There's quite a big difference between visual artifacts, and when someone's hand looks like it belongs to a piglet or when one eye turns into a slit for a brief moment. If this was really a visual error, then it would be alot more common, wouldn't it? How about if only the eyes are changing, and the rest of the image is complete, how do you account for that?
Also, I've mentioned it before and I'll mention it again, these mutations occur to these "people" themselves, and it's very easy to verify. Especially if you inspect a sample from a popular TV series or movie, surely such "artifacts" wouldn't show up on a retail Bluray (like Keanu's claw in The Matrix,) would they? You can keep living in denial all you want, it won't change the fact that this is real and is going on under everyone's noses without being seen by the masses. It's alot like with the UFO scene, the majority will try to discredit every bit of evidence shown no matter how real it may be, even if it was seen and captured on film by hundreds of different people who've never met.
Since when do visual errors occur only in those very specific areas, and if they're really common visual errors, then it wouldn't be so hard to reproduce. Anyway, if you can't accept this kind of content - feel free to leave the thread, I'm posting all this for the people who do find this interesting - it's that simple.
update
Hillary Clinton Reptilian Eye - On Her Official Photo! - This is a photo she approved for a book "Heaven to Hell" by David La Chapellle (not the comedian obviously.)
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]