It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

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

page: 64
61
<< 61  62  63    65  66  67 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 13 2007 @ 10:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by danx
That was never at stake. I don't remember anyone here saying that UFOs aren't real. Even the people that right from the start said the video was fake. I sure didn't say it, on the contrary.


Exactly correct. I was never debating the existance of UFO's, I was debating the video and images provided. I want the truth of UFO's to be known, I also want to protect the truth from being crapped on with hoaxs.




posted on Aug, 13 2007 @ 10:54 PM
link   
Wow, thanks to Leigh Scott and Welcome! Someone with verifiable credentials lends some expert testimony to this thread. Your keen observations and background clearly make you perhaps the most credible person to come forward on this. We are grateful.

I would like to show a quick review of a common observation regarding the Haiti Video from most recent back:


Leigh Scott

The camera movement and focus whiffs are too dirty and realistic to be generated 100% in a CGI environment. CGI camera moves have a certain look to them, even when they are trying to mimic handheld shots.
From a credible source with numerous film and tv credits.



Jakzun37

i've been trying to explain to people who don't use it that it looks different than an out of focus camera i have every 3D and video editing platform on the market they all use 'canned' filters for various fx….I am the one who said it couldn't be done to look the way it looks in the video and i stand by it…..none of the examples blur the way the camera blurs when it zooms in and out - they just don't
From someone who like it or not, had his privacy invaded by someone on this forum. Nonetheless, someone with extensive experience.


Kinda Kurious

I too have problems with the video for the very same reason he (Jaksun37) does. The focus. It is simply not "organic". It is hard to put into words. …..as stated before, I have extensive video post experience. Nearly 30 years. Not in 3D or Effects per-se, but in editing.

Yours truly. I would be glad to U2U anyone who would like a link to the video post company which I own to verify my background. Just don't want my privacy invaded like was done to Jakzun37.

So bottom line, there continues to be an issue with the natural and organic look and feel of the Haiti video to be totally CGI. Now we are to believe ( fingers crossed) that someone is going to verify it's origin and yield insight on how it was created. We will wait until Friday.

Again, Welcome Leigh. You have joined a rather fiesty thread on ATS. Looks like you jumped right in the deep end and effortlessly doing the back-stroke. Kudos.

regards...kk

[edit on 13-8-2007 by kinda kurious]



posted on Aug, 13 2007 @ 10:58 PM
link   
Thanks for your post Leigh! I too have mis-giving's about it the fact he said it took 2 years..is way way too long for a mere 30 seconds even part time, the scene isn't THAT complex is it?


Originally posted by Leigh Scott
I've been fascinated by this video since I first saw it over the weekend. I have to say that I am unimpressed by the person claiming to be part of the hoax. I'm not sure why he is being taken so seriously without real evidence. The real evidence that would sell me is the original "background" plate that the CGI elements were put into (in other words, the famous shots or shots without any UFOs).



[edit on 13-8-2007 by wildone106]



posted on Aug, 13 2007 @ 10:59 PM
link   
Proving Disproof

Although the thread is tagged as a hoax (primarily to avoid ATS being used as a means of propagating hoaxes, see Serpo), all members are free and encouraged to draw their own conclusions regarding the nature and veracity of the videos.

Speaking as a member and not as moderator, I want to share some of my own observations and opinions on all this, which of course other members are free to agree or disagree with as they may.

1. I think the evidence points overwhelmingly to a hoax in this case. Of course I could be wrong, and as with everything else, I try to keep an open mind, because God knows I've been wrong plenty of times in my life.


2. Considering this footage to be artificial does NOT mean dismissing all videos of UFO phenomena as hoaxes. Just this set of videos.

3. ItHasToEnd has not provided proof of direct involvement with the making of these videos. Without that, I suggest maintaining healthy skepticism about those and any unsubstantiated claims made by anyone.

4. There still remains a great deal of mystery surrounding the production of these videos and the motives behind them. Most assumptions about them will probably prove wrong.

In this as in all cases, I want to emphasize that whatever you wish to believe is entirely up to you to decide, and I wouldn't want anyone to feel otherwise.

Alien Evaders

As for the broader questions events like these raise, based on what little I know about the universe, I find it extremely unlikely that this is the only planet on which life exists.

In fact, I suspect what could be considered "life" in the universe is probably far more vast and varied than any of us can imagine. A lot more.

