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.

 

Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Was Hillary actually in Greensboro earlier for her speech? (CGI News[?])

page: 13
56
<< 10  11  12    14 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 19 2016 @ 09:35 AM
link   

originally posted by: dragonridr
a reply to: WeAreAWAKE

Just not possible for example do you think Trump is going to argue with a blue screen?? Don't you think if Hillary wasn't actually at the speech someone would have noticed?? I might buy the video was edited to say increase the crowd size by adding in more people. But to say she wasn't there would be difficult to hide if not impossible. Think about all the people that would have came in contact with her before and after the event. And trust me this would be thr scoop of a lifetime for a reporter. This isn't something they would keep quiet. Look at how they were all over her supposed illness.

I'm not supporting the video one way or the other. I'm telling you that the person in the video can't be affected by a glitch separately from the background unless they are two separate layers or streams, which would mean they aren't there at the same time in reality. And again...unless someone messed with the video to make it look this way AFTER it was recorded.

Just technical facts dude.




posted on Sep, 19 2016 @ 09:44 AM
link   

originally posted by: Greggers

originally posted by: WeAreAWAKE

originally posted by: Chadwickus

originally posted by: NobodiesNormal

originally posted by: boncho
There is also a short section where she glitches out, disappears and her voice seems to sound like a mans. Clip is cut to a few seconds... Here is that clip.


that part is the strangest of it, very odd


No it isn't.

That is what digital television signals do when there is a drop in signal quality.



Don't be an idiot! The "drop you describe affects the entire frame, not individual people within the frame. What this video proves is that the "signal" of the background and the person are two different streams...which for some of you...isn't possible in real life. This is either proof of superimposing Clinton over the background, or proof that someone played with it afterward to produce this effect.

Personally...I sincerely believe Clinton is very, very ill. She has avoided interviews and documented appearances like the plague. This may be their last ditch effort to make up for her physical short-comings. The goal being...my best guess...is using her name to get her elected so she can then resign and the left would still hold the White House.


He's not being an idiot. He's actually correct. Also, calling people names is a violation of the T&C.

I didn't call anyone an idiot...I told him not to be an idiot. A video camera records the entire visible frame into a single image. It doesn't cut the person in the picture into one frame and the background into another...especially since it can't see the background THROUGH the person. This affect of the person disappearing and the background remaining is impossible unless these are two different streams...one of the background and one of the person. That is typically called "green screening".

I'm not saying that this wasn't tampered with to make it look like that...I'm just stating the fact that you can't lose single objects out of a frame and have the background remain, unless they were recorded separately.



posted on Sep, 19 2016 @ 09:49 AM
link   

originally posted by: WeAreAWAKE

originally posted by: dragonridr
a reply to: WeAreAWAKE

Just not possible for example do you think Trump is going to argue with a blue screen?? Don't you think if Hillary wasn't actually at the speech someone would have noticed?? I might buy the video was edited to say increase the crowd size by adding in more people. But to say she wasn't there would be difficult to hide if not impossible. Think about all the people that would have came in contact with her before and after the event. And trust me this would be thr scoop of a lifetime for a reporter. This isn't something they would keep quiet. Look at how they were all over her supposed illness.

I'm not supporting the video one way or the other. I'm telling you that the person in the video can't be affected by a glitch separately from the background unless they are two separate layers or streams, which would mean they aren't there at the same time in reality. And again...unless someone messed with the video to make it look this way AFTER it was recorded.

Just technical facts dude.


"Technical facts"
are you serious?

It was CGI, no wait Hologram, no wait she was a prop or a body double. And all those in attendance were paid off.

Desperate times call for desperate threads.

imgur.com...

Oh man this is too funny but also quite sad how many people actually buy into this BS.
Guess your in to deep now.



posted on Sep, 19 2016 @ 09:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: WeAreAWAKE
..I'm just stating the fact that you can't lose single objects out of a frame and have the background remain, unless they were recorded separately.


Yes you can.



posted on Sep, 19 2016 @ 09:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: SudoNim

originally posted by: WeAreAWAKE

originally posted by: dragonridr
a reply to: WeAreAWAKE

Just not possible for example do you think Trump is going to argue with a blue screen?? Don't you think if Hillary wasn't actually at the speech someone would have noticed?? I might buy the video was edited to say increase the crowd size by adding in more people. But to say she wasn't there would be difficult to hide if not impossible. Think about all the people that would have came in contact with her before and after the event. And trust me this would be thr scoop of a lifetime for a reporter. This isn't something they would keep quiet. Look at how they were all over her supposed illness.

