An update: I present to you.....

[Exhibitman]

Why are there no hard feelings? it is high time we had some!

[brianp-beme]

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

Why are there no hard feelings? it is high time we had some!

I think the new saying for this thread should be "Soft Feelings Only", because I believe hard ones are not allowed.

Brian

[bmarlowe1]

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

Why are there no hard feelings? it is high time we had some!

Funny a boxing fan saying that. Keep in mind that I used it only once to mock the OP. I wasn't intending to be nice.

[commishbob]

This thread gets better and better, or worse and worse. I can't really tell

[Fred]

So, is it Paul Waner?

[Tom Hufford]

I'm pretty sure its actually Lloyd Waner ! I met Lloyd in 1971, and it looks like his ear.

[Directly]

Curious how did you obtain the photo? (from a family member?)

1)How was the photo's date established, if so how?

2) is there definitive proof where the photo was taken?

3) Does the family know whom took the team photo--(a family member, etc?)

Good luck on your quest!

[oldjudge]

Originally Posted by bmarlowe1

Jay - I was hopping someone would ask that question. Two things:
1) It is often hard to find "the bottom of the chin." On the right it is lost in shadow, on the left the skin of his neck seems to hang down somewhat below his chin. This is common and it makes it hard to discern where the chin ends and the neck skin begins. So I try to avoid that as a landmark. However analysts do sometimes use it.
2) I could probably estimate accurately enough where the chin bottoms are. If I then resized as you requested the nostrils and mouth would no longer align. This would be considered as proof that these are 2 different persons regardless of ear size.


Just noticed - Rob (Tiger8mush) already had the right answer!

Thanks Mark, that makes sense

[griffon512]

I have no dogs in this fight.

There are material differences in the features of these individuals. So much so that it is beyond conclusive they are not the same person (including, but not limited to, ear shape and features, nose shape and features, cheekbone structure, head shape -- materially rounder in one, various relative length/width ratios between features that become apparent from horizontal line additions). I wish this could be settled by giving this to an outside party who focuses on facial recognition for a living. I would bet dollars to donuts that they would determine they are two different people. Please let me know if I can ever make that bet! Seriously though, why not agree to have an outside expert look at it agreed upon by both parties and the loser will pay for that expert's cost and whatever you want to bet outside of that?

What's most interesting to me is how strong confirmation bias can be and how belief is more important than reality in shaping views. If one wonders how society can become so polarized in a biased position in the face of objective data look no further than this thread. It is next to impossible to change an entrenched position in many cases so this is largely a waste of time at this point (I've already suggested a possible resolution) but continue on if you wish.

[Fred]

For what it's worth - I'm not an expert in facial recognition or anything related to photo identifying people. However, I guessed without much hesitation who I thought was Paul Waner from the photo. The only thing that seemed "off" (if you could call it "off") is the size of the person that looks like (not saying it isn't him) Paul Waner. The person in the picture looks to be "big" in comparison to the others, however that could be due to things like where the camera was when the picture was taken.

IMO it looks like Paul Waner, but that doesn't mean much.

It's been a fun thread to read and at least it isn't a train wreck.

[celoknob]

Mark,

I assume the ears are not used as a landmark features originally with the nose, eyes and mouth lines is because we are looking at a 3-d person and the ears could be tilted relative the the foreground features? And that explains why the ears don’t originally line up with the others in horizontal lines but you can then go back and compare ear size only after the original analysis but not position? Msybe this explains why ears don’t “line up” in post 127? Maybe this is obvious or I’m way off but would be interesting to hear. Thanks, Kell

[bmarlowe1]

>> Griffon 512: What's most interesting to me is how strong confirmation bias can be and how belief is more important than reality in shaping views.

I have published more than one article on how confirmation affects this. I had read a few sciientific articles on how confirmation bias affects ID of criminal suspects. There is little doubt that it affects collectors (and relatives) looking for the great find.

One can hire a pro and it will cost $2000 - $3000 for a written assessment. I doubt the OP would be willing to pay for something he won't understand.

Responding to celoknob: It only takes a couple of degrees of head tilt difference (towards or away from the viewer) to change the alignment of the ears with the landmarks on the face. So it is hard to use ear position relative to other features. In some cases it can be done, but it can be more complicated and we don't need it for this one.

>> And that explains why the ears don’t originally line up with the others in horizontal lines but you can then go back and compare ear size only after the original analysis but not position?

Yes

>> From Fred: IMO it looks like Paul Waner, but that doesn't mean much

Yes it doesn't mean much. Confirmation bias.

[perezfan]

While not specifically Paul Waner, this photo sequence illustrates how facial features can change dramatically over time.

Compare the photos of Joe Jackson as a young man, a middle aged man and a senior citizen. Thus, the significant ear growth and nose droop exhibited by Waner over the years is minor by comparison...