[HOAX] Haiti UFO Video - YouTube - [HOAX]

it seems we have same trees in dominican republic and haiti but different scenery configuration.


link



mod edit: oversized picture to link

[edit on 2007/8/11 by Hellmutt]

Saying it's hoax because it's not on the news is not a clever statement.

There have been so many UFO incidents with extremely credible witnesses etc that have been either ridiculed or ignored by major news media.

Newsreporters might believe in UFO's but they don't want to take the risk being ridiculed.

Anyway, this thread just proves that debunking is getting more and more impossible.

I mean if those palms had not looked similar and there would not have been that odd light or whatever, had this been called the real thing?

Probably not.

[edit on 11-8-2007 by Shades1035]

sry mistake dbl post .. real post lower with evidence!!



[edit on 11-8-2007 by Quantum_Squirrel]

nice find, i bet all those who thought it was real feel pretty stupid now.

People, please have some common sense. The lighting, shadows and other characteristics are totally bizarre for a normal video recording.

The greyish looking ufo in the pic below, taken from one of the videos, looks simply ridicule.

Clear fake.

Originally posted by Orion437
Theres is a gigantic and bizarre anomaly with the sun and the "shadow blackness" of the "craft" and the the palm trees. (sorry,can´t find better words in english).

Loook at this cap:

The shadow of the supossedly craft looks almost ridicule,compared with the palm´s trees shadow. It looks more soft, greyish, and a shadow of such a solid object should look very black.

Also, the craft and the palm tree seem to be very close. Butthe tone and the strenght of the black color of the shadow it´s totally different !!! It´s bizarre and doesn´t make any sense at all.

I say fake.

Sorry for my english.

i agree with you, but today with bitcomet, some one could get maya, 3ds max, avid xsi & all the software to make this for free, the same person may be out of work making lots of time to make such a project for nothing. making the trees blow around after the craft is easy in maya, every thing in that scene could be done in maya. is it happening in low light to make it harder to see the animated parts ?. in my opinion the hardest part of the animation is the light, wich also gives it that authentic look !. also there is nothing in haiti news about it, there seems to be no witnesses, in fact the only thing that supports this haiti ufo as real is this one bit of film. & to finnish of the ufo over paris, looks like its made by the same person wich also has no supporting evidence.
if you bother to learn maya you too could animate this on your home pc !

ok i am gonna go for a smoking gun post here boys and girls ...

There is a copy of this footage on break .com

it is 1 second longer than the footage posted here!!!!!

it has a logo of a video!!! transcoding and rendering company !! damn i wish i had a drag and capture program to post it

but check it out its in the 23rd second of the footage!!!

FOOTAGE



here is the company's logo at the end of the 23!! second video





may be this is evidence of hoax!!

does anyone know of this company maye its software used to manipulate the file before uploading ..but if its innocent why chop it off?



[edit on 11-8-2007 by Quantum_Squirrel]

Too bad that was posted a day after the original. I might have believed it if it were posted BEFORE the YouTube. It's not hard to download a YouTube clip and add a logo at the end.

What's happening everyone...

This is the first time I've ever been to this forum. And the reason I stumbled upon it, was because of the Haiti UFO video.

After reading all the posts in this thread (up until about the 10th or so page, then skipping to the last couple pages) I'm going to add my two cents.

This video is definitely a product of CGI. Admittedly, a quality produced one, but still CGI nonetheless.

I do some work as an audio engineer for the entertainment industry. And I have, and still do work with plenty of engineers that are on the visual side of things. I've seen a widespread spectrum of CGI visual effects being created.

And from what knowledge I have - Which I'm not saying is enough to make me a CGI expert, but based on things I have actually witnessed first hand, this could definitely be done by someone in their home.

Granted, that person would have to have a really good system to do it. It still wouldn't be the type of money that most people seem to be thinking it would take.

All you would need is a full blown Mac, some legit software, and the rest would just be about having the skills, good eye, good elbow, patience, etc.

I've seen a lot of various material that people have submitted (that are trying to get work in the industry) with stuff easily as good as this. And most of them are young college kids too (for those who think this could only be done by some high-profile employee of Steven Spielberg or whatever).

