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.

 

Is this a real living pterosaur or cgi?

page: 10
18
<< 7  8  9   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 12 2015 @ 09:06 PM
link   
Interesting video,im not sure if it's genuine or not but im quite sure of the existence of such creatures. As for the conventional dates put forward for when these dinosaurs were living,they were highly erroneous. The skewed dates were caused by the creatures having been exposed to high levels of radioactivity prior to or during death,which is also why so many fossil examples displayed in museums are thickly coated in lead paint.




posted on Sep, 13 2015 @ 10:41 AM
link   
Read through a couple pages: First thing that is a big problem that this bird actually looks like pterosaur.

Why is that a problem? Because that's how we envision this bird not how it actually looked millions of years ago. We don't know and that this one matches 1:1 the appearance how you can find them in children's dinosaur books is already a red flag to me.

Second, there is no way that this bird could flap his head down, turn it's wings and continue without crashing. Aerodynamics apply also to million year old creatures. The full drag should have caused a massive reduction in speed but the bird just continued flying without issues.. considering the flight envelope before the head turn, this looks a very massive bird. The bird should have flapped like crazy after the head turn to keep itself afloat without going into a spin.

Looks cool but not realistic.

Edit: Just watched it again twice and during the head flip there is no altitude lost - actually it stays almost in the same altitude with some altitude gain - that's almost impossible except it's a magic creature.
edit on 13-9-2015 by flyandi because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 13 2015 @ 11:58 AM
link   
Periodic Cicada live underground for 13 to 17 years and surface only for a brief period of time to mate. Maybe this is something similar we never knew before. If the duration of the underground stage is in any way scaled to the size of the creature, it is conceivable that pterosaur could only surface every few hundred, or even thousand years.

Don't get your interweb panties in a bunch. Its just a theory...
edit on 13-9-2015 by Vroomfondel because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 13 2015 @ 11:42 PM
link   
The wing tips certainly seem to move differently than any other bird sort of creature I've seen.



posted on Sep, 14 2015 @ 01:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: InnerPeace2012

originally posted by: boymonkey74
a reply to: InnerPeace2012

By looking at it.
I'm not a gullible fool who falls for BS.



Nobody is saying you are, you can't just be all certain if CGI without any analysis. Move on...

Peace



---

Interestingly I am beginning to DOUBT this is CGI but rather
a MECHANICAL flying device. Basically a Drone!

In animation you have to be aware of your final frame rate
be it 24 fps, 29.97 fps, 60 fps and MOST animators TEND
to use the in-betweening function of their software
which on the high-end would be Autodesk Maya,
Autodesk SoftImage, or Lightwave 3D.

Lower end software would be Blender
or 3DS Max.

For compositing, we like to use Discreet FLAME
or Black Magic Fusion...Those two are OSCAR AWARD
winning software...Darn hard to learn but what you
can do with them is amazing!

---

Now the in-betweening tends to use LINEAR interpolation
for each frame which can be back-calculated out to see
if the frame movement is TOO LINEAR on the X, Y and Z
axis. If it is then it is almost CERTAINLY an animation.

However, if the animator is GOOD! then they have
introduced "wobble" with micro-variable nearly random
jitter and juddery movements on each 3D-XYZ axis to
make the CGI SEEM real !!!

One other method to check for CGI is to check the object edges for
INVERSE SQUARED or LINEAR DROP-OFF in the luminance (i.e. Brightness)
of the object edges which indicates MULTI-LAYER IMAGE COMPOSITING.

If the edges are too evenly blurred or LINEAR in their edging that does not
match the "grain" or "noise" of the original camera footage then that's a giveaway too!

As a high end animator, you put random pixelation and video noise in your edges
to match the camera noise pixelization and/or the video-compression originated
macroblocking of your original footage that will lessen forensic-level closeup
examination from detecting far-too-even edging.

It is actually QUITE DIFFICULT to make a true opinion as to this video's
origination as CGI or Reality. To me the flapping of the wings and that head flip
is so bad and unnatural to me...THAT...I'm an more inclined to believe that
it's a MECHANICAL CONTRAPTION rather than an animation. Ironically, it's
flight envolope looks so bad that it looks too "Really Artificial" to be 3D animation!

I could be wrong in that an animator just out of FIlm School could have
done this on Blender or 3DS and made it look this way on purpose.
I however, am more on the side of expensive RC drone made to look
like a Pterosaur!

edit on 2015/9/14 by StargateSG7 because: sp



posted on Sep, 14 2015 @ 01:58 PM
link   
a reply to: StargateSG7

And for your interest here are some links to VIDEOS and articles
indicating current echnology on "Ornithopters" that have flapping
wings. The science behind imitating the flight of real birds
is getting BETTER and BETTER so it is VERY POSSIBLE NOW
to have a real-looking flying Pteradactyl...==>


Here are some links to rather realistic Glider-based and Active Control RC Pterosaur:
uniquedinosaurs.en.hisupplier.com...

