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.

 

"UFO Over Temple Mount in Jerusalem" [discussion and analysis of multiple videos HERE]

page: 41
167
<< 38  39  40    42  43  44 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 31 2011 @ 03:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by flyingfish
Could you use your differential filter on my flash effect above.

Sure, I'll need the unmodified original frame though as I can't easily identify which one you've used. I need the original frame to identify and remove everything except what is affected by the flash. To make my image I used two sequential frames from the original video on youtube, one with and one without the flash.




posted on Jan, 31 2011 @ 03:26 PM
link   
reply to post by Toxicsurf
 


look when come to ATS I want to see UFO, and this look real to me because I see it with my eyes and then
comes the debunker, showing me how fake the videos are, is not fair.

This is like the bonus on a DVD movie where they show you how the movie was made, I'm telling you it ruins the movie, so I never see the bonus.



posted on Jan, 31 2011 @ 03:27 PM
link   
reply to post by Crayfish
 


Here ya go thanks man.



posted on Jan, 31 2011 @ 03:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by flyingfish
reply to post by newkid
 
I for one would love for these videos to be the real deal but I must first explain away all the possibility of in being a hoax.

I think that's about as straight up as it gets when looking for the truth.

The only problem I see with the expertise and knowledge many have shared to anylize these vids, is........their next debunk vid just got a little harder as the hoaxer's learn what they're doing wrong. Sshhhh



posted on Jan, 31 2011 @ 03:36 PM
link   
reply to post by Aztek87
 




See, I didn;t really pay attention, and then I wathcedd it

And I noticed they are speakign a diefferent language and some girl says Is that a UFO" and the guy is like "Holy ****". If I had paid more attention, then I wouldn't a said a thing.



posted on Jan, 31 2011 @ 03:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by mtnshredder
The only problem I see with the expertise and knowledge many have shared to anylize these vids, is........their next debunk vid just got a little harder as the hoaxer's learn what they're doing wrong. Sshhhh


Predetermined end result; hoaxers baffle sceptics to the point it can't be debunked, hoaxers start a religion which believers all sign up to. There are no sceptics left so everyone joins in the 'sheeple' masses ergo NWO. Taco Bell wins the corporation wars and is now the only restaurant on the planet.

How's that for 5 conspiracies in 1?

-m0r



posted on Jan, 31 2011 @ 03:44 PM
link   
reply to post by flyingfish
 

Here is the difference between that supplied frame and your modified image:

I don't think the frame is exactly the same as the one you modified, in the modified one the alleged object has an after image just up and to the right which is not present on the original. You can see artefacts of that difference throughout the image. The other thing that should be obvious is that the lightening of the photo is consistent across the horizon of the original. That's something that doesn't happen with the flash in the original video where the sky is lit up less than the ground.

edit on 31-1-2011 by Crayfish because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 31 2011 @ 04:02 PM
link   
What the Skeptics and Debunkers Decided to Leave Out

With regards to the argumentation and theory that the background in the first video is false or fake in some way should be firstly determined by speculation. Once the speculation is verified then by what means can we detect this video to be false? By the technology that needs to be used to 'stage' the event.

Logically, if the background of the video is not in synch with the foreground, or if the video has a suspect background, we must assume that it is a layered addition, and the technology that is used to do this is called “chroma keying” - green screen (or blue screen). If you look closely at your local weatherman or woman – you will see a vague green outline that is not detectible from a distance. In further review of the first video – I see no detectible 'chroma key' in the foreground images. Photoshop CS5 64bit was used with light level adjustments to explore if any green/blue screen chroma key technology was used – the answer is no. BTW it is very easy to detect when Chroma keys are used by examining the light differentials around the subject (examine picture below).

Chroma Key Example



Also, even people with limited knowledge know that cell phone video stabilization technology is rather limited, especially in low lighting conditions such as the video portrays. The processor is trying to stabilize the video the best way it can by determining which objects are closer, which objects are lighter – and this is where the data becomes a bit scrambled. This theory also collaborates with there being no chroma key effect – and therefore what is being recorded regarding the scenery is indeed what is being filmed with unfortunate night time stabilization results.

As for the UFO – people can make assumptions all they want, the fact is there could be a possibility that it was digitally planted with software. The only way to examine these videos is to actually acquire the original data file.

Thus far – from what the people trying to debunk this event and video have produced, means absolutely nothing. What is even more shocking to me is the failure to look for instances of chroma keying – which would absolutely, without a doubt prove the video is a hoax. This has not been done, until now.

The people that are screaming hoax, and those trying to debunk it almost seem to either not know what they are talking about – or have no experience with video editing/special effects. If their case is that they know what they are talking about – why is it that we see such a failure about mentioning the above technologies stated in my post?

I also find it highly speculative that these so called video professionals are cheered on and patted on the back, even though they tend to leave out the very nature of what technology would be needed in creating such an immense hoax.



News Chroma Key Example



No Chroma Key Detected in Video




Case far from closed!


Peace,
Kroms33



posted on Jan, 31 2011 @ 04:04 PM
link   
reply to post by Crayfish
 





I don't think the frame is exactly the same as the one you modified, in the modified one the alleged object has an after image just up and to the right which is not present on the original. You can see artefacts of that difference throughout the image. The other thing that should be obvious is that the lightening of the photo is consistent across the horizon of the original. That's something that doesn't happen with the flash in the original video where the sky is lit up less than the ground.

