a reply to: Defragmentor
Good find on the averted vision. It looks like we both had the same thought of distraction at the same time.
Regarding the shadows, this is something that was one of my first ever posts. I appreciate that this theory does not fit in with what most people
think, or what most of my own research points to. However, I try and look at small elements and find a likely explanation, even if they don't fit as a
In that late seventies, computer graphics were just developing. You can see examples in the Last StarFighter, for one. Close Encounters was going to
use early CGI, like Tron, but backed out for using lights and lens flares.
Seventies graphics typically used a process called ray casting, as opposed to ray tracing.
Surfaces were largely block colour, and objects geometric in nature.
Processing powered and memory ensured that:
- Low polygon, basic shape objects were all that could be done for film
- Shadows, whilst adding realism were a huge resource hog
- Lighting could not be simulated accurately.
Then, about a year before RFI, patents emerged for a high speed, although less realistic shadow process called shadow mapping. This essentially, is a
cheat used by video games to avoid using a ray tracing process to work out if light is blocked (creating a shadow)
It should be noted that shadow mapping would run faster with the following:
- Flat, untextured surfaces to catch the shadow
- Point (spotlight) light sources, instead of realistic ambient light or area lights
Look at what Bustinza and Warren describe:
- Shadows that are sluggish and out of step (a system running in less than real time - like an old console struggling to run a 3d game)
- Shadows with no visible light source to create them (they should have not been sharp spotlight shadows,they should have been soft shadows from the
ambient lights as the lightalls had failed)
- A yellow green ball appeared and bounced down the shadows (think of the ball in pong) - this would typically be used in computer graphics to align
what a camera was filming and computer was generating. The computer looks at the video image and sees where the green tracking balls are,in relation
to where it thinks they are. Calibration.
Whilst I don't think it fits in with anything else these anomalies are just weird:
- Off angle shadows in an unlit environment
- Sluggish shadows that move out of step
- A primitive yellow / green ping pong ball that bounces on the top of the shadows of the men
I work in the special effects industry. If anyone came to me with a film showing these things, I'd consider it an amateur attempt at 'mixed reality' -
in other words,a bad CGI projection mapping attempt.
I have zero way to resolve this with my general assessment of the RFI. All I can tell you is, that taken on its own,this incident seems like an early
attempt at computer graphics as some form of camouflage not stealth.
Whoever put the system together thought it was better to have fake shadows of the wrong type, rather than no shadows. This was a generally accepted
practise during the 80s for film work. Without cues like shadows, lighting angle the flaws of a rendered object would stand out far more.
Does this mean the craft was terrestrial? Maybe not.
The rendering algorithms had just been developed to do everything we see. However, the processing power, and projection capabilities were not ready a
far as I know.
edit on 7-4-2016 by ctj83 because: cgi example