a low res image, you get large pixels that distort shapes and remove details. That's exactly what the top image shows. If you can't wrap your head around that simple concept in a digital image, then I'm sorry.

I deal with digital images every day as my job. You're trying to compare a low res, pixelated image to a high res image with smaller pixels and you're expecting them to look the same. They won't. They can't. even when they're showing the same damn shoe. There is now magical "enhance that image" shit like they show on CSI. The low detail you get in the first image, when you blow it up, becomes fuzzy, and remains low detail because the information simply isn't there to render. The stripe isn't a differnet size, the damn pixels that have that information are simply twice as big. The flame isn't gone, there just isn't enougn information in the low res shot to replicate it.

I know you're not going to believe me, but I'm telling you the truth. It's a limitation of digital photography.

 

[BeatTheTunaUp]

Do you understand the concept of pixels? You're like the clients that send me a screencap from a web site and ask if I can blow it up to a ten foot wide sign. Sure I can, but it's going to be so pixelated you can't make it out.

When you zoom in on a low res image, you get large pixels that distort shapes and remove details. That's exactly what the top image shows. If you can't wrap your head around that simple concept in a digital image, then I'm sorry.

I deal with digital images every day as my job. You're trying to compare a low res, pixelated image to a high res image with smaller pixels and you're expecting them to look the same. They won't. They can't. even when they're showing the same damn shoe. There is now magical "enhance that image" shit like they show on CSI. The low detail you get in the first image, when you blow it up, becomes fuzzy, and remains low detail because the information simply isn't there to render. The stripe isn't a differnet size, the damn pixels that have that information are simply twice as big. The flame isn't gone, there just isn't enougn information in the low res shot to replicate it.

I know you're not going to believe me, but I'm telling you the truth. It's a limitation of digital photography.

I understand pixels. I can also look at 30 different screen grabs from the video and none indicate any flames or colors on the shoes. There's more than just this one pic to look at.

 

[popsgarland]

Do you understand the concept of pixels? You're like the clients that send me a screencap from a web site and ask if I can blow it up to a ten foot wide sign. Sure I can, but it's going to be so pixelated you can't make it out.

When you zoom in on a low res image, you get large pixels that distort shapes and remove details. That's exactly what the top image shows. If you can't wrap your head around that simple concept in a digital image, then I'm sorry.

I deal with digital images every day as my job. You're trying to compare a low res, pixelated image to a high res image with smaller pixels and you're expecting them to look the same. They won't. They can't. even when they're showing the same damn shoe. There is now magical "enhance that image" shit like they show on CSI. The low detail you get in the first image, when you blow it up, becomes fuzzy, and remains low detail because the information simply isn't there to render. The stripe isn't a differnet size, the damn pixels that have that information are simply twice as big. The flame isn't gone, there just isn't enougn information in the low res shot to replicate it.

I know you're not going to believe me, but I'm telling you the truth. It's a limitation of digital photography.

@General Zod, now you know what its like arguing with a fence post.

 

[General Zod]

@General Zod, now you know what its like arguing with a fence post.

People sink their teeth into something and feel like they know something everyone else is missing...and there's just now way to hit 'em with facts that'll make them see otherwise. I'm about as close as it gets to an "expert" on images like this we have on the board, but apparently I don't know what I'm talking about.

Kind of like when clients send a screencap off a web page and ask us to turn it into a ten foot tall lit sign for them...then don't understand why it won't work that way.

 

[PinnedandRecessed]

It was heartening to see Nashville LEO's in an all out dash to put done this POS. I hope the failures/cowardice of the past are behind us and this is the dawn of a new age in active shooter protocol response. I only wished more rounds were expended to put that subhuman piece of garbage down.

eta: fixed it

 

[General Zod]

It was heartening to see Nashville LEO's in an all out dash to put done this POS. I hope the failures/cowardice of the past are behind us and this is the dawn of a new age in active shooter protocol. I only wished more rounds were expended to put that subhuman piece of garbage down.

Sadly, the Nashville PD's actions are supposed to have been active shooter protocol since the Columbine murders. And yet department after department has failed on that simple concept. Those Nashville cops did it right.

 

[PinnedandRecessed]

supposed

Agreed.