Real fairy caught on tape?

Are we being desensitized.

Video of local cops being some guy to death, NAW, CGI.

Rodney King, NAW, it was CGI.

Originally posted by Maybe...maybe not

Originally posted by _SilentAssassin_
reply to post by stars15k

 

Cottingley fairies.

That's really cool, I never heard of that. I just did sum research thx!

SilentAssassin.....

Unfortunately, they admitted that was a hoax.

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not

Frances always declared that the so-called "fifth photo" was genuine:
upload.wikimedia.org...

Both maintained that they had really seen fairies, although admitting to faking the photos.

I just happened upon this thread, but way cool!

Also, I'm not familiar with CGI... now what is this?

I'm not gonna write this video off yet until it actually is debunked, who knows all the undiscovered creatures. Look at the Patterson bigfoot footage, they still can't debunk that one!

I don't know... I like the video!

Given the number of people on this earth, even if such creatures were rare, I would expect to hear lots of similar reports, albeit not conveniently caught on camera.
Hoax.

If these really do exist then I think that with all the miles I drive in my car I would have cleaned one of these off my bumper or bonnet in the past 20 years...... especially when I am driving down country lanes and past orchards

One further question is - Why would you Run ?? God if I saw one I would stand there and study it not run away like a Fairy.... sorry pansey


Regards

PurpleDOG UK

[edit on 29-8-2010 by PurpleDog UK]

reply to post by _Phoenix_

From the reactions, how it was set up and to how the camera somehow can focus on the fairy so well etc etc

What? You think it's fake because of "how the camera somehow can focus on the fairy so well?"

Whether or not this is a hoax, that statement makes no sense to me.
He's got a camera and (allegedly) gets a good video of something that is strange. How does that add up to fake?

We're usually plagued with grainy, blurry blobs that people post as alleged "aliens" or "ghosts" and we complain about that. Now were gonna complain when the video is decent? LOL!

P.S.: Can someone please enlighten me on what a CGI is and why this thing looks like one?

reply to post by NightGypsy


CGI
You may have come across it before, the movie Avatar is the most recent example, and they also ruined the Star Wars trilogy by adding in CGI in the editors cuts released later on.
The thing with CGI is that it does not look real, it tries to look real but it never does, you can always tell. This fairy falls in the same category, if you saw something that bold in real life, well, actually you wouldn't see something like that. It just does not look real because it is not.
CGI is ruining the movie industry but at least it makes it easy to spot hoaxes.

Originally posted by pazcat
reply to post by NightGypsy

 

CGI
You may have come across it before, the movie Avatar is the most recent example, and they also ruined the Star Wars trilogy by adding in CGI in the editors cuts released later on.
The thing with CGI is that it does not look real, it tries to look real but it never does, you can always tell. This fairy falls in the same category, if you saw something that bold in real life, well, actually you wouldn't see something like that. It just does not look real because it is not.
CGI is ruining the movie industry but at least it makes it easy to spot hoaxes.

I agree. It looks incredibly fake. The acting too.
It's nice that cgi makes hoaxes so easy to spot, isn't it? :p

It's a good fake. Whoever made it should get a job in Hollywood. If they can do that good of a job with the little equipment they have, imagine what they could do with the big hollywood stuff. They'd make themselves a bunch of money and we'd have a hole lotta' new fun movies to watch.

I've watched the video, a lot. I don't know, honestly if it is real or fake. I leave myself open to any possibility.

A decade or two ago, whenever someone got visual "proof" of a cryptid, the skeptics complained "Why can't anyone ever get a clear shot of these things." (The first Hellboy movie alluded to that.)

Now, we have the technology to get excellent "proof" and the skeptics always cry "Photoshop or CGI"

By this logic, there can be no acceptable proof of cryptids in video or photography. It is either too good or not good enough.

So, what will be proof? It's a catch 22 for the researcher unwilling to kill or capture the specimen.

The actual fairy reminded me of the ones in the movie "Pan's Labyrinth".

reply to post by _SilentAssassin_


[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/cc95528145c0.jpg[/atsimg]

What the hell is up with people these days? :shk:

Is this an example the ever-so-common S&F-hunting (the reason why the S&F system should be abolished) or is it really so bad that you simply can't tell what is (mediocre) CGI and what is "real" stuff?

