Skinny Bob Colorized and New Details

a reply to: BelowBottomPublicity
The proof to me is the obvious nature this was faked, I explained it and I pointed out the areas it was most noticeable and argued my point for several pages, but you can't accept that because you want to believe it so badly you spent all your time looking to discredit my points and defend the story. Asking me whether a series of clips are real or not is proof of that fact. If you can't attack the message because you lack the skills, attack the messenger.

You expect someone to do all this work to discredit an outlandish claim, I doubt any proof would be definitive enough. At this point you want more proof find it yourselves because from my perspective you'll only focus on information that supports the idea that it's real, even if it runs counter to the other 90% of people who have seen it.

You don't want proof you want support for your ideology. Extraordinary claims for me require more than a fake CGI video on youtube. Asking someone to recreate this is asking someone to work for free just to prove to you this isn't a real alien. Think about that for a minute let it sink in. Even if they did you'd fall back on the fact that its not done with older software, then when they do that you'll ask them to prove that as well.

Continue to bolster your claim using unverifiable internet facts and ask other people to jump thru your hoops, I'm done for now.
I gave you my professional opinion and you kids still think you know better. At the end of the day your not denying ignorance your embracing it. You have wasted enough of my time.

@spiritualarchitect

you obviously have little to no knowledge about CGi and VFX i'm pretty sure. i do have that knowledge since i'm in 3D modeling & texturing for more than10 years. in animation i have knowledge too, but not as much.

i can promise you, for skilled 3D modellers/3D Sculpters and Animators, creating such a simple Alien Body is not hard work when compare it to the real crazy stuff that i've already seen from 3D sculpting artists in full colour. and all the single video sequences in all three videos, are just a few seconds long. so the artist doesn't need to work on it for days or weeks and to render the material for hours. that's the first thing that i want to make clear. let me explain shortly how it could have been done!

1. an alien must be created. 2. the Alien Body needs to be "rigged" to the virtual "skeleton"/ "bones". 3. the body needs to be "weight painted", so that the skin and the pant suit moves physically correct to the rest of the body when animated later. 4. setting up the scenery/background and animate the alien/aliens. 6. composing the footage. i could go deeper into detail and what tricks could have been used.

why it looks so authentic, is just the grainy, low resolution black and white footage. without being looking as crappy, anyone would immediately see the fake. the hoaxers even don't need to care about colorizing everthing, because the footage will be black & white in any case later. just the natural lighting, the shadow cast and the "ambient occlusion" needs to be sit right.
but here comes the point....me personally, i don't think they just used lame film effects that can be easily detected by somebody who knows those effects from his video cutting program, but a real analog 8mm camera could have been used instead. you can get those for a few bucks along with the tape btw. and a beamer/film projector with a screen of course. i'll explain why a film projector would be of advantage!

now imagine the fake footage is done. you put it in a old vintage reel-to-reel projector and throw it on screen. now you take the 8mm and record it directly from the screen. you can even shake the camera a little so that it will look more real. after it's done, digitalize the record and make some minor edits.

i understand, this all sounds ultra complicated as if it's much work. indeed....it is to some extent, but not as much you might believe. and why all those efforts, what were the intensions by creating a very great looking hoax you might think? well, it's just for fun and to proving themselves. creating something on that he/they can be proud of. i know that good feeling too, when i create a detailed weapon with detailed textures for a video game, close as possible to the original real steel counter part

a reply to: FrvstMaSke

I went thru all that a few pages back but left out the skin weighting. This guy pretty much wants someone to replicate it for him otherwise our words mean nothing to him. He basically wants someone to work for free and because no one has done that yet hes assumed that it's because they can't and this serves as proof that its real. Hes also stated that even if you did all that it still wouldn't work because technology has gotten better and its not the same.

@kobalt7

i already read a couple of your posts. interesting read!

and re-creating the skinny bob footage 1:1 for free, is a bit much to ask for. his comment about the "technology" i found very ammusing too. but back in 2010/2011, the 3D and video editing technology was pretty much the same as today. ok no doubt, it got a little better and faster, but not really drastically!

a reply to: kobalt7

I asked you to support your claims and you refused because you said that would be too difficult and you didn't want to waste your time. So I came up with something that didn't take as much time to accommodate.

