Ok, so this little hoo-ha is a bit difficult to follow; however, I think I grasp that a DU'er called Tangerine....(aka TLB), aka some chick named Annette, is said to have offed herself on Dec. 23rd, and there is some disagreement with her putative sister's account of TLB's life and death. Correct?
So, am I correct that this seemingly dead TLB had a blog at this url:
http://www.annetteappollo.com/?
If so, that would mean that this:
was a pic of TLB and, apparently, the last thing that got posted to the aforementioned blog on Dec. 15th, correct?
Aside from the rather patently obvious attempt to put a pseudo-halo around her own head, this photo is a little amusing, inasmuch as TLB apparently forgot to remove the ExIF metadata from the image before posting it. Just in case anyone finds anything else interesting in that data, here is what I get when I run the image through my handy-dandy little utility, exiftool (from Phil Harvey):
PS C:\Users\Oceander\Pictures> exiftool sepia-annette01.jpg
ExifTool Version Number : 7.85
File Name : sepia-annette01.jpg
Directory : .
File Size : 35 kB
File Modification Date/Time : 2010:01:02 21:22:53-05:00
File Type : JPEG
MIME Type : image/jpeg
Exif Byte Order : Little-endian (Intel, II)
Image Description :
Make : SONY
Camera Model Name : DSC-F828
Orientation : Horizontal (normal)
X Resolution : 72
Y Resolution : 72
Resolution Unit : inches
Modify Date : 2009:12:15 10:17:49
Y Cb Cr Positioning : Co-sited
Exposure Time : 1/30
F Number : 2.0
Exposure Program : Program AE
ISO : 64
Exif Version : 0220
Date/Time Original : 2004:05:20 12:51:47
Create Date : 2004:05:20 12:51:47
Components Configuration : Y, Cb, Cr, -
Compressed Bits Per Pixel : 8
Exposure Compensation : 0
Max Aperture Value : 2.0
Metering Mode : Multi-segment
Light Source : Unknown
Flash : On, Red-eye reduction, Return detected
Focal Length : 7.1 mm
Warning : [minor] Possibly incorrect maker notes offsets (fix by -39?)
Flashpix Version : 0100
Color Space : sRGB
Exif Image Width : 412
Exif Image Height : 373
Interoperability Index : Unknown (....)
Interoperability Version : .
File Source : Digital Camera
Scene Type : Directly photographed
Custom Rendered : Normal
Exposure Mode : Auto
White Balance : Auto
Scene Capture Type : Standard
Contrast : Normal
Saturation : Normal
Sharpness : Normal
Compression : JPEG (old-style)
Thumbnail Offset : 2392
Thumbnail Length : 5436
Image Width : 412
Image Height : 373
Encoding Process : Baseline DCT, Huffman coding
Bits Per Sample : 8
Color Components : 3
Y Cb Cr Sub Sampling : YCbCr4:4:4 (1 1)
Aperture : 2.0
Image Size : 412x373
Shutter Speed : 1/30
Thumbnail Image : (Binary data 5436 bytes, use -b option to extract)
Focal Length : 7.1 mm
Light Value : 7.6
PS C:\Users\Oceander\Pictures>
Just to clarify some of the dates in that data: (1) the "File Modification Date/Time" date is when I d/l'ed it from that blog; (2) the "Modify Date" date is the last time that someone actually modified the image data contained in the file, which would be Dec. 15, 2009, and is therefore consistent with the posting date shown on the blog (it was either resized for use online, or that might have been when the sepia effect and the silly light-halo effect were added); and (3) the "Date/Time Original" date is the date on which the original picture was taken, which would make that image about five and a half years old, as the original date was May 20th, 2004, at 12.51 (most likely in the afternoon, as the file records time in 24-hour format; however, that would have been the camera's onboard time, so there's no guarantee that it corresponded properly to the actual local time at the time the picture was taken).
The picture itself was taken with a Sony DSC-F828, an 8 megapixel camera that was released in August 2003, originally retailed for about US$900, and looked like this:
Given that it was most likely taken in the afternoon, it was probably taken inside, as the flash went off, with obligatory red-eye reduction (not sure why, probably just a lazy photographer, which we can confirm because the pic was taken using the program AE mode), with an exposure time of 1/30th of a second, at an ISO of 64.
EDIT: Playing around with the image in GIMP, using duplicates as filters in various ways, brought out an interesting aspect of the image that is not readily apparent from the original: somebody did a fair amount of editing around the neckline of the image, as well as on the inside edge of the person's right sunglass lens, as indicated by the pixelated appearance of those areas in this filtered version of the original image:
FWIW, I obtained that image by duping the original, inverting the values of that duplicate, and then layering the inverted duplicate over the original as a dodge filter.
It also becomes more evident that the shot was taken during the daytime, as you can now pretty clearly see that the sunglasses are reflecting a set of windows (commercial space, maybe), with daylight coming in, and a tree in the middle distance that is fully leafed in (which would be consistent with the May date of the original from the ExIF data).
