Skinny Bob Colorized and New Details

i think what we need is to get Bob in here to do an AMA.

a reply to: Elyei
I wouldn't say it's impossible, although the cost would still be high.
It's a better explanation than CGI.
I think you'll have more trouble doing this with the 1st half of the clips where it's more visible.
The neck is too long in my opinion but this is worth considering.

a reply to: BelowBottomPublicity

My amateur elbow knee analysis was telling me that it wasn't a child in suit...
unless that child had some rare genetic condition like Marfan syndrome....

I've also played around with contrast and brightness and can't really come up with the "eye" issue like that one photo that floats around showing human eyes submerged in the fields of black.

originally posted by: Elyei
My amateur elbow knee analysis was telling me that it wasn't a child in suit...

I mentioned this before and no one has said anything about it.

In the vacation vid they all look like a females to me.

Stop it at 1:53 in the slow motion vacation vid below:

www.youtube.com...

Does that Grey have brest?

a reply to: spiritualarchitect

Thanks for the kind reply. I caught a glimpse of that also when studying the video but they seemed small enough.
I also spent some time examining Bob's posture and the way the clothing contours over the body. You get an obvious glimpse of clavicle, sternum, and ribs.. along with some strange pectoral striations- as if the clothing is very thin and supple.

The shoulder slope is steep enough to have made Bob the envy of 17th and 18th century women- also strange, the corners of the shoulders.



the stories of the beings having their clothing shipped off for testing and being given human turtlenecks does not make sense to me. Bob's clothes fit his odd proportions all too well-- arm length and al,l and appear to be one piece, not two.

Also noted, right arm appears to hang in-front of right hip.

I was thrilled to see this topic under discussion this October so I joined the forum to participate!

a reply to: Elyei
Welcome, it is good to have you around, even if you have been here the whole time. I never know who I am talking to... Alien Anonymous, Judy, Ivan... only they know and they are not going to tell me.

As for the clothes - they fit.

I see the double picture you posted shows Bobs original body that fit the moving video. You might have noticed that there is a distorted picture going around where Bob has been scrunched down so he is not so tall and not so skinny. This either means that Bob was faked by stretching him out or that someone is hoaxing his photo to make him look more human in shape.

originally posted by: Blue Shift
Well, they ought to know.

You can find a few people in the YouTube comments claiming that Bob looks like the real thing.

What we need is for all the posters on ATS who say they have seen these Greys in person to all post here giving their thoughts on if Bob looks like the real thing to them.

There is an ATS banner ad on my screen right now for Documentary Film making at Wake Forest University. Why can't a university, one who trains people in CGI, have a class where their mid-term is to reproduce Skinny Bob?

Is Bob really that hard to make?

originally posted by: bally001
a reply to: AlienAnonymous

Just my observation, and there might be a legit reason for this. The collar on the uniform seems a little small to get over skinny bobs head unless the material is super stretchy or has some form fastening at the back that I can't see.

Seems a tight fit to the skinny neck.

Kind regards,

Bally

Lets be honest here, the only observation you did was observe someones comment on youtube saying the exact same thing. I don't understand why people need to steal others words and make it their own. That's just sad.

originally posted by: AlienAnonymous
1. Digital camera video of 8mm film projection. Film recorded at 16fps
2. Projector running at 24fps, video slowed to exactly half making it 12fps.
2b. See projector sound youtu.be... SET TO 0.5X
3. Timestamp is from digital camera and is also going half speed.
4. Camera brightness constantly changes from bright flashing projector light.
5. Bright projector also causes timestamp to react. Line is just a glitch in the 6.
5b. Glitch likely occurs where the 6 is because it's changing every second.
5c. Only appears on the 6 and not around it. youtu.be...
6. Horizontal colored banding indicative of modern camera. youtu.be...
7. Black bars edited in to hide date and origin but KGB logo still present.
(my video below is speed corrected to 16fps and brightened)

I spent about 50 hours analyzing, researching, and debunking the myths about skinny bob.
If you have a link to an analysis, I've likely seen it. All can be explained.
He is likely real and no apparent manipulation was done to the footage except the black bars and slow down.

I don't agree that it's "obvious CG" or "ps2 graphics" but feel free to share that opinion down below.

(alternate link: streamable.com...)(i think youtube lowered the quality)

only 50 hours?

Took me 10 seconds to realize that it's fake. The movements are not natural, unless these things move like badly animated CGI renders then I don't know what to tell you other than you wasted 50 hours of your life and still can't see that it is fake.

a reply to: spiritualarchitect

I haven't noticed the distorted photos, just the ones where small eyes are shown hidden in the black fields.
I tried to achieve this myself in Corel Photo and could not. So I think those pics showing small eyes are doctored.

As for CGI attempts: someone out there is trying....
www.artstation.com...


But nobody has come close:
www.youtube.com...