Aside, from the other factors that other people have already made - There are some things that I see from the video, that are tell-tale signs to me.

If someone wanted to create a video of this nature, there are a few things that would make the process a lot easier. As well as, help to mask various things.

For one, basically everything in this video, makes for almost a perfect setting, to create a video like this (clear sky, objects for point of reference, distant mountain range, etc.).

The sky is essentially clear - Which makes for an optimum backdrop to edit against. In this case, the clear sky is almost serving the same purpose as a "green screen".

For the record, "Yes" there are a couple of clouds at the very beginning and ending, but they're way too far off in the distance to pose any editing problems.

If there had been any cloud coverage overhead, it would create way too many overlays between the UFO and the clouds. Which would not only make the editing way more harder to do, but it would open too many windows of potential inconsistencies. And the clouds would be mentioned as the giveaway, just as much as the palm trees are.

The time of day is also fairly optimum as well. Good enough light to see, but not bright enough to create editing issues (like with the palm trees).

Which speaking of the palm trees - They make for good props that serve excellent purposes.

In this case, they're good cover up objects (especially being at dusk, they almost appear black). They're also used to help make the whole video appear to be more believable, by offering some points of reference, and depth perception.

If you saw this same video without any palm trees (or water tower), against the same clear sky, it would immediately look a lot less realistic, because you wouldn't have anything to gauge the UFO's distance, or remotely guess how big they might be.

It'd be like, "Aaah the good ol' toy on a fishing line across a bedsheet trick huh".

Also, if the time of day, was earlier in the afternoon (and brighter), then editing the UFO's from behind the palm trees would be a lot harder to do. If not, just too hard to make look believable.

But being that it's dusk, and from the camera's view, the underneath of the trees are almost black, it's like car headlights coming out of a tunnel. Much easier to create, and more importantly, it can be made to look a lot less suspect.

As far as the UFO's themselves - If they would have made them a stereotypical shape (disc or saucer like) it would create very evident "hardlines" against that clear sky. In turn, making the UFOs look very superimposed and less realistic (like the first wide UFO in the Dominican Republic video). Especially, when making them appear to pass overhead, somewhat close to the ground.

But making them look almost hairy-like with a lot of antenna looking things, this is not only a good way to prevent from having any hardlines, but it also gives a good reason to blur around it. That way you'll be less suspect, at any point, to question their clarity.

I can go on about that type of stuff, but I'll move on to other factors.

Plus, that's more than enough factors already, for it to all be coincedence.

Outside of the visuals, the most obvious other element is the audio. And if this video was legit, the waveform for the audio track would prove this.

If you were to extract the audio track from the raw video, and looked at the waveform from a visual perspective (spectral, phase or frequency analysis, etc.) it would reveal certain frequency characteristics and continuity.

But if the audio track was produced (meaning the video was fake), it's more than likely, you'd be able to tell if there were overdubs, if it was cut n' pasted, etc.

Before this post gets any longer, I'm going to stop and continue some more thoughts in another post. Just to keep this one from been too long of a read.

Like I mentioned above, I read only about the first 10 pages of this thread, so if any of this has already been covered, I apologize.

To be continued...

Even though I think this video is fake, I don't think that logo is a smoking gun.

First of all, it doesn't say 'rendering' it says 'proxying'. The whole frase is 'a digital video transcoding and proxying technology'.

Transcoding is the direct digital-to-digital conversion from one (usually lossy) codec to another. It involves decoding/decompressing the original data to a raw intermediate format (i.e. PCM for audio or YUV for video), in a way that mimics standard playback of the lossy content, and then re-encoding this into the target format.

from wikipedia's Transcode entry.


My guess is that the person that uploaded this video probably got the video from Youtube and since it comes in FLV (flash video) from Youtube he had to convert it to other format in order to upload it to break.

What file types do you accept?

We accept most video and image formats. The list includes wmv, avi, mpg, mov, jpg, bmp, png.

from break.com's help/faq page.


So this logo at the end was added by the program this guy used to convert it to a format that break.com would accept.

