It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

fighter jets escort ufo video

page: 2
4
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 28 2014 @ 04:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: VoidHawk

"the previous video means nothing. what has that to do with the 'ufo' vid?"
Distraction.

People could post the most legit vid and others would shout "CGI" yet most of them are just parroting what they've heard others say.
As I said above, pointing to missing wing tips as proof of it being cgi is silly because the point of cgi is one can put in whatever one wishes, no need for missing wing tips!

Of the many vids out there, real or not, the one in the op is one of the better ones. I think the problem is the original vid has been copied and re-formated, leading to too much noise, giving the impression its been poorly made, the original was very good, and did not show planes with missing wing tips.


The second video was presented, because it is on the same channel as the first video and both appear to be just a part of the demo reel for this cg artist.

And yes, pointing out missing wings and video artefacts is indeed pointless, since it already looks unnatural by just looking at it with bare eye. Could talk about perspective and camera movement compared to object movement, but the fact that those jets move to slow to be real is strong enough argument.




posted on Jul, 28 2014 @ 04:30 PM
link   
So they guy who first published the "UFO" video in 2011 posts a video showing he is an accomplished CGI artist in 2012 and that means nothing to you ?
Geez guys deny ignorance



posted on Jul, 28 2014 @ 04:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: iknowyou
pointing out missing wings and video artefacts is indeed pointless, since it already looks unnatural by just looking at it with bare eye. Could talk about perspective and camera movement compared to object movement, but the fact that those jets move to slow to be real is strong enough argument.


Or you could talk about the fact that the video is signed (pun intended) by the hoaxer/artist that created it...

Have a look at the road sign at the end of the video.


After you have done that, have a glance at the oondyla.com website on the Wayback Machine:
preview.tinyurl.com...

(Many UFO hoax videos in fact indicate their creator, in the same way that some crop circles were signed by their creators Many people that comment on such hoaxes/artwork don't seem aware of the fact that a game is being played, let alone the rules of the game or the identity of the major players in the game...)

edit on 28-7-2014 by IsaacKoi because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 28 2014 @ 04:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: gortex
So they guy who first published the "UFO" video in 2011 posts a video showing he is an accomplished CGI artist in 2012 and that means nothing to you ?
Geez guys deny ignorance


Don't worry Gortex.

It means something to some of us.



posted on Jul, 28 2014 @ 04:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: IsaacKoi

Or you could talk about the fact that the video is signed (pun intended) by the hoaxer/artist that created it...

Have a look at the road sign at the end of the video.



I feel stupid for not noticing that. It saves a lot of trouble in trying to discredit a fake, artist signed it himself. To bad no one will learn from this experience and a lot of people won't even question next cgi put in here.



posted on Jul, 28 2014 @ 04:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: iknowyou

originally posted by: VoidHawk

"the previous video means nothing. what has that to do with the 'ufo' vid?"
Distraction.

People could post the most legit vid and others would shout "CGI" yet most of them are just parroting what they've heard others say.
As I said above, pointing to missing wing tips as proof of it being cgi is silly because the point of cgi is one can put in whatever one wishes, no need for missing wing tips!

Of the many vids out there, real or not, the one in the op is one of the better ones. I think the problem is the original vid has been copied and re-formated, leading to too much noise, giving the impression its been poorly made, the original was very good, and did not show planes with missing wing tips.


The second video was presented, because it is on the same channel as the first video and both appear to be just a part of the demo reel for this cg artist.

And yes, pointing out missing wings and video artefacts is indeed pointless, since it already looks unnatural by just looking at it with bare eye. Could talk about perspective and camera movement compared to object movement, but the fact that those jets move to slow to be real is strong enough argument.


I did say I wasn't claiming the vid was real or hoax, my objection is people who shout "CGI" just because they've heard others shouting it. We see it over and over again and when you pull them up on it its always left for someone else to defend them, thats because THEY were just parroting what they've heard.

By all means shout cgi, but they should at least know why they are shouting it. Just take a look at how many shout "photoshoped" when they see a video!



posted on Jul, 28 2014 @ 05:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: VoidHawk

I did say I wasn't claiming the vid was real or hoax, my objection is people who shout "CGI" just because they've heard others shouting it. We see it over and over again and when you pull them up on it its always left for someone else to defend them, thats because THEY were just parroting what they've heard.

By all means shout cgi, but they should at least know why they are shouting it. Just take a look at how many shout "photoshoped" when they see a video!



It is not easy to explain why something feels cgi. It is the same as watching a movie with cgi animals. If someone asked you why you think they were fake, you would just say... well, because they look fake... But it is not enough here, people want better explanation, so... why does it look fake? It's movements are wierd? Why wierd? Well... giraffes don't move like that. How do giraffes move? Well, it would be hard to explain to someone oblivious, go to a zoo and see how giraffes move.

Go outside and see how different flying objects move, that would be best answer.

Maybe, just maybe everyone is saying it is fake because it is that obvious... "well, it looks fake...



posted on Jul, 28 2014 @ 05:48 PM
link   
a reply to: iknowyou
I get what your saying but there's a world of difference between looking at animals/humans and machinery!
We are designed to notice movement within animals, its how we survived in the wild when we were hunter gatherers, but machinery is different.

How would we know that a saucer is fake by its movement, after all, we've never seen one!
We have no reference for flying saucers.



posted on Sep, 27 2014 @ 01:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: iknowyou

originally posted by: IsaacKoi

Or you could talk about the fact that the video is signed (pun intended) by the hoaxer/artist that created it...

Have a look at the road sign at the end of the video.



I feel stupid for not noticing that. It saves a lot of trouble in trying to discredit a fake, artist signed it himself. To bad no one will learn from this experience and a lot of people won't even question next cgi put in here.


I've expanded on my point above (and included relevant screen shots etc) in a webpage I've created at the link below. I thought it worth creating that webpage because this video has cropped up a LOT on Facebook in the last month or two...

www.isaackoi.com...

edit on 27-9-2014 by IsaacKoi because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 1   >>

log in

join