I saw Skinny Bob's video years ago and honestly don't remember what I thought of it at the time. When the subject of aliens was presented by my sister a couple weeks ago, I suddenly remembered that strange video of the realistic grey alien and said, "there is only one video on the internet that I can confidently show you is of what I believe to be a real extra terrestrial being."

My gut says this one is real... call it women's intuition, or gullibility if you like...
If a man is innocent until proven guilty...
I'm going on Skinny Bob being real until proven fake.
Wouldn't it be worse anyways, to believe he was fake, and not have an open mind,
than to believe him real, and keep an open mind that he just might be fake?

originally posted by: BelowBottomPublicity
a reply to: FrvstMaSke

I'm not sure either, years is a bit much depending on how often he worked on it.

better way to phrase the question would be
If you had to guess how many hours he logged making this, how many would it be?

I really want everyone to guess so we can paint a picture of how unexpectedly difficult this level of CGI is. not just time consuming, but artistic skill as well. I think skinny bob looks as real or more real than this model. If bob had hair, it might be easier to tell cgi because the hair on ed is the only dead giveaway. besides the disembodied head of course...

edit: we're on a new page so im gonna post the video again here
www.youtube.com...

A lot longer than it did to create bob. The difference in quality is night and day. Bob's flaws are easily hidden behind the fake antique recorded effect so the visuals don't have to be that great. The only thing they really had to work on was the animation which is really well done but still obvious that it's not real. the movements are not natural, they are definitely CG

originally posted by: spiritualarchitect

originally posted by: kobalt7
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.

So you have just explained why it is real. Thank you.

That explains absolutely nothing. People have hobbies and not everyone does things for monetary gain. Their return on investment (which is only time) not some arbitrary number thrown out like 8,000 could be oh dunno.....practice? Or to see who they can fool? Ever thought that some Hollywood CG artist may have just been bored on their off time and decided to troll everyone? Why does it have to be associated with Money spent vs Money gained? Why can't it just be for......fun?

a reply to: jidnum
If you cant see the textures through the low resolution then I don't know what to tell you. Making Ed 240p wouldnt make him look more believable. Same with Bob. There is an extraordinary amount of detail.

Its just some people see real and some people see CGI.
I posted about a dozen "experts" claiming its real. There are plenty "experts" claiming its fake too. We are just running around in circles here. Starting the cycle over again when someone new comes in the same opinion "its real cause the blinking" or "its fake cause the blinking" and then argue about how good/shiddy it is. Pointless so I'll just grab the popcorn until someone comes up with something interesting like the child in a suit comparison.

First post here, been following the Skinny Bob story for a few years now, and I've never quite managed to make up an opinion. The first time I saw him I thought it looked very CGI, basically based on his movements looking too fluid and almost exaggerated event though they are small. Why, for example is he moving so much in the shot where he's just standing? It looks like an overly eager animator believing that everything has to be animated to make him look real.

I am a film industry professional, working as an editor for 15 years, but I have little to no experience with VFX, I mostly work with documentaries or smaller drama projects, nothing effects heavy.

Based on first impressions of the shots of Bob alone, I would say they are fake. It's the supplemental material that intrigues me, in every one of the brief shots the production quality is through the roof, and if faked, very well, and expensively done with both practical and visual effects. This leads me to believe that the footage may be authentic, but then again, with time and money, everything CAN be faked.

If I were to venture a guess as to what this could be, if it isn't genuine footage of E.T.s, I would say that this was done by a professional studio, the footage of Bob alone could be done by a single person, but the supplemental shots must have a team behind it. It may be what's called a proof-of-concept, test footage made to prove the viability of a concept for a film or TV-show that's either been shelved or made into something different, like the movie Paul, or something else. The studio behind it is either unaware that the footage is out on the web or are laughing their asses off at our expense. It could be a company like Corridor Crew (www.youtube.com...) Ultra passionate VFX-wizards doing it just for fun. What makes me lean towards an actual big VFX company is the dating of 2011. Again based on money and time.

For 2011, the best film to compare with is Paul, and in my eyes, Bob looks way better than Paul. Yes, Paul is 105 minutes, all of Ivan's footage is 105 seconds, but I am still going to argue that the supplemental footage is the most intriguing and requires a lot more effort than 10 minutes of Paul. But, looking just at the shots of Bob, I wanted to try and compare them to Paul, put a shot of Paul into my AVID, and try to recreate some of the theorized layered "filters" in the Bob footage. FYI, this is not me trying to recreate the Bob footage, just seeing what I can do with a CGI shot of an alien and 15 minutes of spare time. Perhaps I'll try this again when I have more time.

youtu.be...

Following the UFO-topic for years, the romantic in me wants this to be real, just like I want the Patterson-Gimlin Bigfoot footage to be real, but we'll probably never know until the people who made it come forward and tell us how and why it was made, with proof to back it up. Judging by Bob alone I would easily say "great CGI for 2011" and move along, but the supplemental footage gives me doubt. Hope we get answers one day, even if it's just a VFX company.

