|
reply posted on 8-6-2007 @ 05:41 PM by schuyler
|
Originally posted by yuefo
Schuyler and Roadgravel, thanks. So my next question: would a film photo be more credible than a digital? My guess is yes.
If you keep it on the film, yes, away from the prying manipulations of photoshop, with its ease of changing things.
However, people have been altering filmed images for years and years, so it's not like film is immune from either alteration, or from taking pictures
of fake, manipulated things. In an imaginary scenario, if you had a film camera, such as a Canon A-1, for example, with 35mm film still in the camera,
with half the film still unexposed, and got some drone shots, then gave the camera up to neutral 3rd party experts who carefully removed and developed
the film, then I certainly would 'trust' the pictures themselves under those circumstances more than digital.
That still leaves open the possibility of taking pictures of a model built with a super erector set and egg whips. Most of the Billy Meier photographs
were taken with film, for example. Clever, to be sure, but still made from garbage can lids.
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 8-6-2007 @ 05:53 PM by PsykoOps
|
Originally posted by yuefo
Originally posted by PsykoOps
You can only verify authencity of photographs if you have used a special authentication kit that is available at least for nikon and canon. This in
theory should prevent any manipulation of digital images and is used widely by CSI and law enforcement so images presented in a trial can be verified.
I have a Nikon. Just so I understand, is this kit software that you use when downloading photos from the camera? This is the first time I've heard of
this.
Look here for more information. Works only with D2 series of cameras.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 8-6-2007 @ 06:01 PM by yuefo
|
Originally posted by PsykoOps
Look here for more information. Works only with D2 series of cameras.
It looks like it's worth having. But for the price of a D2X, I could get a digi cam. Thanks for the info.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 8-6-2007 @ 08:04 PM by L4md4
|
 Links are broken. Yes, all of them.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
AboveTopSecret.com is advertising supported.
|
reply posted on 9-6-2007 @ 07:41 PM by DocMoreau
|
Still trying to get the hang of it...
I guess this post is a better place, than just the newest one of the big basin picks...
Here is some more info on the Transformers prequel storyline. Check my post in the new pages, where it talks about two different Transformer
ships:
www.abovetopsecret.com...
And more info from a different wikipedia page:
en.wikipedia.org...:_The_Movie_Prequel
Long ago, Optimus Prime and Lord High Protector Megatron ruled Cybertron. Together they were the protectors of the Allspark, an enormous cube of
energy that gave life to the Transformers. However, Megatron secretly desired the Allspark's power for himself, and soon he was corrupted. He formed
a like-minded army of separatists -- the Decepticons -- with Starscream at his side, and he plunged Cybertron into civil war, killing millions.
During the Battle of Tyger Pax, Autobot Bumblebee leads a team to hold back overwhelming odds whilst Prime attempts to launch the Allspark into space,
making a last-ditch attempt to prevent Megatron from claiming it, even at the cost of their civilization. Bumblebee loses his own voice-box in the
process, but the Allspark leaves Cybertron. A determined Megatron flies into space to find it, and Bumblebee volunteers to find it before he
does.[2]
Megatron, keeping a close psychic bond with the Allspark, soon locates it on Earth. Heating up during entry into the atmosphere, he crashes and sinks
under the Arctic ice sheets. The sudden temperature drop and loss of energon forces him into stasis-lock. In 1897, the National Arctic Circle
Expedition headed by Captain Archibald Witwicky discovers Megatron, and the human is promptly driven insane by the Transformer. At the Boston Secure
Hospital, the government takes great interest in his story and the Sector 7 group begin excavating Megatron, codenamed the "Mega-man". In 1902, the
Allspark is discovered to be in the Colorado River,[3] and by 1935, work begins on the Hoover Dam over it with plans to move Megatron there.[4]
I personally think these images are all hoaxes, and have since the first ones arrived on the scene. As I stated in the email I sent before I joined,
the coincidence that ILM is located at near bullseye to where the drones have been seen. (Thanks for spreading the info, Springer!) I am still
getting the hang of how all this works, but once I have I would like to share a hoax image I created that I would like anyone to "debunk" besides
the obvious, "thats the same exact ship!" I created it to illustrate that location and surroundings are major factors as to whether or not the
images "look real" . I am going to be looking in the faqs as to how do so, but if anyone would like to help, thats great... Unless that is against
the rules of ATS. I would be happy to embed a hoax watermark if needed. Let me know....
DocMoreau
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 9-6-2007 @ 07:58 PM by DocMoreau
|
Lex,
I apparently need more posts to respond to you. But know those are not my photos are not mine. DocMoreau is kinda my DJ name... but i am a more a
visual artist though. I maybe should have figured out a cooler name...
Let me know where I should send the "hoax" pic I made via u2u.
Thanks for inviting me to join ATS after I sent Springer that email about the Transformers game. And thanks to Springer and SimonGray for encoraging
me to get involved.
Moreau
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 12-6-2007 @ 11:54 PM by MoralThreat
|
I know I'm new to this thread, but I really think this is nothing more than a hoax and possibly viral marketing. The photos just look TOO good and
the craft keeps changing as new photos surface.
