posted on Feb, 3 2011 @ 07:32 AM
But before that, please bear with me as I introduce a quick background on digital cameras and the video they come up with:
(Some quick credentials first: I'm not just an armchair philosopher lolz. I used to be a cameraman, a video editor, and other stuff related to
postprod, and I'm currently a producer, with some CGI background as I have worked on several CGI projects in both producing and hands-on capacities,
solving and troubleshooting problems on a variety of levels):
Technical background (important):
There are 2 ways a camera can capture moving images (a sequence of still frames):
"Interlaced" capture - each captured frame is a actually made up of 2 separate alternating fields each captured at a slightly different slice of
time. In postprod, this creates "combing" effect (where the 2 interlaced fields reveal themselves especially for objects or scenes captured while in
"Progressive" capture - each captured frame is a whole frame. But there are 2 types of shutter variants:
"Rolling Shutter" - each frame is captured one line at a time.
Observable artifact #1: creates wobbly deformation of objects or scenes with respect to the orientation of the image sensor (either horizontal or
vertical). Common weakness of cameraphones and DSLRs.
Observable artifact #2: external light flashes captured by the camera appear cut off within a single frame (when the duration of the flash is
shorter than the time it takes to expose each frame)
"Universal Shutter" - all pixels (and therefore all lines) of each frame are captured all at the same time.
Observable artifact: no wobble, but creates simple motion blur for moving objects or scenes, regardless of image sensor orientation.
VIDEO#4 Debunk Explanation
1. A digital camera can only take a shot either in progressive or interlaced mode, but not both at the same time.
2. This sequence of frames from Video#4 show both interlacing artifacts and motion blur artifacts (supposedly due to quick motion), IN THE SAME
FOOTAGE! This can't happen in reality, because the camera is either shooting in interlaced, or shooting in progressive, but NOT BOTH. Either
everything that's revealing in the clip reveals interlacing, or progressive - not both.
3. So Video#4 is tampered with in the following sense:
a. The background footage was shot in interlaced mode as most consumer camcorders do
b. The CGI orb was composited into the interlaced background as a progressive image (in fact, the project settings is done in progressive mode - it
can't be done any other way unless you know the "nuts and bolts" of your comp system (many thanks to Pinke's U2U for explaining to me how to do
c. The resulting final video is exported in progressive frames
d. Video comes out with a mixture of progressive and interlacing artifacts, which no camera can do, and it wouldn't make sense for a camera to do
e. Ergo, HOAX
I shall also debunk Video#2 :-) on a later post.