Why so many old cases pop up lately?Im expecting the caret drones anytime now

Btw ivans 4th video





has a similar ufo to this video below







Also not sure why old dead cases seem to come afloat in the past 2-3 months.Food for thought. From what i remember these videos where advertisement of some russian 3d graphic studio,if we got any russian users here they might yandex some answers



Additional info here

www.abovetopsecret.com...

and here

uforesearchnetwork.proboards.com...

Endnotes
i This is a crucial point. The bleached-out skin and heavily shadowed eyes are a clear sign of digital trickery as skin and eyes are notoriously difficult to render photorealistically, even using Hollywood technology; it’s common practice, therefore, to disguise lack of detail or definition with extremes of light and shadow.

ii Again, this is crucial. What Leanne means here is that, if the footage genuinely dated from the 1940s, we might expect to see ‘jumps’ and ‘jerks’ in any on-camera movement owing to natural degradation of the celluloid over time and to other damage the film may have incurred over six decades. Yet the “alien’s” movements are remarkably fluid. While we see jumps and jerks in the second video (the one of the crashed saucer), these too can be created digitally.

iii Following on from my comment above, it’s important to note here that the ‘grainy’ look is easily achieved by increasing the ’gain’ (GAIN, not grain) option. The higher the gain, the grainier the look. As for the black and white – that’s just a standard filter option in any editing package. Software packages also come with numerous other filter options enabling the filmmaker to make his/her film ‘look’ pretty much any way that want it to.

iv The jumpsuit disguises most of the alien’s difficult-to-render skin (which would require very subtle and difficult texturing).

forgot the obligatory poster

a reply to: KlippeLars

While I don't think that Bob in 2011 could be created in under 1000hrs, and I don't think the bigfoot footage is comparable, I did like the rest of your post.

Slowing Paul down might make it a little closer, I did a similar test with Gollum from LOTR. Another thing is I recently noticed that the original footage of Bob has an off-white color due to the camera and surface it's being projected on. When destaturating, it gets much more B&W. So they really did everything they could to make it look like a real projection taken with a video camera, assuming it wasnt.

Bob is so far ahead of other aliens, its hard to consider CGI. but thats the game everyone wants to play these days so ill play. I'm still working on getting a CG animator to tackle bob. One said hed "probably try photorealistic bob soon" so fingers crossed.

Bob's Friend i.ibb.co... is the best but in his description he said he "finished in photoshop". Not sure what he means.

originally posted by: Elyei
As for CGI attempts: someone out there is trying....
www.artstation.com...

“Gabriel Forbes
3D Artist looking for opportunities”

Well if Gabriel here makes a moving production of Skinny Bob he will have himself a new job.

originally posted by: Elyei
But nobody has come close:
www.youtube.com...

Good Job AA!!
That video Really shows the difference between Bob and the wanna be Bobs.

I like the Blue Man Group at 43 seconds.

originally posted by: IMSAM
Why so many old cases pop up lately?

forgot the obligatory poster

Because what some called debunked - were not debunked - they just wished they were debunked.

Really like your ob poster - Skinny Bob lives!

Also on the ivan0135=nova351 i found this in another forum

Let me clear this up real fast for all of you .

In 2007 i made two fake alien videos on youtube , they were both black and white and had aliens in them that had blinking eyes . they came from a TV show that was airing on cable at that time , they were debunked about one week after i posted them , they might have got about 5.000 views ? No more than that .

After they were bebunked i removed them my channel but they were copyed and other users re posted them and they have stayed on youtube for almost 4 years now. When i see them i always post in the comment box that there fake and i made them . Every one knows i made the old videos .

Now , this guy ivan0135 a new youtube user just posted two videos of so called aliens from the 1940's up to the 1960's , they are both black and white and in one the alien blinks it's eyes . Now this nut case in here telling you a bunch of lies about me is hell bent on trying to get everyone to buy into the fact that im ivan0135 and i made the new videos ,four years later , as you can see buy his posts he is on a witch hunt across the internet trying to get anyone to buy this BS .

He has his facts all mixed up , my real name is billy cruise , my website address was novaworldgaming.com , NOT novagaming.com . This person your dealing with here is "stone cold crazy" . here are all the links you need to look into this story for yourself. This is a link to the starter of this post: [link to www.youtube.com] This is a link to ivan0135 channel the guy who made the new alien videos : [link to www.youtube.com] This is a link to my youtube channel: [link to www.youtube.com]

This person is slandering me across the net based on a hunch ! Based on the fact that my videos 4 years ago where done in black and white and ivan0135 videos are B&W and in both videos the alien has blinking eyes , thats it nothing more , if you look at both sets of videos you can see my old videos were made with windows movie maker , ivan0135 videos are completely professional. Where is the proof !!!!

Heres his channel

Heres the post im quoting above