Regarding the question of whether there are "aliens among us", that's a little sketchier.

I consider it quite possible that beings with superior technology could be operating on Earth, and that such beings might well be able to do so without being proven to be here for many good reasons. Not least among them the natural human tendency to dismiss evidence that doesn't fit our preconceptions as "fantasy" or "imagination".

The truth surrounds all of us, though it is only accessible to us if we can know and accept it when we see it.

To that end, I recommend keeping an open mind, and always remembering that any and all of us can be wrong.

With an investment of time and patience, however, the truth tends to eventually emerge.








P.S. And remember: if you want to discuss videos other than the Haiti/Dominican Republic videos that are the topic of this thread, please start a new thread for them.


P.P.S. Oh and hey, if that's the real Leigh Scott, welcome to ATS!


[edit on 8/13/2007 by Majic]



posted on Aug, 13 2007 @ 11:39 PM
link   
*comes back into topic, seeing it exploding more*

I agree with kinda kurious. Don't we have enough discussions going on right now? newkid, I advise you to just make a new topic.

Getting off the tangent, have we contacted barzolff814 or ladave1969 (the two who put up the videos on YouTube)? I notice that barzolff814 is on YouTube frequently (and his video has over one million views, grr). Have these two admitted to putting up this hoax, or has nobody been able to reach them?

[edit on 8/13/2007 by SonicInfinity]



posted on Aug, 14 2007 @ 12:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by SonicInfinity
*comes back into topic, seeing it exploding more*

I agree with kinda kurious. Don't we have enough discussions going on right now? newkid, I advise you to just make a new topic.

Getting off the tangent, have we contacted barzolff814 or ladave1969 (the two who put up the videos on YouTube)? I notice that barzolff814 is on YouTube frequently (and his video has over one million views, grr). Have these two admitted to putting up this hoax, or has nobody been able to reach them?

[edit on 8/13/2007 by SonicInfinity]


Thus far, the only person (purportedly) to have had any contact with any of these supposed video makers, was 'ItHasToEnd', who, as you may know, a short while ago, posted up a screenshot of a message which was allegedly sent to him by Barzolff814, via Youtube. Frustratingly, the thing was removed (by the poster) after only about a minute, though we did read within the message that "Barzolff814" wanted to "Let it run for just abit longer", whilst also claiming that "..they haven't worked everything out just yet."

The alleged message ended with the words: "This Isn't over with, not by a long shot."

[edit on 14-8-2007 by Brad.T]



posted on Aug, 14 2007 @ 12:26 AM
link   
What? No one knows how to raid their browser cache around here?



Click on image for full-sized version

Original image URL: home.comcast.net...




(Mod edit: Hosted a copy of the image on ImageShack and used a large "thumbnail" to keep from sporking the page formatting. --Majic)

[edit on 8/14/2007 by Majic]



posted on Aug, 14 2007 @ 12:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by Leigh Scott
I've been fascinated by this video since I first saw it over the weekend. I have to say that I am unimpressed by the person claiming to be part of the hoax. I'm not sure why he is being taken so seriously without real evidence. The real evidence that would sell me is the original "background" plate that the CGI elements were put into (in other words, the famous shots or shots without any UFOs).


Leigh Scott
www.imdb.com...


Hi Leigh and welcome to AboveTopSecret.com.

Why would you be unimpressed with ItHasToEnd before Friday?

I asked for and have been promised exactly the evidence you mention, ItHasToEnd has promised I will have it all by Friday.

Until then there isn't much to talk about in that regard, either (s)he will produce or (s)he won't. The only thing I am personally impressed by at this point is his/her willingness to set a deadline, most hoaxers never do this because it's a guaranteed end to their hoax if they can't produce.

We'll see...


Springer...

edit to add: (NOT directed at Leigh) I've done some off topic housekeeping in this thread, I really don't want to waste anymore time doing more, so PLEASE stay on TOPIC.




[edit on 8-14-2007 by Springer]



posted on Aug, 14 2007 @ 01:05 AM
link   
"Sporking", Majic? You,? Our most angelic mod?!!



[edit on 14-8-2007 by Tuning Spork]



posted on Aug, 14 2007 @ 01:32 AM
link   
Mankind's Greatest Invention


Originally posted by Tuning Spork
"Sporking", Majic? You,? Our most angelic mod?!!

