Quote:
Originally Posted by SteveS
Jonathan, thank you very much for those important contributions and well wishes. De Bost gave me a lot of problems, as at first I thought he was wearing glasses. But after sharpening it up and looking very closely, he's not wearing glasses. His eyes are mostly shut. As with some of the other gentlemen, the blurring of the stereoview and outdoor lighting/shadows make it appear that they have wrinkles where there aren't any. Niebuhr was also very difficult, as he does look younger than the rest. As I said above, I thought at one point that it could be Harry Wright. I can still be convinced of that, but his features match up very well with Niebuhr. In fact, I believe that each of them line up very well when facial features are compared. Here's a side-by-side with an older Doc Adams, which I think is even more convincing.
Corey, I'm glad you were able to see this again after I've researched it further and made it easier to see and get more accurate comparisons. Math is not my forte, but at least the odds are above 50%.
|
Steve,
For the odds to be greater than 50% by probability theory analysis, the facial recognition analysis you cite must be accurate. I am not familiar with the method you used, and in any event have no experience with that technique. But inasmuch as facial features change over time, unless you used as your comps images of each subject taken at substantially the same point in their lives, which I don't know how one could confidently do that here, I would be very skeptical of the reliability of facial recognition analysis in this instance.