UFOs Over London Friday 2011 ? (pretty damn spectacular)

Just watched the video.. Looks like one of those "UFO Flash-Mob" things to me.. Only certain people are continuously looking up. Others loose interest and leave. I think it's fake and spreading misinformation is a no-no...

Originally posted by Ahmose
You make absolutely no sense.

If that is true, then why did you comment DIRECTLY to me? Are you expecting me to change something, in order for you to better be able to make sense of MY OPINION?

Originally posted by Ahmose
Looking at things only from your limited perspective.

When viewing a short, low quality, distorted video clip, that was taken on the other side of a pond which is far too big for me to swim across, how can I look at it from any perspective other than my own??

Originally posted by Ahmose
Simple psychology..

Actually, simple psychology shows your immeasurable ignorance, since you have obviously thought more about my opinion than I did.

Originally posted by Ahmose
Just saying,
You are being ignorant here.

[color=B1FB17]That is your opinion, which you are entitled to. It is not my place to tell you that your own opinion is wrong. After all, it is only an opinion.



[color=302226]P.S. Does it make sense to you, to continue wasting precious server space by repeatedly quoting someone who makes no sense?? hhmmmmmm

Originally posted by Darce
The guy filming here obviously has a better camera

Originally posted by Darce
It's obvious because of the camera zoom. If any cell phone cams can zoom in like that, it's news to me.

What is gained from a comparison to another camera? I simply pointed out to you, that it is not a high quality camera. Does it really matter if this crappy camera is better than another crappy camera??

Originally posted by Darce
How do you guys...
...You guys think.....

I am not sure why you continue using this term of 'You guys,' while addressing me.
I apologize if the 'S' at the end of my username is confusing to you, but I am only one.

Originally posted by Darce
Debunking and calling it a hoax is what your essentially doing BrokenCircles, not truly investigating, just searching for reasons to disprove video evidence. Why?

As previously stated, I did not use those words.
You are essentially placing words into my hypothetical mouth.

Regardless, if you believe that this is true, then why do you keep calling me back here?
What type of a truly investigative technique would describe this repetitious whining of yours?
Stop whining about it, get your hands dirty, and find that proof that you need.

First two videos are most definitely fake (fake enough that I didn't bother with the rest of the thread), looks like they're in Soho or East London and the same location, one definitely being an office and the other just outside the same office. So there is a good chance this a post production, viral advertising agency or CGI studio having a bit of a practice.

2/10 so many amateur mistakes for someone attempting viral videos.

This is indeed REAL IMO. I have been researching these white orbs for the last 6 months.

I took this picture below with two witnesses:

November 6th 2010
Picture

White Orbs Over Manhattan NY October 13th 2010


White Orbs Over Kazakhstan April 29th 2011


White Orbs over Forth Worth Texas May 10th 2011


White Orbs over Fukushima Japan March 26, 2011


White Orbs over Japan March 26, 2011


White Orbs over Japan March 12 2010


More


Single White Orb over Cross Roads, Texas June 7th 2011


These are just some. There are MANY MORE.

When I took the time to do the research, the evidence started to pile up pretty high pretty quickly.

Also this was predicted end of may:

Expect several major displays of multiple hundreds of “lighted orb” type sightings in several major cities across Europe and North and Central America in the next several weeks. We are “testing” several appearance patterns we intend to use after hard disclosure and this is in preparation for that.

source





One characteristic I have found that is a common attribute among these white orbs is that since white is all color combined, you will often see them cast a very subtle rainbow reflection or hue.

reply to post by freedommusic


Just because you have been researching "white orbs" (and I commend you in that),...
doesn't mean that the video in question is authentic...

We have entered the age of "video techno-obscurity"...

Any and all video "evidence" must be considered suspect until the majority of probabilities of deception are eliminated...

That is a moral imperative...

Originally posted by coastlinekid
reply to post by freedommusic

 

Just because you have been researching "white orbs" (and I commend you in that

),...
doesn't mean that the video in question is authentic...

Well I'll put it to you or someone else who can post a CGI this realistic. How about a Hollywood movie w/ white orbs that look as realistic as the OP.

A side by side comparison. Proof or supporting evidence that OP video is indeed a hoax.

Should be easy to produce no?

