It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


New Eulerian Video Magnification technology applied to Alien Interview Video. What do you

page: 5
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in


posted on Mar, 23 2014 @ 08:48 PM
reply to post by Speotyto

Consider this. IF it is a real video, would the ET's arms not be bound? We suspect it is humans interviewing this thing...what else would we do to something we don't fully understand/ are possibly scared of?

posted on Mar, 23 2014 @ 08:51 PM
Am I missing something here? First off, there's no consistent pattern to this assumed pulse. It apparently beats randomly and irregular and wouldn't be very efficient if real. Second, every time the head moves, you are picking up reflected light off the high points on the head. That's proven by the fact when the head moves, the highest points, like the area around the eyes, are lit up. Blood flow isn't based on the highest spots. Third, if you watch the MIT video, you'll see a common thread throughout... Every example they give is stationary with very little movement. You negate this pulse pattern when you have other outside influences like movement in a poorly (and purposely) lit video.

I give you a star for approaching this from a different perspective. But, I don't believe it shows anymore evidence that this is actually an alien being. I have a feeling if you run this through a video software program and raise the specular value, you'll get the same results.

posted on Mar, 23 2014 @ 10:51 PM
I just wanted to remind everyone we are talking about " E.T , Angels , Demons , Gods " Or whatever you want to call them for all we know they could not even have a Circulatory system . Now with that in mind what about these so called Psychic abilities these beings are said to have let's say what if telepathy and those ability's work like Sonar or so fourth used by many Animal's and send out a burst of energy now take a look at the second video who's to say that Flashing is not those Signal's being sent out or a Field of pulsating Energy or some sort .

posted on Mar, 24 2014 @ 07:27 AM
reply to post by smurfy

the point is ....the more videos are posted using this technique the better it masks the videos which actually proof something.

The ones that are afraid that this technique could reveal something will not hide things...they will flood the internet with so much videos using this technique that the attention to the good ones is diverted by that..

The same thing that we see in Ufology....There are so many fakes that people don´t pay enough attention to the real stuff.

But i know what you mean: this is still a learning process. We are at the beginning. And yes i was to fast as i only read the first thread without reading everything. I did now.. So yes.

posted on Mar, 24 2014 @ 07:33 AM
Excuse my ignorance, but what am I supposed to see? I see the original and a pixelated version on the right, right?

posted on Mar, 24 2014 @ 09:46 AM

reply to post by Speotyto

Consider this. IF it is a real video, would the ET's arms not be bound? We suspect it is humans interviewing this thing...what else would we do to something we don't fully understand/ are possibly scared of?

Yeah I have considered this scenario too, and I think it is very possible. But, when the physicians enter the room with their torches, I can't even see their arms. Of course they could be bound behind its back, and if that's the case, what a shame on us as a race...


posted on Mar, 24 2014 @ 09:48 AM
reply to post by smurfy

That was a pretty sweet on the spot limerick
(almost a limerick? i don't care close enough for me
I want the power to do that!

posted on Mar, 24 2014 @ 01:01 PM

reply to post by Cerdofuego

Many congratulations for your work. I have always wondered about this video's authenticity, one thing I always missed was not being able to see the EBE's arms. I don't know what to make yet of your edition, this will probably give me a lot more to think.

Thank you!

I have seen aliens up close and the type in the video is not what I saw.
That does not mean I believe it is faked, only that there may be more then one kind of alien.
Lets hope that the truth will come out soon and the people will be given cheap clean energy.

posted on Mar, 24 2014 @ 01:21 PM
Could you also post a low quality video that you filmed as a base to compare this one to, because I'm pretty sure that the software is supposed to be used on a high quality source (seeing how it works and the trouble with low quality footage)

posted on Mar, 24 2014 @ 03:19 PM
Wow amazing job.. really stunning . I never had any doubt that the alien interview was fake.. I mean you can feel the truth in this video and also unawarely I think that we can sense if something is alive or not..

