Skinny Bob Colorized and New Details

a reply to: BelowBottomPublicity
If it was a digital camera they why does it have a overlay of wave banding that's indicative of a VHS camcorder.

Here is the proof the scratches are an overlay.


Do you need a picture of the banding as well, I know since you are young you might not know what banding is on VHS video.

a reply to: kobalt7

it was identified by multiple people right away and eventually a member found the original photo on myspace of all places.

That's what happens with fakes. Still waiting to see evidence like that for skinny bob.

The alien autopsy video in the 90s

That's a non-moving blurry alien that costed many thousands of dollars. 10-15k IIRC.
This is a moving, clear profile of an entire alien.
Leagues ahead of all other alien videos.
Never featured in any production and never made any money as normal users couldn't monetize on YT in 2011.
Almost every other convincing video has had a money trail or was too hard to full analyze.


a reply to: kobalt7
The scratching was explained. Again, it doesnt look like the other film scratches, it only affects the last digit briefly twice.
It only appears on the 6(and 9), not around it like an overlay would.
And for the final time, the timestamp is not meant to be part of the projection so there would be no need to add an overlay.


a reply to: kobalt7
I suppose it could be analog although I don't think so because of the quality.
Also wasn't the font of the timestamp identified as 2005?
Either way it's probly not meant to be from the film.
The wave banding was addressed in the OP. Did you even read it?
It clearly affects modern cameras.

a reply to: BelowBottomPublicity
The banding he is referring is different, the banding I'm referring to is caused by age and exposure to the elements, over time VHS suffers from degradation that creates a soft banding that looks like waves.

If the timestamp was added on top and the font is from 2005 that would point to it being a modern digital addition. It shouldn't have that much degradation and shouldn't be affected by the VHS banding or tint shifting and flickering should be nonexistent. That would indicate that it was aged artificially, which is a process I'm familiar with which is why i pointed out the shadowing below the font, I only see this happen when you apply alpha effects to a text layer rather than an adjustment layer above it in after effects, its characteristic of the plugins and software I use everyday.

a reply to: kobalt7
The banding he is referring to is usually caused by lighting and it creates hard edges which are usually inconsistent, I don't see those in this video.

a reply to: kobalt7
I should add the the VHS banding can also be caused by poor coaxial connection but when it does so its usually not consistent and follows a more random pattern.

Words will not do it. The CGI guys need to stop talking and start rendering. That is the only way to prove it. Make a moving beauty that looks like this:

i.redd.it...

a reply to: kobalt7
OP supported his arguments. Even if its just a video, show us something showcasing your argument.

The brightness of the timestamp may be programmed to increase in bright white light to remain visible.

Just stop with the timestamp, it was never supposed to be part of the film reels. If it was added to make it look like a digital camera, then why would he add the "scratch" to the time code? Makes no sense. But if you can replicate it or show similar features in other videos, then thats evidence. If i could find a timestamp in a bright white light that adjusts, thats evidence for my side. Until one of us has that, nothing has been proven.

But i think the explanation that its part of the digital camera is better than that its been added in and intended to be mistaken for the film reel.

a reply to: BelowBottomPublicity

Our OP has posted his video on another site. You might like reading what one of the members said about Bob.

www.reddit.com...

Well that link did not go directly to the text, so here it is, quick typing and all:

" when you look at famly vacation you can see the alien with its back towars us blink or partially blink just before the camer gets directed to the 3rd Alien that is suspicious. If you slow it down the 2 aliens seem to be turning their heads to each other and the one blinks. Why on earth make a fake and prosthetic like that to have it blink 1 just before the camera turns to the third one. If its fake then it needs to be scripted. walking with the three aliens is not scripted due to the obvious animosity of the 3rd alien.

Bob is real, its obvious, thats not someone in a suit and there is no need for those subtle movments.When you watch Bob in his chair, when he moves you can see his back and posture respond. His whole body moves in response to his actions with his arms head etc. Also at the end when he puts his head up he moves back slightly and nartuarlly straightens his posture for a split second.

When he looks at the camera there is emotion there, people often say its like he's being a smart ass.... many of us see emotion or consciousness there. Imagine sititng at a desk with papers on the table and looking over to a camera right beside you. What would your body language be? most likely like Bob's, You would acknowledge it for a second... maybe smirk or have some facial reaction, they get back to the papers you were looking at, while seated and the desk.

Also if you were to fake an Alien hoax, why on earth of all clips staged would anyone measure his height? Most UFO hoaxs are dramatic and have a fantasy element to it, not Bob getting a physical done at the doctors office. Its a lame boring thing to fake.

Let's spend allot of money to make a fake alien and show him getting a check up in the doctors office ( Military doctor... whatever.) A full frontal shot, no shaky hollywood action camera in a movie, and have him sway and dangle his hands by his sides. Notice before the height clip ends he slightly turns his head. You can see it, Bob is full 3d.

He's real"

- sdives

@spiritualarchitect

do you know this video? it's older than the skinny bob stuff, but in almost the same fashion and very well done too!
but it has been proven as a hoax later! i'm wondering, if the hoaxers behind that aren't the same guys who made skinny bob a couple of years later! even the ridiculous eye winks they added to the aliens lol

Video Title: Alien Footage Smuggled From Area 51 (Part 1)
www.youtube.com...

and here two more videos that originated from the same source

Video Title: 4 Aliens and a Human Hybrid Part 2
www.youtube.com...