I don't recognize the logo though.

[edit on 11-8-2007 by danx]

While i find it pretty strange, that you get no direct google hit for the term "a digital video transcoding and proxying technology", it's got nothing to do with rendering afaik. I guess, the letters are BKII, but can't find anything related to that either.

Good vid nonetheless, but i'll leave my bet on hoax.

Originally posted by 11 11
I had to make the evidence to a video and move its location...

media.putfile.com...


The small video clip above shows the UFO behind and in front of the tree at the same time which is physicaly impossible. If you focus on the tree itself where the UFO passes, you will see unnatural tree morphing that is most likely a mistake during the production of this CGI/Real hybrid movie.

[edit on 11-8-2007 by 11 11]

Isn't the other light simply the other ufo? I also couldn't see this 'morphing' you mentioned..... Hard as I tried. I'm not saying it's real - I'm simply trying to see what you are pointing out.

J.

Originally posted by danx
My guess is that the person that uploaded this video probably got the video from Youtube and since it comes in FLV (flash video) from Youtube he had to convert it to other format in order to upload it to break.

good point man thats why at the end of my post i asked if anyone knew if break used it to transcode before displayin ..

i have also tried to search the company with no luck at all ( to see if its linked with movie making etc)

has anyone seen this logo before? is it converting software?

i couldnt read the second word

if they did rip it from you tube then its a sweet program it looks better on break in my opinion.

remember i never at any point state this is a hoax just it maybe , i like everyone else am just researching and trying to contribute to the authenticity of the video to the best of my meager abilities



[edit on 11-8-2007 by Quantum_Squirrel]

Originally posted by Phil J. Fry
While i find it pretty strange, that you get no direct google hit for the term "a digital video transcoding and proxying technology", it's got nothing to do with rendering afaik.

Actually I got 5 hits on Google, but they are all to the some page on Yahoo! Answers, that no longer exists.

I guess, the letters are BKII, but can't find anything related to that either.

BKII? I see a WXII or WKII or maybe the last character isn't really a II but it's a H. I don't know..

Hopefully someone will recognize the logo.

Well, what if a video is real but the same thing could be also be done with CGI.

Just saying "this can be done with this program or that program" is no real evidence. As technology gets better most things can be done in CGI I guess. It just gets harder and harder to tell what's real and not.

So far the main hoax theory with similar looking palms, but then someone posted images that palms can indeed look very much alike. And, I agree why make a good video and copy & paste such an obvious thing.

As someone pointed out, it would be easier to just take an actual video of a beach with actual REAL palms and then only make the UFO cgi.

i have done a extensive search of the logo .. it is not a common used video converting software i can say that much hopefully someone will recognise it .

u see if i was trying to 'break' into the buisness this is EXACTLY how i would do it ..

first post footage to generate intrest .. next day footage with strange logo on end , (company) .. maybe in a few days we will see longer versions posted with website addresses as these guys try to make it to the big time

someone mail the youtube poster to upload a video of the same beach without ufo's :p

[edit on 11-8-2007 by Shades1035]

QUOTE:'The UFO in this one looks like the oval shaped one in the Dominican Republic one, and this one isn't faked.... too many on-the-street participants.'

Hmmm..and I thought this one was an established fake? Now I AM confused!

J.

BKII? I see a WXII or WKII or maybe the last character isn't really a II but it's a H. I don't know.

Also possible, i just thought it might be kyrillic, therefor the "B"

Ok I found what the logo is. It's actually VIXII

"THE VIXIIit is a service of conversion of archives of video of FLV, the type of video that appears in the YouTube for example, in other formats as the Divx, MOV or mp4. Then if vc to want to save aqule interesting video that vc found in the YouTube, are enough to catch link (URL) of this video that the VIXII go to make the conversion and to order the archive to you in the format that vc to choose. I already caught some videos of the DoCopenhagen that In them postou a few days ago. Pra who likes them videos that people place here in blog can be legal."


Link




[edit on 11-8-2007 by Skush]

[edit on 11-8-2007 by Skush]


[Mod Edit: Link Format. - Jak]

[edit on 11/8/07 by JAK]