It is the same frame however when cropping the background I had to move the flashed cropped area to mesh with foreground. I was a little sloppy I must admit.
I believe if would have turned down the opacity to better match original, the highlighted buildings would have been similar.
Also I believe they must have used a layered flash effect the first being a sphere around the object with about 12% opacity or less then a second layer illuminating the cropped background in even lower opacity.
It's obvious they put more work into it than I, however I have seen enough to come to a conclusion.
Thanks again



posted on Jan, 31 2011 @ 04:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by m0r1arty

Originally posted by mtnshredder
The only problem I see with the expertise and knowledge many have shared to anylize these vids, is........their next debunk vid just got a little harder as the hoaxer's learn what they're doing wrong. Sshhhh


Predetermined end result; hoaxers baffle sceptics to the point it can't be debunked, hoaxers start a religion which believers all sign up to. There are no sceptics left so everyone joins in the 'sheeple' masses ergo NWO. Taco Bell wins the corporation wars and is now the only restaurant on the planet.

How's that for 5 conspiracies in 1?

-m0r

Well if it does get to that point we still have you to fend them off with your wit!



posted on Jan, 31 2011 @ 04:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by flyingfish
reply to post by newkid
 


You held on to bitter end that the Isaac CARET - Drones are real!
Why would the evidence in this case be any better.
Instead of calling us out on our hard work to prove if this is real, why don't you contribute to the findings.
I for one would love for these videos to be the real deal but I must first explain away all the possibility of in being a hoax.


yes the Isaac CARET - Drones I remember, but my point here is, aren't this hoaxter are like a movie makers?, obiously this video will fall apart in the real world, because just like the movies they are not real. this is almost as someone trying to explain that Spiderman is real, go over New York trying to find Spiderman web and find himself with no evidence. The idea that ET exist still with me and no matter how many video and stories they debunk. I believe in ET, Ok debunker win this time, what gave it away for me was the flashing they look fake, and no witness



posted on Jan, 31 2011 @ 04:10 PM
link   
Dont know if anyone els seen the newest vid of this from a closer look very strange youtube



posted on Jan, 31 2011 @ 04:11 PM
link   
Third video is a fake here is a link to the proof ( sorry if this has been posted before ,long thread) www.ufoeyes.com...



posted on Jan, 31 2011 @ 04:16 PM
link   
reply to post by Godhood
 


Um? Did you even read the thread? That video was discussed since a day ago lol..if anything it takes away from the credibility of the other videos.



posted on Jan, 31 2011 @ 04:21 PM
link   
reply to post by kroms33
 

It is possible to use chroma keying in this case but I find it more practical to use masking.Like I did with the flash effect.
Using a separate layer with a green background would have just added that much more work IMO.
Also you fail to realize the bright colored background on the weather map is going to show chroma keying better than black and low light contrast of the UFO video.
However if you look at the still shot of the mans back"shirt" you will see this contrast line.Very similar to the lady's hair.




posted on Jan, 31 2011 @ 04:30 PM
link   
I'm telling you that when that bright light flashed there is no reflections or building silhouettes, the city should look markable different but the scene just gets brighter, Photoshop has a myriad of tools to do lighting effects but it can't reflect off of the buildings. This video isn't the best example but it has bright lights within the city when the camera pans to the city and notice how the buildings are effected by the lights. We see none of this in this picture video.




posted on Jan, 31 2011 @ 04:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mr Mask

You think its worth quoting a guy who is confusing the "separation of two plains of perspective moving independently of each other" with "auto cropping and edge mending".


Don't turn this into your personal crusade here, or a war zone - there is no confusion going on with my end.



Who also claims this anomaly doesn't appear in the unedited version of video, when it clearly does.


Back up your claims by facts - please find out where I said the anomaly does not appear in the unedited version of the video? You confuse me for another.



Mind telling me how "auto cropping and frame-edge smoothing" somehow means "entire foreground separates from horizon line and lives its own life in an entirely new perspective plain"?


Don't go throwing around expressions that you don't know anything about, seriously. You will make yourself look bad. Check out my "chroma key" post for further detail.



Worth quoting that, I'd say. But I'm sure you are going to ignore that and enjoy agreeing with the guy talking about irrelevant effects unrelated to "the picture splitting in two and moving independently of each other".


irrelevant effects? Your stretching things beyond measure - where did I ever state that anything in the videos was 'irrelevant'? Wow, I would not continue on if I were you - you are not looking as credible as you would like. Again, please find the quote that I said the effects were irrelevant. Thanks.



posted on Jan, 31 2011 @ 04:40 PM
link   
reply to post by gift0fpr0phecy
 

Great job at debunking this fake UFO sighting above Jerusalem. Now they can't say this is a sign from Allah.



posted on Jan, 31 2011 @ 04:43 PM
link   
reply to post by flyingfish
 


What I see is the reflection of the light on the back of his shirt - not a chroma key. Masking would not make the image jump around as you suggest it would (with the parallel lines), and again would be nearly as easy to detect the edges as chroma keying.

As for your assertation that it would show up less on a black background:



and



unless these guys are visual effects experts, these artifacts would show as the above looks.
edit on 1/31/2011 by kroms33 because: whoops typo artifacts effects... blah.



posted on Jan, 31 2011 @ 04:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by hawaii50th
Now they can't say this is a sign from Allah.


Who can't?

I thought I'd remake my image for an evening setting just to compare the difference.



To be honest why there isn't a link to their location this far into a thread I don't know. Here is the Richard We-Rhoda Goldman Promenade in Jerusalem.

2.5 Km from the Mosque.

-m0r
edit on 31/1/2011 by m0r1arty because: Silly img tags



new topics

top topics



 
167
<< 38  39  40    42  43  44 >>

log in

join