This is far from the first time crappy hoaxes like this gets posted on ATS. I know that many of them are trollworks...but do I dare hope the all are?

If not, are people really that easy to fool? Do they suffer from some sort of poor visual condition or are they just so uncritical and dumbed down that "everything goes"? Or are we just talking about children that post on ATS?
May I ask the OP's age? Everything below 12 years is excused...

Holey moley, what kind of world do you guys live in?
Get help damnit...

While resting on the tree what you see is a pair of dragonflies mating. I suspect it took off towards them and they had the clever idea of inserting CGI to make it look like a faerie. Very well done.
Arthur Conan Doyle did some clever fakery as well, seems to be a solid British tradition.
Cheers.

reply to post by Raud
Maybe you believe you have seen it all and know it all, well you might have been reading and researching things for a long time.

Some of us, like myself, have just started looking into the possiblities of "the unknown", let us make and remark on our thoughts and or research... your say isn't the say all and end all to all conversations.

Please don't belittle anyones journey.

I'm wasting my time but ...

- The blackest point in the image is on the fairy wings. This should not be the case.
- Around 1:38 crazy artifacting/matte lines
- If you keep playing back at 1:40 - 1:43 look at the wings. 2D planes. Furthermore if you freeze at the right spot you'll get some nice look awkward white.
- The compression on the wings especially (and the fairy) are not consistent with the rest of the shot
- THE BIGGEST thing though ... 1:38 to 1:40 the auto aperture kicks in and guess what faeries are immune to? Automatic camera systems and proper lighting. Everything else changes - fairy the same.

Not real. Not close to real. Amusing shot. The end.

The people who are going to believe are going to believe regardless though, and the usual persons will say 'you always say its CGI!'



[edit on 29-8-2010 by Pinke]

reply to post by fooks


Where did you hear or read about that?
2nd line

reply to post by Raud


Raud not everyone on here is on the exact same level remember that. So what might be easy for you to spot as CGI might not be so easy for others. Honestly when that "fairy" flew up I jumped, it scared the crap out of me. I thought it looked fake but others might not. Wouldn't it be better to maybe help them see why it's cgi and not criticize them. I think the OP genuinely wanted to know what this was. It is interesting and nowadays with CGI being so good it does make things like this hard to determine to the average poster.

Originally posted by mblahnikluver
reply to post by Raud

 

Raud not everyone on here is on the exact same level remember that. So what might be easy for you to spot as CGI might not be so easy for others. Honestly when that "fairy" flew up I jumped, it scared the crap out of me. I thought it looked fake but others might not. Wouldn't it be better to maybe help them see why it's cgi and not criticize them. I think the OP genuinely wanted to know what this was. It is interesting and nowadays with CGI being so good it does make things like this hard to determine to the average poster.

True, but I understand Raud's frustration.

When things like this come up there's always a few die hards. The face palming and eye rolling I think isn't intended to be at people who don't know any better ... the OP is okay in my book, it's the people that insist it could still be real afterwards.

Just like the Mars hoax thread. Like the thread on the moon that apparently had a robot on it. Like Nicholas Cage's acting ability ... They don't exist yet people insist on believing anyway against all common sense.

reply to post by mblahnikluver


Okay... I understand what you mean, Mblahn... But you know me, I am easy to ignite at times...

My frustration is maybe an expression of my worries for the OP (and those alike). I don't mean to label anyone "an idiot" (I don't even know the fella').

It's just that...if people remain so unsceptical of phenomena like these...you know, what other "lies" can they be talked into believing?

Sorry for my little "outrage" there OP...don't be sad.
But remeber that far from everything is what it seems to be.
Always begin with the mindset that it is a hoax, whatever your findings. Then you start searching for the answer or "proof" for the opposite.

It is a bit like the Napolean law: "Everyone is innocent until proven otherwise".

If you wonder where I stand in various "alternative" subjects; feel free to check out my public profile.

Peace out everyone.

Great CGI - one of the best I have see lately. I didn't listen to the audio - probably made it more believeable.