Does anyone know what happened to the account on Flickr? It was deleted by someone.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 13-6-2007 @ 02:16 PM by DocMoreau
|
Hey all, i created a thread to try to consoldate the Transformer Viral Campaign evidence into one place.
www.abovetopsecret.com...
unfortunately I am not super well versed in ATS... so we need your help, if interested.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 13-6-2007 @ 03:25 PM by Cydonian Priest
|
Originally posted by highCT
Originally posted by eaglewingz
Originally posted by RedStar11
Now, does everyone STILL think this is a photoshop masterpiece?
Actually, this was predicted.
Originally posted by groingrinder
This UFO is going to appear in more places than Matt Lauer.
...whomever made these must REALLY be dedicated.
Ever seen those forum hoaxes where one poster played multiple personalities and argued with him/herself for months?
Some people have WAY too much time on their hands.
[edit on 5/21/2007 by eaglewingz]
OR they are real. ever think of that one?
I am going to laugh when this dies out after the Transformers movie is released is theaters. You would probably believe the robots in it are real too.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 25-6-2007 @ 10:06 PM by Pairofnormals
|
Hi Guys and Gals! New member here! Just thought I would throw my 2 cents in on this drone issue. In my humble opinion it is a hoax. From the first
photo I saw it just rubbed me the wrong way. Now mind you, I am a VERY open minded person about UFOs, Bigfoot, Crop Circles etc. I am a "believer"
but I don't take things handed to me as fact. I like to read and learn more about the subjects I have interest in and then base my decisions on the
evidence available. This drone just bugs me. Maybe it just seems to look more and more ridiculous as more photos come to the surface.
Anyway, I have emailed Linda M. Howe a few times about my feelings on this object and I would feel pretty bad if she was taken for a ride on this. I
enjoy listening to her on Coast To Coast AM and to have her waste her time on a hoax just sucks. Even investigating potential hoaxes can give you
insight though.
One thing I wanted to mention was: (and sorry if this has come up) Let's say you did some CGI work and created this drone, and then you printed it
out on a his-res continuous-tone color printer, then you hung it on your wall maybe 7-10 feet away and then took a photo of it. Would this disguise
any of the "photoshopping" techniques? Could this be a way to make computer generated hoaxes look a bit more realisitic?
Just a thought!
Also, I thought this was an odd picture:
halo2snipers.com...
|
copyright & usage
|
|
AboveTopSecret.com is advertising supported.
|
reply posted on 25-6-2007 @ 10:46 PM by yuefo
|
Interesting idea about hanging a printout. The image translates: nyau! (japanese cat meow)
[edit on 6/25/2007 by yuefo]
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 26-6-2007 @ 09:49 PM by Pairofnormals
|
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 29-6-2007 @ 09:53 AM by Spec01
|
I'm convinced this is faked.
The graphic styles of the supposed 'plans' or whatever they are closely match whats considered trendy in graphic design today...
The probes and writing don't look at all 'alien' to me. They look like a cool thing some dude put together. All very human inspired... just my 2
cents.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 4-7-2007 @ 08:05 AM by olegkvasha
|
The thing that gets me about these claims is they are ALL still photos.. think about cameras and phones from the last 2-3 years maybe more. MOST
phones and cameras have the ability to record short video clips. Hell i brought a cheap £35 digi camera and even that came with a function to record
20 secs of video..
If I saw something like this i would take a quick photo and the rest would be shot on video.
Just my opinion though
Rich 
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 7-7-2007 @ 04:57 PM by KINGOFPAIN
|
ok... heres my problem with this whole drone thing...but before i start,i dont want anyone to think i'm trying to be a buzz-kill or anything,but the
pic's of the object in my opinion just look fake to me.. why?.. well being a 3-D artist working with programs like 3DSMAX this is very easy to
produce. but the one thing that stuck out to me about the objects pictures were the classic look of a 3Dmax render,light,color the whole feel... but
to give you an example of what i mean heres a few pic's of objects done in 3Dmax,along with a ship made in max and rendered composite style.
just my observations... i could be wrong... my point is... this can be done with just a few programs... very easy.
classic render look...
composite render:
HDRI render:
Drone:
just my thought.
[edit on 7-7-2007 by KINGOFPAIN]
[edit on 7-7-2007 by KINGOFPAIN]
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 7-7-2007 @ 05:39 PM by yeti101
|
that drone image looks like its been mirrored. You can tell the "alien" writing is inverted on the other side.
sloppy work from the hoaxer, a sure sign of a cgi render
|
copyright & usage
|
|
AboveTopSecret.com is advertising supported.
|
reply posted on 7-7-2007 @ 05:44 PM by PsykoOps
|
That proves nothing, the object might just have those texts like that.
[Edit] About those cgi examples above, none of them come even close to the quality of the caret pictures. That only serves to sway me to the opposite
direction of that argument.
[edit on 7/7/2007 by PsykoOps]
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 7-7-2007 @ 08:12 PM by KINGOFPAIN
|
dont get me wrong... i dont think we are alone either.. but the fact is CG work can produce that no problem.. and the pics i posted were just to show
you its easy to do.. but i can post a few more pics of CG work if you'd like,some you couldnt tell if they were real or not.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 8-7-2007 @ 09:44 PM by Luminal
|
Just take a look at this Ferrari, It´s made i 3D. Still looks so real.
Everything is possible nowdays.
[edit on 8/7/07 by Luminal]
|
copyright & usage
|
|
