Most likely CGI as no one else was looking into the sky.

Originally posted by Cydonian Priest
Most likely CGI as no one else was looking into the sky.

Theres so much that is illogical about that statement that I don't know where to start. First of all, theres no other people in the video to begin with. Its not as if people fill the streets every time a UFO appears, especially in cold ass Moscow. 2ndly, there very well could have been people looking at it from inside their houses or on some street out of view. 3rd, your logic would suggest that for a UFO video to be legit that people must be in the street looking at it. Thats totally ridiculous and unreasonable. The film only lasted for 44 seconds, its highly unlikely that very many people saw it at all.

I'm not saying this video isn't CGI, but just because there is no people in the road staring at it doesn't mean it is.

The phony video "tell".

Why is the camera being moved in that fashion? That's not normal, and in my judgment, is intended to add some kind of realism and authenticity into the shot.

Odd, unnecessary camera movements=the "tell".

[edit on 3-6-2007 by MrPenny]

Originally posted by MrPenny
The phony video "tell".

Why is the camera being moved in that fashion? That's not normal, and in my judgment, is intended to add some kind of realism and authenticity into the shot.

Odd, unnecessary camera movements=the "tell".

[edit on 3-6-2007 by MrPenny]

Some shaky camera movement is to be expected, because he is clearly not using a tripod. How much shaking is up for debate. But this cameraman does follow the object after it moves instead of before like in many fakes.

I'm not so sure that this indicates a fake, but rather just a show of how amateur the cameraman is.

[edit on 3-6-2007 by Vipassana]

Originally posted by Vipassana

Originally posted by Cydonian Priest
Most likely CGI as no one else was looking into the sky.

Theres so much that is illogical about that statement that I don't know where to start. First of all, theres no other people in the video to begin with. Its not as if people fill the streets every time a UFO appears, especially in cold ass Moscow. 2ndly, there very well could have been people looking at it from inside their houses or on some street out of view. 3rd, your logic would suggest that for a UFO video to be legit that people must be in the street looking at it. Thats totally ridiculous and unreasonable. The film only lasted for 44 seconds, its highly unlikely that very many people saw it at all.

I'm not saying this video isn't CGI, but just because there is no people in the road staring at it doesn't mean it is.

I believe that if this were real, this one person would have gotten more people to view the UFO, maybe even give the video to the news.

Originally posted by Cydonian Priest

I'm not saying this video isn't CGI, but just because there is no people in the road staring at it doesn't mean it is.

I believe that if this were real, this one person would have gotten more people to view the UFO, maybe even give the video to the news.

You do realize the news in Russia is state controlled right, also that it could have been on the news without us knowing? Keep in mind this was just posted on youtube today. Also, if you see that in the sky you get your camera as fast as possible, not grab people out of nowhere to look at it.

They seem pretty subdued throughout the clip for seeing a rare UFO...not that they need to put on the "jacked up on mountain dew" act, but these guys sound unimpressed by their UFO sighting.

I'd like to know what the last words were before the clip ends. If he says something like "it's gone now", then I say fake since any other person wouldn't have given up at that point. I would of been running down the street to get to the other side of the building to keep filming...I have a hard time believing anyone would just stop filming because it goes behind a building.

Originally posted by Atomic
They seem pretty subdued throughout the clip for seeing a rare UFO...not that they need to put on the "jacked up on mountain dew" act, but these guys sound unimpressed by their UFO sighting.

I'd like to know what the last words were before the clip ends. If he says something like "it's gone now", then I say fake since any other person wouldn't have given up at that point. I would of been running down the street to get to the other side of the building to keep filming...I have a hard time believing anyone would just stop filming because it goes behind a building.

Finally, A legitimate argument. This may be true, depending on the context of the situation. There may have been no room to run down the street.

Congrats on the video Vipassana. I for one think this is a fantastic find. I have heard no one disprove the video itself based on analysis of the images. I don't think we can realistically disprove it on the basis of camera movement or the lack of emotion expressed or whether he should have run down the street after it. For all we know, he thought it was an interesting blimp and only later did someone put it on the web. Russians are pretty stoic people, not prone to emotion over things like this. People on ATS are always saying "take a video, get it into focus"....perhaps they did on this occasion. It does look a lot like the O'Hare UFO and those horizontal movements are not those of a blimp. I would love to hear from a CGI expert on what deconstructing the images reveals.


[edit on 4-6-2007 by j_kalin]

Well it is a shame that the object is too low because it could be something hanging on clothelines or something between the buildings. Looks like a shirt or a plastic bag moving in the wind. It's hard to tell for sure. Doesn't really look like any type of aircraft if it is real...


[edit on 4-6-2007 by Diplomat]

Ok I will confess. This is a spacecraft from planet XC12. I actually live there. We wanted to visit the earth and meet some friends in Moscow. I am the pilot of this spacedraft. Oh, if you want to know why I made those two sharp move to left and right, because my wife were in a deep sleep and I wanted to wake her up. Thank you for your interest.

