Why Did the Alleged Smoke Trail From Flt 77 Immediately Disappear From Both Videos?

Originally posted by SPreston
Your images are useless. I have modified nothing; just magnified them and added text.

Unfortunately you clearly have modified these images. Whether you realise it or not, you have resized them with a software program which has applied a smoothing algorithm. Not only that but you have also taken them from a poor source and appear to have resized to non integer multiples.

That is what the heavy white smoke trail looks like on the original video.

No it isn't. I located two copies of the original video, one released by Judicial Watch and one as part of the ZM trial exhibits. Neither of them have high resolutions (352x240) and neither of them have the time and name of the frame on them. The nearest analog to your image I have been able to find is the full frame enlargements produced by the FBI for the ZM trial.

Open two tabs in your browser and load these images:
www.thewebfairy.com...
www.vaed.uscourts.gov...

Notice the significant differences between them. The former image has been sharpened and had its contrast increased, these are operations which change the data you are studying and are to be avoided.

Are they deliberately blurred and pixelated and blocky?

Yes, because this is the original resolution of the footage (as far as I have been able to determine). Resizing these images with interpolating algorithms will lead to the appearance of your images.

For example. On the top is a selection taken from the MPEG footage and enlarged using the techniques I mentioned. On the bottom is the same selection but enlarged using your techniques:



As you can see, the bottom image is produced from the top image with a simple algorithm to 'fill in' the spaces (Lanczos, which is what I suspect you used even if you weren't aware). Because of this you are adding information which was not there originally. If you cannot claim the smoke trail on the top is "well drawn" or any features exist there, you cannot claim that the smoke trail on the bottom is, because it is taken from exactly the same source.

From a simple investigation, the modifications I can identify to your image are

• Saturation or contrast, plus sharpening
  
• JPEG compression applied
  
• Resized to a non-integer multiple
  
• Lanczos interpolation
  
• Second round of JPEG compression

The images i have produced (except the one on the right) have none of these steps, and have been saved in PNG format to ensure no loss in quality.

If you truly believe you haven't modified these images, you must be completely uninformed about video and image analysis as you have heavily modified them whether intentionally or not.

edited to change left/right to top/bottom

[edit on 23-11-2008 by exponent]

posted by exponent
Notice the significant differences between them. The former image has been sharpened and had its contrast increased, these are operations which change the data you are studying and are to be avoided.

The heavy white smoke trail in both those images you presented are clearly defined, as they are in the videos and in the images I posted. Your other pixelated and blocky images are suspicious. The videos I posted and took the images from were the Judicial Watch videos they posted on YouTube on May 16 2006.

posted by exponent
If you truly believe you haven't modified these images, you must be completely uninformed about video and image analysis as you have heavily modified them whether intentionally or not.

No I certainly am not any kind of video technician and am just working with simple graphics using Paint Shop Pro 7. I also do not have the expertize to tell if you are manipulating images. The images I came up with are very similar to the images of the heavy white smoke trail originally depicted in the leaked five frames.

For myself, with your history of pretending evidence against the primary suspect which has been brought to light repeatedly, and then subsequently ignored and shoved into the background and treated as inconsequential and to be ignored by you and others like you, I simply do not trust you as an expert witness on video and photographic analysis.




[edit on 11/23/08 by SPreston]

PSP7 uses 8 year old technology.

Not only is exponent 100% correct, but the accuracy of the algorithms the programs has gone through 4 generations of technology since the release of the program you are using.

Trying to compare PSP7 with modern graphics tools is like trying to compare the computing power of a C-64 to that of an Intel Pentium.

Using inferior tools yields inferior results.

Results are also made exponentially more inaccurate by the ignorance of the user in regard to how the tools work.

[edit on 23-11-2008 by cogburn]

Originally posted by SPreston
For myself, with your history of pretending evidence against the primary suspect which has been brought to light repeatedly, and then subsequently ignored and shoved into the background and treated as inconsequential and to be ignored by you and others like you, I simply do not trust you as an expert witness on video and photographic analysis.
[edit on 11/23/08 by SPreston]

I totally agree... exponent like the rest, continue to ignore some of the most basic common sense evidence that must be taken into consideration upon determining which side is most likely telling the truth and making logical conclusions since the circumstancial evidence alone is enough for a court to convict on.

Lets be honest, With all thats been presented and all the LACK OF EVIDENCE from the government, whats the point anymore of this petty debate about pixelation etc and technicalities trying to prove what cannot and will never be proven in the scientific way you want exponent? While I understand these areas need to be argued, its becoming silly now since IMO the real evidence proving this conspiracy is more in the LACK OF EVIDENCE. So The burden of PROOF in this case is ON THE GOVERNMENT because they CONTROL the evidence and won't release it properly! Yet we're the ones you claim are full of it because we can't show "proof" of whats in the footage?? are you serious exponent? USE YOUR BRAIN. THINK about what i'm saying here. At what point will you concede we haven't proven a conspiracy?

So again, cutting through all the technicalities and bs, the biggest issue
in the END or bigger picture and ONLY CONCLUSION one can make when one takes all the evidence and lack of in FULL CONTEXT into consideration is the fact that in this case its an incontrovertible FACT that the tapes have been doctored, frames are in fact missing, and ultimately there is NO evidence whatsoever of a boeing 757 hitting the pentagon which is something the government could EASILY PRODUCE if they wanted to.

Their unwillingness to produce all the video footage they have and have confiscated and explain the missing frames rises to the level of CONTEMPT any citizen would be subject to and jailed. THIS BS EVIDENCE AND LACK OF IS CRIMINAL. But clearly this proves they are ABOVE the law. And with such a dangerous precedent set and lack of immediate action by those who represent the people to properly investigate and prosecute our government, the UNITED STATES is for all intents and purposes, DESTROYED. GAME OVER. The USA can no longer exist as a nation now, and when the truth reaches the people en mass soon, there will be a civil war and revolution. This is imminent now.

it really is that simple...

even though there's an overwhelming amount of scientific factual irrefutable evidence that to this day is being ignored, unanswered and evaded, a court could probably CONVICT without it!

FBI, CIA, MEDIA, Bush, Cheney etc etc are apart of this conspiracy.

ITS AN OBVIOUS INSIDE JOB, AND THATS NOT JUST AN "OPINION" OR THEORY.

GUILTY AS CHARGED...

the PEOPLE are beginning to awaken and its just beginning...

Originally posted by SPreston
The heavy white smoke trail in both those images you presented are clearly defined, as they are in the videos and in the images I posted.

There's certainly a smoke trail, I don't know if would classify it as white, but it's there. I wasn't disputing that.

Your other pixelated and blocky images are suspicious.

They are suspicious? Suspicious of what?

The videos I posted and took the images from were the Judicial Watch videos they posted on YouTube on May 16 2006.

This adds yet another step of modification into the images you are presenting. How is it that you clearly admit this:

No I certainly am not any kind of video technician and am just working with simple graphics using Paint Shop Pro 7. I also do not have the expertize to tell if you are manipulating images.

Then claim that my images are "suspicious"? In fact you go further:

For myself, with your history of pretending evidence against the primary suspect which has been brought to light repeatedly, and then subsequently ignored and shoved into the background and treated as inconsequential and to be ignored by you and others like you, I simply do not trust you as an expert witness on video and photographic analysis.

Well if you want to ignore me then go ahead, but it should be obvious to everyone how even the smoothed images I have produced are of way higher quality than your images, and that the original image has no features to allow you to say it is "well drawn". There is nothing to indicate it has been faked at all, and indeed there is some evidence of a large object preceding the smoke trail.