Sorry, no offense intended.



posted on Aug, 14 2007 @ 01:38 AM
link   
Thanks for the welcomes. Yes, it really is me. If I were a faker, I'm sure I would choose someone with a more distinguished resume.

I'll try and give an example of the palm trees tomorrow. Like I said, I don't doubt they used Vue (for a reason I will explain in a second) but don't think it's a smoking gun per se.

I'm having a hard time with the two years thing too. I would say this is a three month or so operation with a team of people working part time. Additionally, the specific technology that was most likely used wasn't around two years ago, so they would have had to start and then change workflow as the project progressed. Here's what I mean.

First off, the camera used. Highly compressed formats like DV and HDV have been around for years. However, high end compositing software can't get around compression artifacts that pop up when you try and manipulate lower res formats. This would lead me to believe that it was shot in some format with less compression like HD or DVC Pro 50. Now, the movement of the camera in the video suggests that it is a small camera. That would rule out the Sony F-900 (which is what we use in Hollywood and what Lucas shot Star Wars on). I suspect it was shot on a Panasonic HVX-200 which is small but records in HD without a lot of compression. This would allow the artists maximum flexibility to create really seamless composites. The HVX-200 wasn't around two years ago, and became readily available around the summer of 2006.

Secondly, the latest version of Vue which has photo real capabilities wasn't released until about a year ago. They've made a really big push into the market over the last few months. While I don't believe the entire image was created in the virtual world, it would make sense to me that they would use Vue for a portion of the shot. There may have been objects in the second half of the shot that spoiled it, but provided them with good "tracking markers". Once the shot was tracked, they could paint out the other objects and replace them with Vue architecture. If you look at the first part of the shot, the palm trees (especially the ones in the distance) are very different from each other. If they took the time to tweak those so they looked different, they would have changed them all, so no one could recognize the similarities (although I still don't see this as being definitive).

Lastly, I don't buy that this wasn't intended as a promo for something or as an elaborate hoax. A bunch of artists with a pet project would do something much more sexy if they were just going to show off for each other and their friends. My friends who do this stuff create little cartoons or dramatic space battles, not examples of seamless compositing and rotoscoping. This was conceived as a hoax from day one or these guys were paid in excess of $150,000 by someone to create this as a marketing tool, commercial etc.

Thanks for giving me a place to talk about this. All of my friends are sick of hearing me talk about it!



posted on Aug, 14 2007 @ 01:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by Leigh Scott
I'll try and give an example of the palm trees tomorrow. Like I said, I don't doubt they used Vue (for a reason I will explain in a second) but don't think it's a smoking gun per se.


So you think they used Vue, but its not the smoking gun for the entire hoax? Wouldn't using Vue classify this as CGI? I believe it would.



posted on Aug, 14 2007 @ 01:50 AM
link   
Leigh:

I actually agree with everything you just typed. I don't see the two years either, but that could be the total time from talking about it for a year to actually doing something and getting started 9 months ago.
We all know how those operations go.

I also believe this was either a BRILLIANT Viral Marketing Campaign for Eon by Eon or it's as "ItHasToStop" says which I should have proof of by Friday if (s)he is genuine.

Another thought I had is that "IHTS" is a contractor for Eon and the youtube poster is an Eon employee unbeknown to "IHTS", (s)he did mention most of the members of this group have never met, who explaining that there will be consequences if "IHTS" spills the beans, such consequences being no more work.

The possibilities are quite endless and hopefully we will have a better understanding by Friday.

I have to say that the youtube private message is pristine and if faked, was some considerable work for a couple hours attention on ATS.

mark...


[edit on 8-14-2007 by Springer]



posted on Aug, 14 2007 @ 01:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by Leigh Scott
Thanks for giving me a place to talk about this. All of my friends are sick of hearing me talk about it!


That's what more friends are for.



posted on Aug, 14 2007 @ 02:16 AM
link   
I've just been really frustrated by how quick everyone has jumped against this being authentic with little experience or expertise in the field of filmmaking or computer graphics. It's not that I believe that this is real, it's just that I didn't think the whole cut and past palm tree and vue references were enough to debunk this. The fact is, hopefully, one day someone will come out with something so incredible that it proves the existence of some of this stuff (which I do believe in). The problem is that everyone will jump on it and disprove it with sketchy logic and inexperience etc. So, no, my point is that the "cloned palm trees" and the vue demo alone are not enough to prove without a doubt that this is a hoax. Yet, once that little palm tree video went live, everyone seemed to turn their back on the whole thing. With low res images and the actual shape of palm trees, you could do the same thing with tons of other videos and photos whose validity isn't in question. Similarly, the screenshot from the vue demo is not the same as the background used in the video. It's close, but not exactly the same. Vue has a million different options and parameters to customize the image. Anyone who could create those highly detailed models and perfectly composite them in would know how to tweak the background.

