Skinny Bob Colorized and New Details

a reply to: BelowBottomPublicity

on the previous page, i already linked 3 videos. they're older as 2011 by the way. i don't know exactly what's so good about a grainy and low resolution footage to be honest. do you mean the aging effects itself? they could have been realised by the use of real vintage hardware as i already said before. when it comes to the Models & Animations "quality" (in at least one of the other videos), they come pretty much close. maybe even a bit better, if you ask me. but the aging effects are not as good and obvious CGI and there are almost no other locations visible in background. by the way, the humans (arms & legs) that appear in two of the Skinny Bob Videos, they could have been taken from anywhere and edited out with the "rotoscoping" technique. anyways^^

a reply to: FrvstMaSke

I already responded to your videos. You said they were proven fake and I'm still waiting on an answer for my question, what was the proof? I can easily believe they are fake, but I'd still like to see the proof.

I mentioned that they were very well done, one of the best(sadly). Regardless, it was terrible compared to bob.

Who said free? Why not get paid.

Did you guys ever talk to ownership? If this is a skeptics website, maybe ATS will put up the money for you to recreate Bob and prove that it is CGI. It would be a great sponsorship for them across the internet.

If not ATS, other skeptics websites might pay you.

Ignoring this route leans toward the idea that you CGI guys cannot recreate Bob.

a reply to: BelowBottomPublicity

i can't give you any prove because the videos are quite old. but i've read that myself somewhere long ago. spiritualarchitect already confirmed it, he/she obviously has a little more background info about it.

don't get me wrong, believers, i didn't said that the 3 Skinny Bob videos were badly made, that they do look like hoaxes at first glance. i'm still pretty sure they are hoaxes, but the artists seemingly didn't left anything out and provided some nearly perfectly created alien fakes. in the whole, i find this stuff quite well done and not the specific contentsuch as 3D models, animations ect. which can be done by a skilled artist or a small team of them. i'm impressed they know my secret techniques, that i would do the same

@spiritualarchitect

could this be possible that you are Skinny Bob himself? c'mon admit it

but that's a good idea with being paid by ATS. i would take part of it

Yea I'm sure they would all be real excited to spend that kinda money with little return. Apparently you have less a concept of business than you do CGI or reality for that matter.

If it was a paid venture it would be spending at the very least 8,000+ to make a 10 second video. Where is the return for the investment. A few thousand spread out over years in views on youtube? Add it to a UFO doc with a budget of 30,000? It makes no sense unless there is some viable production value.

a reply to: kobalt7

I agree, it would be at least 8,000$ for 10 seconds in 2019, let alone 2011. No one would do that for no return. It makes no sense.

a reply to: FrvstMaSke
More likely hes a troll farming stars.

I do think ATS would be the only place that would front the money, but without a projected return and profit plan nobody would be interested.

a reply to: BelowBottomPublicity
That 8,000 is low low ball too, I wouldn't do it for that much and I'm cheap AF. The market now vs then is saturated, so it is actually alot cheaper now.

The technology hasn't changed all that much since, the render engines are where we've seen the most advancement. I mean I still run 3DS max 2013 for base polymodelling and .obj import and then port over to Cinema4D.

But the multiple clips with vastly different scenes and detailed lighting. If this was a passion project as a whole that's alot of work and it would have been done over several months.

I did do work with a russian tech back then and there was a case of a company that paid us thousands to build a website in flash only to be ditched at the last few months of production. This could have been for a movie/show or a viral campaign that fell thru the cracks.
It could also be a state sponsored fake, remember the Secret KGB UFO files doc in the late 90s the crashed UFO video they had was supposedly state sponsored.

a reply to: Blue Shift
ah sorry for the mixup Blue

BelowBottomPublicity
What VR setup are you rocking? We have a few different pairs at the office to use with a steam console we are partnered with. I've only played a few of the games, despite doing a lot of the video bumpers for them. They have some fun stuff going on. I was going to spend 40 bucks and get one of those VR glasses you can throw your iphone into just to watch 3d movies on my phone. Haven't seen one I liked tho they all seem flimsy.

a reply to: kobalt7

If fake, I find all of those theories acceptable. Not outlandish enough for me to say its impossible. I still doubt it, but you could be right.

Edit: im just using cheap phone goggles. I think theyre called Dream Vision. 10$ on clearance at walmart. Still are online. They arent the best but theyre worth 10$ for sure. Better than google cardboard

a reply to: BelowBottomPublicity
I imagine fact checking would be pretty solid on anything state sponsored by KGB so the timecode issues would have been spotted by a pro so it kinda rules out the KGB for me.

the KGB logo they used on one video was identical from the KGB Abduction files documentary aside from some stretching and a RGB channel shift(common on CRT screens). That itself might be a clue to investigate.

a reply to: BelowBottomPublicity

I was gonna splurge for a 40 buck one just because i wear glasses and i was worried that might be an issue, the guys at work also said the cheap ones are super uncomfortable too.

A viral video to promote a 2011 movie is a popular explanation. JJ Abrams' 'Super-8' is constantly referenced despite its lack of 'Greys'. But what is NOT usually mentioned is the comedy 'Paul'...



'Paul' was released in February (UK) and March (USA), before being launched on DVD in June 2011. Was Skinny Bob launched into the world in April 2011 as a primer for the DVD?

The film is a loving tribute to many major UFO stories and conspiracies, and made nearly 100 million dollars. With a budget of 40 million, I'm sure some spare change could have been found to produce three mini-videos as indirect hype.

But then would they keep quiet about it after the fact? Again, this is the part that doesn't make sense... or DOES it? In fact, I probably would keep quiet in their shoes... DVD/online sales still continue after all.

Food for thought?

a reply to: ConfusedBrit
I don't think Paul looks good enough to say they created this. Yes Paul is 2 hours and this is only 30 seconds but still it doesn't click. People were saying Super 8 before the movie came out and stopped saying it after the movie came out.

I want to repost these videos here because I think theyre interesting to discuss.

A popular YouTuber "Billschannel" just uploaded this video to facebook a few days ago.
Robert Kiviat on Skinny Bob: m.facebook.com...
Nick Pope on Skinny Bob: youtu.be...

Nick Pope worked for the ministry of Defence specifically covering UFOs. And Robert kiviat has been involved in a lot of paranormal documentaries. So it's interesting to see their takes. Even though kiviat apparently directed the infamous autopsy documentary, he still has experience and some good points.

On that note, does anyone have the evidence for that? I can't locate it for the life of me but I know Santilli or someone came out admitting it was a hoax, if anyone has that evidence please link it.
Edit: Found enough here www.youtube.com...

edit on 19-10-2019 by BelowBottomPublicity because: (no reason given)

a reply to: FrvstMaSke

Textures are rubbery and the lighting is off. Good job but its 2019, I expect better. Some have said CGI hasn't changed much but i disagree, its improving every day and is drastically better every year. Slight improvements in motion, textures, mapping, smoothing, lighting, physics. All together make a big difference.

a reply to: ConfusedBrit


Uh oh! Too late now. Ill try and undo it by putting this in italics. Fingers crossed

a reply to: BelowBottomPublicity

the video was uploaded in 2011. the artist Wayne Robson also mentioned it in the description that this work is older.
and it's not about the lighning and all this stuff but about the model and the animation itself. and the head is untextured. it's just the color of the material and ambient occlusion, that's it.