Originally posted by Vipassana

Originally posted by Cydonian Priest

I'm not saying this video isn't CGI, but just because there is no people in the road staring at it doesn't mean it is.

I believe that if this were real, this one person would have gotten more people to view the UFO, maybe even give the video to the news.

You do realize the news in Russia is state controlled right, also that it could have been on the news without us knowing? Keep in mind this was just posted on youtube today. Also, if you see that in the sky you get your camera as fast as possible, not grab people out of nowhere to look at it.

Im affraid I dont have a camera so I would grab as many people as possible, plus this guy isn't to excited about what he is seeing here. To me the only CGI part that sticks out is when it moves, it just looks unreal but after all it is a supposed ufo so who knows....I say it's fake, though the CGI is good.

[edit on 4-6-2007 by Cydonian Priest]

They way it is filmed tells me that its fake. Unnecessary movements, no attempt to zoom in or follow the object and purposeless movements of the object also indicate its an easy fake.

Any object of this size, so low in the sky would have caused a big panic in the city. I can't believe that no one except this utuber saw it.

the object also exhibits some very strange movements that few man made objects can do.

Uhmm... Where?

I have to agree with the general consensus (even though I seriously do not want too) that this video is yet another (allegorical) b*****d child of someone out to get a little fame and the dreaded b*t*c that is Photoshop.

Every single one of these vids are the same. The cameraman/woman stands neatly to attention, aims, takes as much footage as possible before the 'UFO' slides conveniently behind the nearest solid object, theeeeen CUT!
Thanks everyone, that's a wrap.

I absolutley agree with Atomic; if I'd caught such a clear shot, there's no way on earth that I'd let it out of my sight! Why do they always let these objects go after a minute or so? Do they get bored? (Or is it to do with the fact that they can't be bothered to sit infront of their computers, animating a little grey blob any longer than they have to?)

Come on guys! If you're filming a strange ariel structure flying with impunity through your country's sovereign air space, wouldn't you want to get as much of it on film as possible? Or even if you weren't interested in the defense of the realm, what about the fact that you are seeing something seriously odd? Is your normal life really that all-encompassing that there's no room for excitement, or you don't feel the need to know what the potential alien craft/unknown organism/manifestation of the earth's tectonic plates sliding against each other floating above your hood is? Where's the sense of urgency in these videos? Where's the feeling of viewing something truly unusual? All I get from them (and if you watch the obvious CGIed vids, the camera work is always the same because they're all following a formula of how they think a sighting should be captured), is a passing interest.

'Oh look, something vaguely anomalous in the sky. I know; I'll capture some lacklustre footage, let it fly away so I can't get any shots from right underneath or any engine or exhast vents it may have, then post it straight away on the worlds biggest video site. What's for tea, mum?'

This fad for filming, and the subsequent discussions, of CGIed 'Ufauxs' is clogging the arteries at the heart of serious research. But heck, even though I hate them, here I am discussing one.
Do I think its a real vid? No.
We've seen it before it many other guises, and we'll see it time and time again.

What the danger here is, is that those lucky enough to have captured real, genuine footage may find themselves reluctant to release it into the public domain. If all they're going to get is accusations of digital manipulation, fraud and cheap thrill seeking by seeing your 'work' discussed on the biggest conspiracy site in the world, well, I won't blame them.

I like how everyone is coming to the conclusion that this is CGI simply based on the behavior of the camera man instead of film analysis. You guys were not there so there is no way for you to know the feelings and thoughts of this man, let alone how he "should" of acted. People from different countries do things differently.

With that said, I agree that behavior is potentially abnormal, but this isn't proof of a fake. Does anyone have any sort of film analysis to help proove that this is CGI? I'm not satisfied with behavior evaluations of someone we have never met. And please dont say "you have to proove its real, not us proove its fake"

I dont have an opinion either way, I just want some legitimate discussion about the integrity of the film, and not the actions of the camera man.

Originally posted by Vipassana
I just want some legitimate discussion about the integrity of the film, and not the actions of the camera man.

How is that done? Considering that the film only exists because of the actions of the camera man. No camera, no man,....no film.

The bizarre movements of the camera are enough to consign this video to the trash bin. I've used small hand held video cameras. It is not difficult to maintain a relatively stable image. What we see in this video is a camera technique used to convey a sense of heightened reality. We see it constantly in cinema when the director wants some informality to the scenes.

See: The Blair Witch Project.

Try it yourself.

[edit on 6-6-2007 by MrPenny]

the object also exhibits some very strange movements that few man made objects can do.

It moved to the left and the right a couple of times, in a perfectly horizontal direction and rather slowly. The movements don't appear to be purposeful, which lends them a rather fake aura, but they certainly are not strange or beyond what a man made object could do.

Russians are a stoic people.

You've not read "The Russians" by Hedrick Smith, have you? It's been called 'an exploration of the Russian soul.' I'm not altogether positive, but I just don't think Smith would agree with you.

Bad fake. The artist did'nt track the CGI ship into the moving camera frame very well, which causes it to 'slide' against the background..a real object in a scene just does'nt do this even when its moving.