I'm not supporting the video one way or the other. I'm telling you that the person in the video can't be affected by a glitch separately from the background unless they are two separate layers or streams, which would mean they aren't there at the same time in reality. And again...unless someone messed with the video to make it look this way AFTER it was recorded.

Just technical facts dude.


"Technical facts"
are you serious?

It was CGI, no wait Hologram, no wait she was a prop or a body double. And all those in attendance were paid off.

Desperate times call for desperate threads.

imgur.com...

Oh man this is too funny but also quite sad how many people actually buy into this BS.
Guess your in to deep now.

OMG read the words before you point fingers. I have no clue if this video was altered or if she was actually there or not. I'm just telling you that the background and the person must be separate. Maybe in some post processing where they decided to replace the background for some reason. I don't know, but it requires two different video frames or layers for one to display the affects you see in this video.



posted on Sep, 19 2016 @ 09:55 AM
link   

originally posted by: WeAreAWAKE


Just technical facts dude.


I've provided some of the few examples of technical facts in this entire thread. What you're saying is not factual. It is, in fact, counter to the facts.

I actually obtained input from an AV professional with thousands of hours dealing with video compression algorithms and various codecs, and he explained that a highly uniform, unmoving background can easily copy itself over another part of the image, which in this case would create the impression that HIllary had vanished and the background had not. In fact, we have still-frame proof in at least one set of frames that the top of Hillary's head (and the stripe behind her) repeated all the way down the screen vertically.



posted on Sep, 19 2016 @ 04:34 PM
link   
a reply to: boncho I watched the one video and I see what you're saying about the cell phone videos not matching up to what's going on in front of them. One clearly had a video of another rally, it looked like the democrat convention with multiple flash bulbs going off which wasn't happening at that current event. This is getting weird but anything with the Clintons is going to be strange and a little weird.



posted on Sep, 20 2016 @ 11:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: Dutchowl
a reply to: boncho I watched the one video and I see what you're saying about the cell phone videos not matching up to what's going on in front of them. One clearly had a video of another rally, it looked like the democrat convention with multiple flash bulbs going off which wasn't happening at that current event. This is getting weird but anything with the Clintons is going to be strange and a little weird.



Depending on signal processing, and if something like interpolation is going on, it is possible for the hillary digital artifacts to occur. But for them to occur at this precise time and for the first time in either candidates carrier, draws suspicion.



posted on Sep, 20 2016 @ 07:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: Greggers

originally posted by: WeAreAWAKE
..I'm just stating the fact that you can't lose single objects out of a frame and have the background remain, unless they were recorded separately.


Yes you can.


I'd be interested in seeing a similar video glitch example to this Hillary clip. I'm not saying she wasn't there, but I wonder if they had some setup to go to a different feed in case she fainted. You can have a camera isolate any background and overlay a new image on it like in football games. Maybe she was there and the feed was showing her best practiced take instead of airing the real live hillary that everyone saw. If there is an amateur video on youtube does the soundtrack match?
edit on 20-9-2016 by thepixelpusher because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 20 2016 @ 07:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: thepixelpusher

originally posted by: Greggers

originally posted by: WeAreAWAKE
..I'm just stating the fact that you can't lose single objects out of a frame and have the background remain, unless they were recorded separately.


Yes you can.


I'd be interested in seeing a similar video glitch example to this Hillary clip.



The only types of videos easily referenced by the type of mpeg artifact are specific to scaling/deinterlacing/video-processing discs. Having some experience with this myself, I can assure you there is nothing this specific on either Audio Video Essentials or Avia.

If this were the sort of glitch that plagues particular types of video chipsets or television technology (like green-trail on plasma sets or SDE on front projection systems), you'd be able to find it like that. But this isn't one of the named "bugs" common to AVS forums.

What you're looking for is out there, but if you want to locate it, you'll have to dig it up for yourself. The type of video where this will tend to happen (press conferences at the like) aren't exactly a staple of audio/video forums.

