|
reply posted on 13-8-2007 @ 10:49 PM by 11 11
|
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.
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 13-8-2007 @ 10:54 PM by kinda kurious
|

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]
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 13-8-2007 @ 10:58 PM by wildone106
|
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]
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 13-8-2007 @ 10:59 PM by Majic
|

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]
|
copyright & usage
|
|
AboveTopSecret.com is advertising supported.
|
reply posted on 13-8-2007 @ 11:39 PM 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]
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 14-8-2007 @ 12:12 AM by Brad.T
|
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]
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 14-8-2007 @ 12:26 AM by IAttackPeople
|
       
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]
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 14-8-2007 @ 12:33 AM by Springer
|

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]
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 14-8-2007 @ 01:05 AM by Tuning Spork
|
"Sporking", Majic? You,? Our most angelic mod?!!
[edit on 14-8-2007 by Tuning Spork]
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 14-8-2007 @ 01:32 AM by Majic
|
Mankind's Greatest Invention
Originally posted by Tuning Spork
"Sporking", Majic? You,? Our most angelic mod?!!
Sorry, no offense intended.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
AboveTopSecret.com is advertising supported.
|
reply posted on 14-8-2007 @ 01:38 AM by Leigh Scott
|
     
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!
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 14-8-2007 @ 01:49 AM by 11 11
|
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.
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 14-8-2007 @ 01:50 AM by Springer
|
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]
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 14-8-2007 @ 01:54 AM by Tuning Spork
|
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.
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 14-8-2007 @ 02:16 AM 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. 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...
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 14-8-2007 @ 02:34 AM by 11 11
|
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.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
AboveTopSecret.com is advertising supported.
|
reply posted on 14-8-2007 @ 02:43 AM by SkepticOverlord
|
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)
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 14-8-2007 @ 02:45 AM by SkepticOverlord
|
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.
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 14-8-2007 @ 02:53 AM by Leigh Scott
|

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!
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 14-8-2007 @ 03:12 AM by 11 11
|
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.
|
copyright & usage
|
 |