I am more interested in debunking this alleged hoaxer. I didn't see where (s)he said they were going to provide the background plate. I thought they were going to provide us with the models, which IS NOT PROOF in my book by a long shot. In three or four days a moderately skilled modeler could create simple models to show us. The background plate in its original format is the real smoking gun.

And am I the only one who thinks that the hoaxer's syntax is a bit odd. The youtube email also has a similar syntax. And why if this is a co-worker, would you correspond through youtube? Wouldn't you have a personal email? Isn't it too convenient that it's in a format that we all would recognize (ie. the video poster's youtube handle)

I do recall old stories of the MEN IN BLACK talking strangely...



posted on Aug, 14 2007 @ 02:34 AM
link   
Seriously Leigh Scott, if that IS you, I highly suggest you read this entire thread from start to finish. You actaully are only mentioning a FEW flaws with these CGI rendered videos, when there is actually 10 or more flaws in them, each.

You still haven't described your opinion on the cartoon red pickup truck in the video either. This truck, although may appear real?, looks like a cartoon truck, and measuring that truck height with surrounding trees I can pretty much say this truck is NOT to scale. Its fake.

We aren't debating the existance of UFO's, and we are not debating the exact method used to create these videos (because there are many methods). We are debating wether or not any type of computer graphics have been used in these videos. If they have, then its safe to say these videos are fakes, and this entire thing is a hoax.

If its not any more clear then that, then God help us.



posted on Aug, 14 2007 @ 02:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by Leigh Scott
I've just been really frustrated by how quick everyone has jumped against this being authentic with little experience or expertise in the field of filmmaking or computer graphics.


Well... several pages back, on Friday, I caught some unusual flack from several members for labeling these videos a hoax, based on my combined UFO experience with the Mutual UFO Network, and having produced 3D entertainment CD-ROM's back in the day when there were no "stock models," everything needed to be created from scratch.
Post on page 27

Lacking the time to "duke it out" in the thread over the "hoax" label, I readjusted to the thread title to read, "possible hoax."

Before focusing full-time to ATS, my previous work involved lots of 3D software... from doing it myself, to managing those who do. (Among several other digital artsy-fartsy things)



posted on Aug, 14 2007 @ 02:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by 11 11
You still haven't described your opinion on the cartoon red pickup truck in the video either.

I'm not convinced it's really a truck. The video compression is heavy in that area and the contrast is so low, it's impossible to know what it really is.



posted on Aug, 14 2007 @ 02:53 AM
link   
Whew! 11 11. So angry!

My point is simple. Regardless of what evidence or hypotheses you present, none of it is proof positive as to how or what was actually done. As someone who watches VFX and stares at photographed images all day for a living, this video blew me away. Cartoon trucks? Water towers off turbo squid? I don't care.

Clearly, this video is of a high enough quality that it has a lot of people excited and a lot of us in the field intrigued. So, bring me EVIDENCE that it is a hoax before telling everyone that they are ignorant for not closing the thread and accepting that it's fake.

What will you say if the hoaxer on Friday lays out the entire project and vue was never used and the "cartoon" truck was actually a real 1972 Ford pickup sitting in the background?

Investigation is just that. Getting to the bottom of things. Finding proof. That's what we're all looking for in terms of the paranormal, so let's expect the same criteria from the skeptics and debunkers. Odds are its fake. Now lets find out the whos, whats, whens, wheres, and whys!



posted on Aug, 14 2007 @ 03:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by Leigh Scott

What will you say if the hoaxer on Friday lays out the entire project and vue was never used and the "cartoon" truck was actually a real 1972 Ford pickup sitting in the background?


Actually, you are wrong, if it was a Ford it would have to be 1960 and below. I believe it might be a 1940 Chevy though..

www.stovebolt.com...

..only because it has an mini oval rear window.



new topics

top topics



 
61
<< 61  62  63    65  66  67 >>

log in

join