This opens many doors for us to put more of this kind of footage under surveillance...S&F

posted on Mar, 24 2014 @ 07:20 PM
reply to post by Cerdofuego

Even if the conditions in the video aren't perfect for this application, I think it's awesome that you tried it. S&F for that. Maybe we can find other videos, better quality footage, and apply these techniques. Who knows what we can find? Bravo!

posted on Mar, 24 2014 @ 07:27 PM
reply to post by Cerdofuego

Great work.. I think you just proved this video a fake for once and for all.
No real doubt anyway but your idea proves it to me.

posted on Mar, 24 2014 @ 07:44 PM

Out of curiosity, I'm wondering about something here:

What do you do if the alien has no moving facial features....because instead of skin, they have an exoskeleton?

What if the alien does not have a cardiovascular system with circulating fluid? (no pulse).

Just curious.

If the accepted notion/ assumption is that the video is to be viewed as real until proven fake then the narrator clearly says that it has a respiratory system if it has a respiratory system then it has to have some sort of cardiovascular and means for circulation otherwise having a set of lungs don't mean diddly. I am not saying that they have to be the same as humans but non-the-less it is stated in the vid and could be reasonable to believe that similar is a good approach. I don't personally think this is real, but thats also because I am not a proponent into "space aliens" visiting earth although do believe ET exists out there somewhere.

posted on Mar, 24 2014 @ 09:40 PM
Would be nice to see it applied to the Skinny Bob video.

posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 12:20 AM
reply to post by Cerdofuego

S&F fou you, OP. Thank you for putting in the time, effort, and energy to see what this software would do.

And, IMHO, NO ONE is very familiar with any kind software after using it for a few days. Don't automatically doubt the results you got because of someone else's opinion. Especially someone on ATS!

You know what they say about opinions...

posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 12:26 AM


A pulse can only be detected on the skin in the right conditions. Lighting, resolution, color depth, contrast etc are all extremely important.

Please post your settings, as I am very familiar with this software and you appear to have ran this video through motion magnification, not color magnification. Color magnification is what would show a pulse. All we are seeing in this video is the trails and echoes of motion.

Edit: Yeah, your settings are definitely off. Even if you had done it right, I'd be skeptical of any results because of the quality of the video. This isn't some one size fits all miracle machine, and you can't expect it to give you good results with any video. The lighting is terrible, the subject is far away, and possibly behind glass. This software is awesome, and I've been using it for a few days... but it won't do miracles. It requires controlled condition if you expect decent results. You can't just feed any video through it.
edit on 22-3-2014 by LeviWardrobe because: (no reason given)

Edit2: If you wish to do it anyways, might as well do it right.

Try these settings

30 color 140/60 160/60 150 ideal 1 6
edit on 22-3-2014 by LeviWardrobe because: (no reason given)

I have to laugh my ass off at this... Look at the two areas quoted in blue...

You know the software enough to tell this guy he's doing it wrong because of all of your two days of


THANK YOU! My point, exactly! For the record, I lol'd as well.

posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 03:21 AM

reply to post by Cerdofuego

S&F fou you, OP. Thank you for putting in the time, effort, and energy to see what this software would do.

And, IMHO, NO ONE is very familiar with any kind software after using it for a few days. Don't automatically doubt the results you got because of someone else's opinion. Especially someone on ATS!

You know what they say about opinions...

Not strictly true because at least some people read the requirements to get good DATA, on here we have already seen 2 threads regarding this software and members jumping to conclusions of what it can show and how to use it. I don't know if you have looked at the website but it states the following.

Tips for recording and processing videos:

At capture time:
- Minimize extraneous motion. Put the camera on a tripod. If appropriate, provide support for your subject (e.g. hand on a table, stable chair).
- Minimize image noise. Use a camera with a good sensor, make sure there is enough light.
- Record in the highest spatial resolution possible and have the subject occupy most of the frame. The more pixels covering the object of interest - the better the signal you would be able to extract.
- If possible, record/store your video uncompressed. Codecs that compress frames independently (e.g. Motion JPEG) are usually preferable over codecs exploiting inter-frame redundancy (e.g. H.264) that, under some settings, can introduce compression-related temporal signals to the video.

So lets see MOST members wont have a camera with a LARGE good quality image sensor, all cheap consumer video camera/smart phones even high quality DSLR's will save video in a compressed format.

So people on here trying to use youtube videos or there own smartphone/camera videos will not have good enough quality.