Anything other than evidence or proof is merely opinion or worse "believing" ...

Doesn't matter if it's "real" or not.
These days, regardless of how real or authentic a video looks, it will never be accepted as genuine.
All that's needed is for one person to say "CGI" and that's that. A video of one will never be accepted as proof here or anywhere, nor will a photo.

reply to post by BrokenCircles


I'm just curious who you are, and what on Earth you are doing here. There must be some purpose in your actions, they are clearly well thought out. It's your motivation that confuses me.

If this is your job, I am jealous.

Just to add to the topic of UFO's around London...

If there was any major and I mean (MAJOR) sightings of UFO's around London on a daily basis then I'm pretty sure we would all start to see security stepped up. I'm know for a fact the Metropolitan Police Service, the London Ambulance Service and the London Fire Brigade would all be given direct orders to be on standby and to get ready for a CBRN incident. Also its more than likely that if these videos were real and the government thought these UFO's provided some form of danger to the public and other aircraft they would end up sending military aircraft to police the skies.

Originally posted by Darce
reply to post by BrokenCircles

 

I'm just curious who you are, and what on Earth you are doing here. There must be some purpose in your actions, they are clearly well thought out. It's your motivation that confuses me.

Thank you. That means a lot, but I just cannot accept it.
As much as I would enjoy taking credit for your confusion, I cannot.

I believe in giving credit, where credit is due.
Your confusion, comes straight from you.

reply to post by freedommusic


You are doing a double back-flip of logic here,...

Just because one can't reproduce a video event doesn't mean the aforementioned video is real...

It is plausible, and more than likely, that the video being discussed is a FABRICATED event, created with video editing technology that just happens to be PHYSICALLY in close proximity to the event that supposedly occurred...

That being said,... if independent videos surface that corroborate the event,... then the possibility that it is authentic should be considered...
It is like watching a completely believable video of an alien invasion that just happened to be recorded on the corner of a street that just happens to be within throwing distance of Digital Domain Inc.

www.digitaldomain.com...

Digital Domains stock went up, what a great way to get hits on their website, as far as hollywood creating these white orbs, well they did better than that in Star Wars in the 1970's so a few white like things in the sky should not be difficult by an amateur 30 odd years later.

If I ran a CGI company and wanted some free advertising this would be a great way to do it, problem is, the press are a pretty powerful bunch, if made them look stupid by staging a hoax it could backfire when someone is looking for a CGI effect for Doctor Who and Digital Domains name comes up.

Monday morning tomorrow when they log on they will be having a right laugh, the untrusted one will be mobbed at the local Comic book store all because of white orbs and a friday afternoon prank.

All I can say is there are going to be loads of CGI hoaxes coming our way in the future, so many that no footage will ever be believed again, unless you can find software which can tell if effects have been added?

Sorry I am late to this HOAX party...

This video is clearly fake. You can prove it by watching the video starting at 1:00 and after, and stabilizing the video. You can see they did a horrible job motion tracking the camera movement... probably because they have a rolling shutter camera.

If you watch the UFO you can see it is not shaking with the camera perfectly, it is shaking independently. However the "UFO" is shaking the same rate and nearly the same magnitude, it's direction and position are just not synchronized. That to me indicates several bad motion track points.

In order to insert a fake UFO into the video they had to track certain pixels as they move and shake around, then apply that tracking to the UFO so it moves exactly the same as the camera (match moving). Sometimes the pixels will move say 10 pixels in one direction, yet the computer detected the pixels move 12 pixels, and that creates a bad tracking point. Normally you can fix bad tracking points by hand, but when there is about 30 tracking points per second, it becomes very time consuming. If you apply the motion tracks to the UFO when it has bad track points, it will wobble and shake around similar to what you see in the video.

On of the main causes for bad motion track points is motion blur. When you select which pixels you want to track, and then the camera moves or shakes fast enough to cause motion blur, those pixels become almost unrecognizable by the tracking software, and it can't find the exact position of the pixels you selected, and the software will try it's best to approximate where the pixels are. That creates bad tracking points.