Video Title: Long Awaited Part2 ALIEN footage smuggled from area51
www.youtube.com...

"you decide"

a reply to: FrvstMaSke
Those videos are extremely well done but nothing compared to skinny bob. The eye blinking especially.
You said they were proven fake. I believe you but i would like to see the proof anyway. Its hard to tell how exactly it was done and im curious to see what did them in.

When was it proven fake and what was the proof?

Trolling the thread. Seriously no wonder you keep getting banned. Wait a few years till your older and go learn digital effects, film and TV production so people don't have to keep explaining to you when things are obvious.

a reply to: spiritualarchitect
The OP tried hard but at the end of the day if the timecode is artificially aged like this, it stands to reason that the video is also fake. No degradation process I know of would have that profound effect on digital timecode alone. And you can't ignore it because its in ALL his videos.

This means I can unequivocally say Ivans videos are well done fakes. The genius behind then isn't as much just the skill as knowing how to avoid immediate detection. The blacking out around the eyes was probably the most intelligent.

The eyes are 1st area to fall into the uncanny valley and they convey the most emotion, by limiting the visibility of the eyes we automatically go to the body language which can be easier to convey. This also hides much of the stretching you would see in the eyes as they blink, some is still visible but not enough to convince the hardcore. We are to assume the eyes are matte and have no reflection or refraction in a high contrast environment. The eye blink stops halfway unless I'm to assume that's where the eye ends.

Notice the shoulder fold on the clothing bulges out slightly on the right shoulder but the folds themselves don't shift or change when the either arm moves the several folds are for the most part unaffected, this is because the clothing folds are sculpted not natural effects of gravity and bodyshape. Just another clue to being 3D.

On the vacation video someone stabilized the walk cycle and it is damning. Even without the stabilization you can see the walk cycle isn't natural as the bodies show limited motion(stiffness) and dip while in motion.

I can't deny that the render skill and post production here is done by a skilled artist, but there are still things that you can identify that indicate it is CG even if you aren't a professional. To a professional the issues are glaring. If you lack the skill to see or understand them then maybe you aren't in a position to judge the legitimacy of the video.

By analyzing the video with a mindset to prove its legitimacy OP ignored the obvious multitude of issues this video had. I only focused on this small part of the videos ivan made I'm sure if I went thru them all I could find more digital tells. You can ignore everything I've pointed out in this thread and chalk it up to me being a shill or wrong and continue to believe its real.

But lets be honest I haven't even approached the elephant in the room.

This is a video of an ALIEN on YOUTUBE!!!!!!!

a reply to: kobalt7
I disagree with everything you're saying but I can't prove you wrong unfortunately.

originally posted by: FrvstMaSke
@spiritualarchitect
do you know this video?

Thanks, I had never seen the saucer one.

**************************************************

Email from 2011 that Mr351Nova sent to a senior member at davidicke.com:

“Yeah that's all correct , i had an old acct under 351NOVA , my real name is Billy Cruse , i am 42 and i was the owner of novaworldgaming.com (closed now** . It's was a gaming site nothing more , no ufo alien stuff just online gaming.

I have always owned up to making the old alien videos with movie maker , it was a joke and i still can't beleave there still around , i have always posted in the comments when i see them that there fake and i made them .

Feel free to re post this anywhere you like ,

I am NOT ivan0135 , i did not make his videos i now run windows 7 with movie maker live witch is not what made ivan's videos , he used something that cost a lot of money to make them .

That man who is trying to link me to ivan0135 is NUT's .

Bill Cruse AKA Mr351Nova AKA 351NOVA.”

SO IN CONCLUSION Bill is saying he is Nova but not Ivan. And that Skinny Bob is not Nova’s alien.

Bill (351Nova) made those videos and admitted to them. Ivan0135 was the first distributor of the 4 Bob video set.

So we have at least 3 possibilities here:

1 - 351Nova is Bill telling the truth about not making Bob - or he is lying about it - even though he admits he made the other fakes.

2 - Ivan0135 is Judy. She saw the 351Nova videos which had been around for 2 years and decided to name herself after Nova to deflect identity onto Bill.

3 - Judy had a screen name once called "Ivan the Tormenting Norwegian". So Judy could be Ivan0135. But Ivan0135 could be just the media connection/distributor of the 4 Bob video set. So Ivan could be Judy, but not the owner or the creator of Bob.

This means Bob could be real and Judy, unable to divulge the owners’ identity, gleefully took over ownership herself.

But the story of Judy's involvement all comes from one person; Grant Cameron. And of course we have no proof that Grant, Judy or Bill are telling the truth.

I thought I'd fiddle around with the video to see if I could squeeze any 3-D information out of it. The problem is always going to be finding two images where the camera moves horizontally while the rest of the stuff in the image stays still. The poor quality of the images didn't help much, either. Here's what I was able to come up with after a little playing around.

These are cross-eyed 3-D pairs. Cross your eyes until portions of the image line up in a false "center" image. With a little practice, you'll be able to see the 3-D effect. See what you think.

Not sure what the hell this is supposed to be, but it apparently has some depth information:

a reply to: Blue Shift

I think thats the flying saucer.
I tried your picture with my cheap VR phone goggles and it wasn't working so I messed with the image a little bit and it is very interesting to look at. Maybe someone can improve it but it's working much better than I expected.

Image: i.ibb.co...

EDIT: I tried to make the video 3d by putting one side a single frame ahead of the other.
Not bad, I suggest people give this a go as well if they have a VR headset.
Video: streamable.com...