Also in one of the website videos of the baby they use a photographers gray & colour cards to get the white balance & colour data correct to get a good result so NONE of that is in the OP video.

So as I have said before this works on the GIGO principle like all computer software Garbage In Garbage Out.

Oh and just to give you an indication look at this graphic

Camera Sensors

Most peoples cameras on here will be the very small one on the left once you get to the 4/3" and above that's the quality region low noise levels high performance lots of members will have DSLR'S (me) with APS-C sensors or above but again will record video using a compressed output.
edit on 25-3-2014 by wmd_2008 because: (no reason given)

edit on 25-3-2014 by wmd_2008 because: (no reason given)

posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 06:48 AM
Yeah. And besides the tips posted on MIT, you also need to understand how to use the different settings within the software. In order to detect a pulse through an area of skin you must use "color magnification". Simple as that. Motion magnification would only, at best, with an immensely high quality [like 4k or 8k quality] illuminate the motion of a vessel near the surface of the skin. And that is only under good lighting, with the subject, light source and camera remaining perfectly still.

What you guys have to do, at the very least, is consider the idea that I am right. Actually try and determine if I'm wrong. You guys have provided no evidence whatsoever that my statements are wrong. I, on the other hand, have provided plenty of evidence that I am right.

It seems like that because you believe in aliens, you must also believe that this video is real. So, because this video must be real, I must be wrong. That is remarkably ignorant. I believe in aliens, 100%. But I don't accept all alien videos just because I believe that aliens exist. I am not saying that this video is fake. I am saying that the OP's analysis is wrong. The OP has admitted it, and several other users have agreed. And I no more expect you to believe blindly me than I expect you believe OP blindly. I want you guys to make informed judgements. So far, from what I can tell, you are all just saying "He has only used it for a couple days, he has no idea what he is talking about." That is shoddy logic. If you won't take the time to prove that I am right or wrong, then you are among the worst people on this site. You are the people that make sites like this an absolute pain. This site is supposed to deny ignorance. But what I see in this thread is an abundance of ignorance.

Basically, learn a bit about the software and come back to me. Tell me why I am wrong. Tell me what this analysis shows, and how it proves anything at all. Show me that these "pulses" are not directly a result of the high contrast areas of movement on the subject's head. Show me that motion magnification can detect pulse in a subject from at a distance in a dark room in a lossy decade old youtube video.

Do a control. Sit from your camera, 10 or more feet away, record yourself sitting still. Analyse the video, and compare any "pulsing" to your resting heartrate. Come back and show the results.

No more ignorance people. I'm not trying to be a negative nancy. I'm not attacking anyone. I expect that anyone who disagrees with my statements in this thread will actually do the leg work to form and argument as to whether I am right or wrong. "He used only used it for 2 days" is not an argument. It means nothing. 2 days is plenty of time to learn the difference between motion magnification and color magnification.

Edit: For those of you who aren't following the other thread [here] I made a post the other day helping users set up and use the software. I want to stress again that I want to help people. I want people to know how to use this software right so that we can get actual results from this. I want someone to analyse alien/ufo/ghost/cryptid videos, because I want to know if they are real. But they need to do it right. If the method is bad, the results are bad. And that does not look good for a field like UFO/Extraterrestrial research, a field already rife with hoaxes and misidentification.

Hey guys. I see quite a few of you are having problems using this software, so here is a quick guide. Like I said earlier, this isn't a plug-n-play experience. You need to put effort both into the video that you use [ensure that the subject, camera, and light sources are all still] as well as the settings you use. Anyways, this might help some of you.


1. Extract the ZIP to a folder. To keep things tidy, extract it to a new folder.
2. You should now have a folder with the following contents:
-changelog [unimportant]
-evm [this is the program, but you will never have to use this, so just leave it be]
-LICENSE [unimportant]
-README [explains how to use the software]
-reproduce_results [batch file]
3. create a folder called "data" and a folder called "results" in the same folder you extracted the ZIP to

The easiest way to use this software is by executing "batch files". A batch file is basically a text file that contains commands. When you extract the ZIP, it comes with a batch file called "reproduce_results". If you right-click the file, and select "edit" it will open the batch file in notepad, or whatever your default text editor is.