---
Paul MacCready RC pterosaur from 1984 !!!
www.youtube.com...
---

Robirds Falcon Drone robotic birds of prey:
www.youtube.com...

---

Background of EXPENSIVE German Robotics Maker FESTO: Robotic Bird Takes Flight
www.youtube.com...

Live Demo: goto 2:12 to see it fly:
www.youtube.com...

---
Cheap but GOOD robo-bird:
Avitron v2.0 Bionic Remote Controlled Bird
www.youtube.com...

-----------------

ARTICLES ON THE SCIENCE BEHIND ROBOTIC BIRDS (and Flying Dinosaurs!):

FLIGHT DYNAMICS OF HIGHLY FLEXIBLE
FLYING WINGS

Mayuresh J Patil
Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State Uni…

and

Dewey H. Hodges
Georgia Institute of Technology

---


Incremental Evolution of Target-Following
Neuro-controllers for Flapping-Wing Animats

by

Jean-Baptiste Mouret
Pierre and Marie Curie University - Paris 6
and
Stéphane Doncieux
Pierre and Marie Curie University - Paris 6

---

Dragonfly or Insect Spy?
DARPA Scientists at Work on Robobugs.

DARPA plans autonomous 'flying insect' drones with skills to match birds of prey:
www.ibtimes.co.uk...



posted on Sep, 14 2015 @ 08:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: boymonkey74
a reply to: InnerPeace2012

Cgi without a doubt.
it just looks wrong.
or some type of flying drone.


So it's absolutely, "without a doubt" CGI... but it also might be a drone? So there is both "doubt" and "no doubt"?

How about this: "It can't be; therefore, it isn't."



posted on Sep, 14 2015 @ 09:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: cooperton

originally posted by: InnerPeace2012
a reply to: cooperton

Guys lets get some thinking caps on here and explain how you guys are so certain it is CGI? It seems so natural to me
it could be a mechanical toy?

Peace



They are not certain it is CGI. It just goes against their belief system. Dinosaurs are not millions of years old, and they cannot accept that. There are plenty other videos and pictures of pterosaur sightings that I posted above.

A useful google search to follow this trail of truth: Dragons were Dinosaurs


Yea, obviously dinosaurs have co-existed with humans from the beginning, the whole 6,000 years the earth has existed...how ignorant can you be to not accept that? Obviously just caught up in some cooky belief system that doesn't let them see reality.



posted on Sep, 15 2015 @ 05:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: TheJourney


Yea, obviously dinosaurs have co-existed with humans from the beginning, the whole 6,000 years the earth has existed...how ignorant can you be to not accept that? Obviously just caught up in some cooky belief system that doesn't let them see reality.


It's ironic because your picture is a yin-yang...

Tell anyone who actually knows the deep truths of the yin-yang that their ancestors are fish and they'll laugh in your face.
edit on 15-9-2015 by cooperton because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 15 2015 @ 08:56 PM
link   
Murgatriod, your avatar keeps making my cat look under my monitor every time I scroll past it......

That being said I have no opinion as to the veracity of this video being CGI or a mechanical fake but some of you are convinced it is CGI some say good, some say bad, Great, REPLICATE it. the true test will be if someone on ATS can do this same thing with what ever software they have to do it, that would settle the question best. The scientific methodology is if results cannot be replicated it's not science.



posted on Sep, 15 2015 @ 09:10 PM
link   
There is a rather simple way do assure if this is a real creature.

Are there any mid sized domestic animals in the area missing?

Have there been animals such as dogs or cats that have disappeared?

What about bones? And faeces? Egg shells? Is there a nest?

How about footprints near any lakes?

Any skeletons been found of similar/same ?

yea or nay

This is not a UFO right? It is supposedly a biological entity...or is it?






posted on Sep, 16 2015 @ 05:01 AM
link   

originally posted by: StargateSG7

originally posted by: InnerPeace2012

originally posted by: boymonkey74
a reply to: InnerPeace2012

By looking at it.
I'm not a gullible fool who falls for BS.



Nobody is saying you are, you can't just be all certain if CGI without any analysis. Move on...

Peace



---

Interestingly I am beginning to DOUBT this is CGI but rather
a MECHANICAL flying device. Basically a Drone!

In animation you have to be aware of your final frame rate
be it 24 fps, 29.97 fps, 60 fps and MOST animators TEND
to use the in-betweening function of their software
which on the high-end would be Autodesk Maya,
Autodesk SoftImage, or Lightwave 3D.

Lower end software would be Blender
or 3DS Max.

For compositing, we like to use Discreet FLAME
or Black Magic Fusion...Those two are OSCAR AWARD
winning software...Darn hard to learn but what you
can do with them is amazing!

---

Now the in-betweening tends to use LINEAR interpolation
for each frame which can be back-calculated out to see
if the frame movement is TOO LINEAR on the X, Y and Z
axis. If it is then it is almost CERTAINLY an animation.