You said the film scratch went outside the aspect ratio, that should be easy to show me. Just snapshot the frames. I can't argue that point until you substantiate it.

there's another interesting detail in at least one of the videos that supports my belief, that a real projector, a screen and camera, to film off this stuff directly from the screen must have been used. i can detect slightly colored lines which run horizontal from the bottom to the top. when you film off your TV or computer Monitor with a digicam or whith a mobile phone, you should see a similar effect. for me, this could be one prove more that the footage was not 100% created just with computer software and analog stuff took part of all. but i have a VFX effect in my Video Software that can emulate this as well tbh^^

a reply to: FrvstMaSke
well we did get better render engine support like octane and redline

a reply to: FrvstMaSke
I noticed that too, but that can easily be after effects plug or an overlay, but they could have mixed in alot of real footage, i think the banding was legit they just didnt use any distortion texture on it.

originally posted by: kobalt7
a reply to: FrvstMaSke
I noticed that too, but that can easily be after effects plug or an overlay, but they could have mixed in alot of real footage, i think the banding was legit they just didnt use any distortion texture on it.

there exist a plugin from Red Giant called " VHS Universe" and also "twitch" from Video Copilot. both plugins available for AE and Premiere. with Twitch i already did this sort of effect accidentally. i don't know how old Video Copilot Twitch is, but Red Giant VHS Universe is pretty new^^

a reply to: BelowBottomPublicity
Its not difficult its time consuming. I supported my claims with knowledge, you picked a couple different clips and quizzed me to judge my answer. Snapshotting the frame you still wouldn't see it because of the heavy grain its only noticeable when its playing you can see the spotting.

a reply to: [post=24694714]FrvstMaSke[/postYup

I dont think VHS universe is that old but twitch was videocopilots first paid plugin so its pretty old.I got right when it came out because before you had to do alot of work to achieve that result, it literally cut that channel shift effect creation down by several hours.

a reply to: FrvstMaSke
Hey do you think he even went with skinning on this, the way that eye blinks uneven it looks like vertex weighting using soft selection.

a reply to: kobalt7

I supported my claims with knowledge

You're welcome to support your claims with evidence.
Until then, maybe you can show us some of your CG animation projects.

originally posted by: spiritualarchitect

I believe the controversy surrounding the projector was not the fact that it could be heard, rather it sounded 'wrong'.

originally posted by: EnigmaChaser
So has anyone done a deep dive analysis on the audio?

It seems like the projector issue would be easy to test. Just run an old reel of film projected on a screen or wall. As you are watching the film you can hear the projector. While this is happening, take video of it with a camcorder which would record the sound of the projector.

Then you could hear the sound of the projector while the same type of film (8mm/16mm/etc.) is running.

How hard can it be? Or is there something else I am missing here?

Apparently pretty hard since it hasn’t been done - if this is a sticking point someone should be able to clear it up. I would if I had the tools and capability.

We also haven’t really addressed the financial aspect of this hoax. What did Judy gain? Money? Street cred on the UFO speaking circuit for a minute?

Given the cost of production relative to the payoff this angle has to be explored further.

So, we can analyze:

Video - check.
Audio - not done.
Background of the OP of the video - largely done
Cost for the film if hoaxed - not cemented.
Profit of the OP from surfacing the video - unknown.

It seems to me like we’re stuck on only one dimension (video) and not looking at other topics that could help get a better understanding of what the video is, where it came from, why it exists, etc.

a reply to: BelowBottomPublicity
As my website is down I'll have to link individually and focus on the 3d

a reply to: kobalt7

I'll admit those headphones look astonishingly real. Well done.
Any animations? That's the hard part.

a reply to: BelowBottomPublicity

your not kidding, the modelling took a few days and the render took an hr per frame. I worked on specific parts mainly on concept art, 3D sculpting, titles and post production.

Here's a few clips of small solo projects I did the last few years. Nothing fancy mostly just weekend rush jobs I keep separate from work.

www.youtube.com...
www.youtube.com...
www.youtube.com...
www.youtube.com...
www.youtube.com...
www.youtube.com...

Lol, so fake.

a reply to: kobalt7
K regarding the timecode I spent time this morning to point out a few of my issues with it. I'd like to also note that the timecode font isn't right for any camcorder I've seen, they all tend to be larger block fonts.



I could pick apart the whole video because there's actually a lot of things that tell me its fake but I'll focus here. Just pointing out the texture stretching would do little to convince you if you don't have the technical skill to know what your looking at unfortunately and my word is clearly not enough.

a reply to: BelowBottomPublicity
Actually when it comes to character animation, the animation part is the easiest part, the sculpting, low poly, texturing, weighting and rigging is all far more difficult and time consuming. We are talking a week of work just building and prepping the model for animation, with the animation actually only a day or 2.