The batch file that extracts from the ZIP contains the commands needed to reproduce the results that MIT shows on its site. The baby, face, shadow, wrist etc. It contains a lot of stuff that isn't really important to an amateur users. I'll try and break down the contents the best that I can though, without dragging this on. I won't cover every single line/command.


-":: Windows Batch Script for generating example results" - This is simply a "comment". Anything in the batch file that follows two colons "::" does not actually execute anything. It is just a note. If you want, you can just get rid of these to make the file a bit easier on the eyes.

Everything between "set f=evm" and "mkdir %RDIR%" is necessary. It is just for finding, calling, defining directories and other boring stuff. Don't change any of this unless you know what you're doing.

This is the part that we will actually play with.
-"set inFile=%SDIR%/" - This is just a bunch of coding jargon that essentially finds/defines the file that the program will analyse. In your batch file, it will probably say "baby.mp4" or something like that. This line has to have the name and correct filetype in order for the software to actually find and choose the video that it will analyse. With all my batch files, I have the filetypes set to "" and "file.mp4". When I want to analyse a video, I drop it into the "data" folder that I made, rename it "file" and then double click the batch file. Simple.

-"%f% %inFile% %RDIR%" - This here is again just a bunch of nifty coding. %f% is just the EVM program, and %inFile% is just the file name and type, %RDIR% is just the directory to save the file to etc. All this can be left alone, as it is all defined in earlier bits of the script.

And finally, the fun bits. "30 color 140/60 160/60 150 ideal 1 6". These are the actually parameters for the analysis. The "README" actually lays out and defines all these terms plainly for us.

EVM_BIN vidFile outDir samplingRate magType lo cutoff hi cutoff alpha filterType [mag par]

vidFile: the input video file
outDir: directory under which the output video will be stored (the actual
name of the output video file is set automatically according to the
choice of filter, amplification, etc.)
samplingRate: the sampling frequency of video [Hz] (notice this may be different
from the frame rate of the actual video file)
magType: type of magnification (without quotes):
"color": for amplifying color
"motion": for amplifying motion
lo: low frequency cutoff [Hz]
hi: high frequency cutoff [Hz]
alpha: amplification factor
filterType: the type of temporal filter (without quotes)
"ideal" [default]
edit on 25-3-2014 by LeviWardrobe because: (no reason given)

posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 06:59 AM

So there you go. The readme will explain some stuff in better detail, like the magnification parameters. Also note that the lo and hi cutoffs are written as fractions in the default batch, but the software accepts plain decimals too. Just play around with it. I'll post an example batch file below, so you guys have an easy place to start from. Everything will be good to go, and you can just tweak the settings. Just make a copy of the "reproduce_results" batch, erase all the text inside, and copy what I've pasted below. Everything from "@echo" and down. Then save the batch, put a video in the data folder, call the video "file", and then run the batch file. That's it! If it doesn't work, check the filetype. The batch below is set to use .mp4 files, so if you are using .mov or some other file, just change that one part in the batch file. Note that the space after "C:" is added by me, because it is interpretted as a emoticon and then lost in copy/paste. So just make sure to remove spaces in "C: P".

@echo off
set f=evm

set SDIR=./data
set MCR=C: Program FilesMATLABMATLAB Compiler Runtimev80runtimewin64


set verNum=v80
set RDIR=Results

mkdir %RDIR%

set inFile=%SDIR%/file.mp4

%f% %inFile% %RDIR% 30 color 2 2.4 50 ideal 1 4

:: printing helper Function, should NOT come before all others
echo Processing %inFile%

:: MCR verNum:v80
:: MCR defaultPath: C: Program FilesMATLABMATLAB Compiler Runtimev80


Hope this helps folks. I'm excited to what what this community does with this software!

edit on 24-3-2014 by LeviWardrobe because: (no reason given)

edit on 24-3-2014 by LeviWardrobe because: (no reason given)

edit on 24-3-2014 by LeviWardrobe because: (no reason given)

posted on Mar, 27 2014 @ 01:37 AM
Skeptical, just I don't agree with this video. Just my opinion.

new topics

top topics

<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in