However, here in this thread, you can clearly see the frame where the top of Hillary's head repeats all the way down the screen. Erego, it's obvious what is happening.
edit on 20-9-2016 by Greggers because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 20 2016 @ 07:29 PM
link   
I'm also a video editor and the only thing I saw that matches the Hillary clip is a setup where they have the background separated from the foreground to lay in different effects. It's possible to isolate the person in the foreground as a separate layer in a live keying setup like they do in Football games on TV. I believe she was there and this was all some video setup for a possible keying of Hillary for a very non-devious reason. A reason that is not apparent. Maybe adding in extra flag props that were not available at the time or things like that. We are in the modern TV age where everything is staged to perfection. So planning to layer in stuff is not out of character or reason.
edit on 20-9-2016 by thepixelpusher because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 20 2016 @ 09:26 PM
link   
a reply to: thepixelpusher

Except in one of those frames, the background visibly shifts. Just a few pixels, but it proves the background changed too.



posted on Sep, 21 2016 @ 12:04 AM
link   

originally posted by: Greggers
a reply to: thepixelpusher

Except in one of those frames, the background visibly shifts. Just a few pixels, but it proves the background changed too.


what about the voice changing to male, and shadows being cast in the distant flag, as well as the camera man that was several meters away, next to the flag appearing to be about the same size as hillary. And the cell phones appearing to be of other events in their screens.
edit on 21-9-2016 by Xenogears because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 21 2016 @ 12:12 AM
link   

originally posted by: Xenogears

originally posted by: Greggers
a reply to: thepixelpusher

Except in one of those frames, the background visibly shifts. Just a few pixels, but it proves the background changed too.


what about the voice changing to male, and shadows being cast in the distant flag, as well as the camera man that was several meters away, next to the flag appearing to be about the same size as hillary. And the cell phones appearing to be of other events in their screens.


The voice change is easily explained as an audio dropout where the data got scrambled. I haven't commented on the other things, nor have I really paid much attention to them. My focus has specifically been whether the video artifacts were unusual.



posted on Sep, 21 2016 @ 02:40 AM
link   

originally posted by: WeAreAWAKE

OMG read the words before you point fingers. I have no clue if this video was altered or if she was actually there or not. I'm just telling you that the background and the person must be separate. Maybe in some post processing where they decided to replace the background for some reason. I don't know, but it requires two different video frames or layers for one to display the affects you see in this video.


You should of just stopped at "I have no clue". If your entire technical knowledge is based off of 5 minutes in Photoshop i'd suggest you stop spouting at "facts". As Greggers has already corrected you, its not a technical fact and can be done.



posted on Sep, 21 2016 @ 05:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: Xenogears

originally posted by: Greggers
a reply to: thepixelpusher

Except in one of those frames, the background visibly shifts. Just a few pixels, but it proves the background changed too.


what about the voice changing to male, and shadows being cast in the distant flag, as well as the camera man that was several meters away, next to the flag appearing to be about the same size as hillary. And the cell phones appearing to be of other events in their screens.


I understand your point. The government does have software that can match a person's voice perfectly, so another person's voice can be altered to sound like anyone. Trying to find a link to the article I read years back.



posted on Sep, 21 2016 @ 05:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: Greggers
a reply to: thepixelpusher

Except in one of those frames, the background visibly shifts. Just a few pixels, but it proves the background changed too.


I'd be more apt to agree with you if you could supply a video example of your viewpoint on this, other than the Hillary one.
edit on 21-9-2016 by thepixelpusher because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 21 2016 @ 09:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: thepixelpusher

originally posted by: Greggers
a reply to: thepixelpusher

Except in one of those frames, the background visibly shifts. Just a few pixels, but it proves the background changed too.


I'd be more apt to agree with you if you could supply a video example of your viewpoint on this, other than the Hillary one.


If it were an easy thing for me to dig up an example I think you'd find satisfactory, I'd be happy to do it. Unfortunately, it would take a lot more work than I am willing to invest, for reasons I explained here:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

You don't really need a real world example to see Hillary's head tiling all the way down the screen, or to see the background visibly shifting, or to understand the explanation I provided from an AV specialist, but...

If you'd like to put in that work, you're welcome to it. I'd start by watching press conferences with stationary backgrounds. It's going to take a lot of hours. Be sure to take breaks.
edit on 21-9-2016 by Greggers because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 22 2016 @ 06:51 AM
link   
reply to: Greggers

I'll take your word on it. I'm not eager to binge watch C-Span.



posted on Sep, 22 2016 @ 07:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: Greggers

originally posted by: LadyGreenEyes


Explain how the flag is perfectly visible even behind her, where the camera would not be able to see it, if it's just a glitch.

It's been explained, by AV professionals and others, multiple times already in this thread.




No, one single frame was explained, were her head repeated. What about the frames where you don't have that repeating effect, and she's still transparent? In those, the background ought to be distorted, and the flag not visible, but that's not the case.

Plus, more simply, explain how her neck looks younger, with far less wrinkling, between 9/11 and that appearance? No skin cream is that good!




top topics



 
56
<< 10  11  12    14 >>

log in

join