It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Thin Line Between CGI and a Good Video.

page: 1

log in


posted on May, 30 2012 @ 11:34 AM
Greetings ATS'ers, I'm basically looking for information on these videos. The first is from Bulgaria and has been posted before, it remains undebunked and I can find very little information on it, which means it could've been made by a CGI'er, however I have also heard a story about it being taken by a woman who wished to remain anonymous, which is also a possibility. Now I don't think this video is fake:

A. Because, the CGI involved in making it, would've taken quite a long time and would it even be worth it for a 30 second video. Doesn't make sense to me.

B. The waves coming from this craft and the spinning motion, adds to the propulsion theories that some people have. The turn of speed also reminds me of some of the footage from Gulf Breeze, particularly the video over the ocean, which to the best of my knowledge still also remains undebunked.

Now, if I'm wrong, I accept I've been duped, but at least it took an excellent piece of CGI work to do it, although I still maintain, this to me seems good footage. I also appreciate that parts of this video seem fake, but I'm putting it down to being unfamiliar with this method of propulsion, I can't see any CGI effects in this video.

The second video from Russia, which to be honest, I haven't looked at as closely as the first. I personally believe this one to be CGI, because:

A. There are rogue pixels around the craft at the 16 second mark, which may indicate CGI.

B. When the aircraft shoots off behind the building, you do not see it go, and based on the trajectory of it, you should

Now I may be wrong about these videos and if I am, I will openly admit to being so, but all replies welcome and additional information, even more so.
edit on 30-5-2012 by Zcustosmorum because: (no reason given)

posted on May, 30 2012 @ 11:38 AM
reply to post by Zcustosmorum

Just took a peek at video #1. I see a problem, for me, in the motion of the object relative to the camera motion.

The object is spinning, yes, you can clearly see that. But watch it's position compared to the clouds and relative to the movement of the camera.

To me, it looks like the camera matching is off, the motion isn't perfectly matched and it's probably because they didn't properly configure the reference points of the buildings.

Of course, that assumes it's fake. It could be real, a big jiffy pop packet spinning and bouncing around.

posted on May, 30 2012 @ 11:43 AM
Both fake , I'm afraid .
The give away is the zoom into the object in both cases . As the camera zooms in and the object becomes focused , the buildings remain sharply focused too . This would not happen if the objects were real . As one zooms in, the foreground should become blurred, but because there is nothing for the camera to focus on , the auto focus is still using the buildings as a focal point.

Dead give away
edit on 30-5-2012 by dawnprince because: (no reason given)

edit on 30-5-2012 by dawnprince because: (no reason given)

posted on May, 30 2012 @ 11:46 AM
They are both CGI animated videos.

The poor attempts to match camera motion with the object position in the first video is so obvious it hurts my eyes.

The second video is a bit better but still the same technique as seen in 823756 videos before it .. the object hovers conveniently until the camera has completed a full zoom in and out and then vanishes into thin air.

I really would love to see an authentic video, but this ..

posted on May, 30 2012 @ 11:53 AM
The zoom out motion before the objects shoot away could be suspicious I accept and it's the only thing that annoys me with the first video however, the amount of detail on the object would have taken a long time to do and it just doesn't figure out for a 30 second video.

new topics

top topics

log in