However, if the animator is GOOD! then they have
introduced "wobble" with micro-variable nearly random
jitter and juddery movements on each 3D-XYZ axis to
make the CGI SEEM real !!!

One other method to check for CGI is to check the object edges for
INVERSE SQUARED or LINEAR DROP-OFF in the luminance (i.e. Brightness)
of the object edges which indicates MULTI-LAYER IMAGE COMPOSITING.

If the edges are too evenly blurred or LINEAR in their edging that does not
match the "grain" or "noise" of the original camera footage then that's a giveaway too!

As a high end animator, you put random pixelation and video noise in your edges
to match the camera noise pixelization and/or the video-compression originated
macroblocking of your original footage that will lessen forensic-level closeup
examination from detecting far-too-even edging.

It is actually QUITE DIFFICULT to make a true opinion as to this video's
origination as CGI or Reality. To me the flapping of the wings and that head flip
is so bad and unnatural to me...THAT...I'm an more inclined to believe that
it's a MECHANICAL CONTRAPTION rather than an animation. Ironically, it's
flight envolope looks so bad that it looks too "Really Artificial" to be 3D animation!

I could be wrong in that an animator just out of FIlm School could have
done this on Blender or 3DS and made it look this way on purpose.
I however, am more on the side of expensive RC drone made to look
like a Pterosaur!



Yikes...so much wrong with what you said....but im too busy now to address them.



posted on Sep, 18 2015 @ 04:42 PM
link   
I like this one. It is a lot more convincing than other "footage" I have seen.
I see NO problem with the footage--I gave it a good look over and, though I don't have much experience in CGI, I could not find any trademark of animation.
That being said, the footage really gives no proof whatsoever that this is the real deal.
I don't think this is a pterodactyl guys. My feeling is that they went completely extinct some time between 1600 and 1910 ish.



posted on Sep, 18 2015 @ 05:25 PM
link   
There's zero question this is CGI. Watch any other winged animal fly and you can see that the motion is much more smooth with a much larger "flapping" motion. This wing flap doesn't look natural at all, to me.



posted on Sep, 18 2015 @ 06:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: TheBatch

Guys it was already proven by HalfSwede that the video was fake. It was made by a group who make CGI videos

Here: www.youtube.com...

Just going to "ruin this" for everybody again because it seems to be getting lost in the discussion 😉


^



posted on Sep, 19 2015 @ 12:37 PM
link   
CGI or maybe a well made drone.



posted on Sep, 19 2015 @ 10:22 PM
link   
I am all ears....please tell me what's wrong with what i said....do note that i am quite familiar with the process of 3D animation and the compositing process (both luma key, chroma key and alpha channel)



posted on Sep, 20 2015 @ 01:04 AM
link   
Your statement about it not looking natural is key here...and YES it is NOT natural....BUT.....i just can't
"feel" the cgi part of the equation....for some reason i ca't really put a finger on...the bird's
Movements feels so robotic and machine-like....

In terms of animation you can use a number
Of techniques to make animation look real

A) use decent spline tensioning to mimic
Movement of limbs that have natural
acceleration And deceleration.

B) fool people who know to look for edge
Feathering on 3D objects composited over
A background .... Much edge feathering
Is inverse squared or linear along the entire
Edges. Look for that inverse squared or linear
luminance drop-off along those edges as a
tell tale signature Of compositing.

C) add macroblocking or artificially randomized
video noise to a 3d object rendering to match
the background. Different size and placement
Of video noise between foreground and background elements could indicate compositing.

D) direction and intensity of Shadows and
lighting on foreground that that doesnt match background.

Those are 4 i can name in terms of what i would look for...

Me? I really can't say if this is cgi or not.
It's that head drop movement that to me
Screams rather mechanical to me than cgi

And after finding all those youtube videos
On flapping wing drones you cannot truly
Rule out mechanical unless the original
Artist admits to the video being animation.

Some of my earlier posts on 3D animation ARE
Just opinion which can be different from others.
And any difference in opinion is fine with me
Because this IS ats....a website FILLED with
Opinion....



posted on Oct, 16 2015 @ 11:51 PM
link   
a reply to: Picollo30

I don't think it's CGI. Either real, or possibly a remote-controlled model of some sort. The odd little loop it does makes me lean toward the later.

Not that I would write off the possibility, considering what I saw once.



posted on Oct, 19 2015 @ 03:50 PM
link   
I thought I saw a pterosaur in Hawaii once. After researching birds I came to the conclusion that I must have seen a dark Frigate. The video was done well and I want to say it is CGI. If it was real I would be willing to say that it could be a Frigate carrying something in its mouth.
(I skimmed the posts here and I did not see someone mentioning the bird, sorry if it was.)




top topics



 
18
<< 7  8  9   >>

log in

join