Another main cause bad motion track points is a camera that has a rolling shutter. This causes objects in the video to appear to bend when there is a lot of movement. This wave like movement makes it extremely difficult to do motion tracking, and you have to choose your tacking points wisely. For instance if your camera has a rolling shutter that scans each line horizontally, you need to set your tracking points on the the same horizontal line as the UFO. If you do not do that, and you apply the tracking points to the UFO, then the UFO is going to move at a different rate then it's own background, and it will shake and wobble.

For example, if the UFO is at the top of the video, but your motion tracking points are at the bottom, and then you apply those tracking points to the UFO.... your UFO is going to move in synchronization with the bottom of the video, and not the top where it is located. That will make UFO appear to be moving independently from the background. If the UFO is supposed to move across the video's viewpoint, then you would also have to change your tracking points, and THAT would take MANY HOURS if you have a rolling shutter and visible wave like motions. It would be a nightmare, and it would create a shaky and wobbly UFO if not done correctly.

That is exactly what I have detected in this HOAX video... They did a bad job at motion tracking.



As for the people looking up.... I would bet there was a few provocateurs saying "do you see that?" while pointing up in the sky, and out of curiosity everyone else started looking up, searching. If they can't see it they keep searching, and it makes it appear as though they are looking at something.

I've done that before... I saw someone looking up at something and pointing, and so I looked up too... I was trying to figure out what they were looking at. It's a natural reaction, and probably easy to take advantage of...



Also, those lights look really familiar... I think they are standard "optical flares" from the "Optical Flares Plug-in by Video Copilot".


I say, throw this in the HOAX bin.

reply to post by Heliocentric


well obviously you guys are the experts, it is amazing how quickly u.f.o. threads are debunked professionally here.
it certainly beats anywhere else where you will likely get alot of assumptions, plain denial and out right stupid reasons as to why something 'proves' it fake, i am glad there is none of that here.

i argee, debunked because there is a shop near by and he does appear to be in a workshop i think. besides i don't like the look of that guy anyway so it must be fake.

this is the first place i would'nt go if i ever caught anything on film. thats for sure.

reply to post by BrokenCircles


Ah, I see. You're just trying to be funny.

I also see that this has yet to be proven a fake... hopefully inquiring minds somewhere are doing some real research into this. The gut feelings are nice to hear about, but I'm still not seeing any proof yet one way or the other.

Even if it is a fake, the method of debunking here leaves a lot to be desired. Opinions are like bungholes, every body has one, and they are usually full of it.

reply to post by Darce


I am sure there is info in my last post that can help you determine that this video is fake if you do some extended research into what I said.

The UFO is showing signs of motion tracking errors which is probably caused by the rolling shutter artifacts created by the camera shake. The UFO is shaking with the camera, but it is not synchronized. They didn't "match move" the UFO to the video with enough precision and so it is wobbling and shaking.

I am absolutely sure it proves it is fake. The video is CGI.

Originally posted by lifeform11
reply to post by Heliocentric

 

well obviously you guys are the experts, it is amazing how quickly u.f.o. threads are debunked professionally here.
it certainly beats anywhere else where you will likely get alot of assumptions, plain denial and out right stupid reasons as to why something 'proves' it fake, i am glad there is none of that here.

i argee, debunked because there is a shop near by and he does appear to be in a workshop i think. besides i don't like the look of that guy anyway so it must be fake.

this is the first place i would'nt go if i ever caught anything on film. thats for sure.

I'll take that as a compliment.

I would not say fake for sure, but the fact that the OP can be traced to a special effects production company does not exactly reinforce his credibility. In any case, these videos ("UFOs Over London Friday 2011" and "UFO over London Wednesday") have no weight in the debate on UFOs. There's already ample evidence in the form of videos, photos, testimonies and other type of evidence to show that some type of phenomenon is going on that can not be explained with rational means.

If, by chance, more people would step forward to corroborate these supposed sightings, we could triangulate the information and consider it differently.

Greetings. I'd like to give you guys a short video of the street version. I've actually took the time to stabilize the video. I have annotations included. This is definitely CGI work. I would have made it the full version but had a program crash and I wasn't going to compile it again.



Have fun.

reply to post by gift0fpr0phecy


Brilliant response, you took the world of CGI and brought it to the layman.

If I were a professional outfit and judging on giftofprophercys response, I would be ASHAMED and would never employ you to make CGI ever again.

Remember the name of the hoaxers and revell in their mistake to take on the UFO world.