unforum

Flidget Jerome · Unfettered Joined: 26 Aug 2004 Posts: 308

Is that everything?

By the way, Picture 4, the only one we can't piece back together, is just the same torn up photo as picture 5, so we're not missing anything.

I'm wondering now if that was PM laziness or if John took a picture of it twice for a reason and if he's lying to us about how much time he had there, since he found time to spread the pieces out.

Varin

**Posted:** Thu Oct 14, 2004 4:28 pm

_________________
"I still miss him to this day and probably always will." - Todd Keeler, Chasing the Wish

"meta meta meta, I made you out of play..." ~ j5

TJ229ER

Can someone confirm the no picture 8? I can work on it if needed.

**Posted:** Thu Oct 14, 2004 5:10 pm

TJ229ER

EDIT:This picture is incredibly hard I have attached a png file of what i have done so far so i am passing the torch to somone else to finish up please.

**Posted:** Thu Oct 14, 2004 6:00 pm

eMouse · Decorated Joined: 25 Jul 2004 Posts: 179

Done with #8. Someone give me a hand!

**Posted:** Thu Oct 14, 2004 10:38 pm

TJ229ER

Thanks for taking that on. I was having way to much trobule on that one.

**Posted:** Thu Oct 14, 2004 11:07 pm

eMouse · Decorated Joined: 25 Jul 2004 Posts: 179

The trick is to realize there are certain realities about how the pictures are torn up.

There must be an even number of 'border' pieces.

When you tear something up, you typically tear it into strips, then put the strips together and tear those into bits. As a result, you end up with 'linear' tear lines in one direction (the primary tears), and non-linear but similar tear lines in the other direction (the secondary tears). So if there are a set of pieces that look like a trapezoid, they probably all go together since they were produced by the same secondary tears.

You can also use the white edges as guides. Since photos usually don't tear cleanly, you end up with the backing and the photo tearing slightly differently - producing a white edge on some pieces. These white edges have to tuck under a non-white edge, and once again, you usually start at one end, and work your way to the other, so you can usually assume that all of the pieces have the white edge in the same direction.

I'm really wondering how old those photos are supposed to be. They look pretty new, although I guess it's possible that they're supposed to be the same age as the other material. Any one else notice the 'I'm off to Vallisca' message on the postcard? That would date that post card to 1912.

**Posted:** Fri Oct 15, 2004 1:21 am

TJ229ER

So it seems like Old Todd ripped up these pictures, but why did he lay them out like they were? and how is this leading us to somthing else?

**Posted:** Fri Oct 15, 2004 4:05 pm

Flidget Jerome · Unfettered Joined: 26 Aug 2004 Posts: 308

I think only the letter and the postcards are important. Everything else is just . . . atmosphere.

**Posted:** Fri Oct 15, 2004 4:18 pm

RungeKutta

It seems that John Palmer (iaminvisible) forgot to upload another photo that was on his memory card.

Well, I'm not working on this anymore because I really have to get to bed. I've uploaded a jpeg and photoshop data-file (every piece in a seperate layer) for someone to continue. I'm busy all day tomorrow so I guess when I get home, LATE, I'll continue if no one has completed it.

So far, there's a face and some writing. For some reason, the picture strikes me as Micheal Ciphers, but with the text is makes no sense... The text seems to say "CMH Fundraise" and "Archive Ca".

http://www.iaminvisible.com/images/cambridgepicture014tn.jpg is a link to the newest photo.

**Posted:** Fri Oct 22, 2004 6:18 am

Kender

Thankx Runge,

eMouse is better at this than I am. Removing my pic.

Flidget Jerome · Unfettered Joined: 26 Aug 2004 Posts: 308

**Posted:** Fri Oct 22, 2004 12:31 pm

eMouse · Decorated Joined: 25 Jul 2004 Posts: 179

Here's what I've put together so far. I'm going to stop for a little while, so if someone wants to pick up from here, I'm including the PSD file.

I think the PMs read my previous 'hint guide' to doing the puzzles. They're are a few tricks they've employed to make this one tougher than the others.

**Posted:** Fri Oct 22, 2004 1:37 pm

RungeKutta

What the gosh darn heck??

The previous post that says eMouse posted, that was me... The one that has both the psd and the jpeg of picture #14.

So what, do I no longer matter? *sniff*

**Posted:** Fri Oct 22, 2004 3:55 pm

eMouse · Decorated Joined: 25 Jul 2004 Posts: 179

I wouldn't have gotten so far so quickly without your work on the PSD! I did one of the previous puzzles that way and it was a real pita.

I'm also convinced that the puzzle is either missing some bits, or I've made some mistakes in the border construction. Obviously it can't be mistakes on my part, so there must be bits missing. I leave it to others though to verify. Wink

On a little more serious note, and in case there are any future puzzles - when photoshopping out the background, try to leave the white fringe on the pieces. It really helps when figuring out where pieces go. The white edges go under non-wihte edges, which is sometimes the best clue you can get.

**Posted:** Fri Oct 22, 2004 4:25 pm