Ed Applying luma curve to photos and footage

[nt1]

C'mon, nt1, ya boring. Look, I'll give you the first one: pic number 1 has a tree's reflection added where there is no tree on the shore.

{Eta: or the reflection was slid over or the tree causing reflection was slid or however you want to say "reflection not jibing"}

Now get ya ass in gear for the rest. Me and the rest of the thread already got them all.

Ya boring too bruh bruh. I still love ya. Its all good. Im not here for you. But I appreciate some of your feedback and information.

 

[nt1]

I think in this case its fair not to have a claim. It would be fair to say, "Hey, I've found these things about the event to be weird and suspicious, what do you think?" I don't think that is actually what's going on, on account of @nt1's even responding to the reasonable criticisms and questions.

Unfortunately, seems to be true. The issue here is that that's how this started. Vague questions about 9/11 that took days to even figure out what was being asked that included snark then eventually an actual thing that could be responded to.

IMHO, very humble,

I'd like to see us give folks like nt1 more leash and room to be jerks

than we give each other to encourage more dissent on subjects like this.

To be clear, I'm as guilty as being a jerk as anyone.

These type of statements elevate groups and encourage growth

ETA, also i do think with something that amounts to a vast conspiracy, you ought to have a reason why. I mean, I assume the motive is greed or lust for power but given the expense and effort involved and uncertainty of outcome? Strange gamble for the pentaverate to make.

ETA: @P.J. You are right, it would be

more interesting and fun if he'd actually respond to questions

i am sifting through a sea of jerk. Ill do better. I am still working on any subjects i brought up here. Politely. The tone of engagement is not thrilling. I enjoy the subject and the scrutiny is helpful.

instead of being dismissive or ignoring them. It makes me wonder if and when I do that? I hope, not often.

I will do better with my tone. Some comments I dont respond to. Purely based on the tone or wording of them.

 

[nt1]

Then you should make your case for its inaccuracy to the posters whose inaccuracy you are questioning, and who have the expertise that you and I both lack.

JayUtah has kindly taken the time and trouble to share his considerable expertise with you in several long posts. To simply ignore him is not only incredibly rude but remarkably stupid. He has just responded to your post to me.



Jay says: No, it's what you see when there is a midtone boundary and you aggressively emphasize midtones for no apparent reason. Besides, the one example is against a bright boundary. That's the one you're claiming has no "halo."



Jay says: You create artifacts with your random fiddling. And you're the one who has up and decided those must be artifacts consistent with tampering.

Until and unless you start addressing such criticisms I can only continue to assume that you have no idea what you are talking about.

I see tech advice here. I am commenting to push it forward so i can examine the info and use it. So, your post isnt lost in the middle. Thanks.

 

[nt1]

I absolutely agree but I'd first like to establish that's even worth doing, seems its impossible to provide a link to publicly available documents on a government website though.

ETA: Until @nt1 is willing to link to the actually documents he's taken pictures of, I fine assuming that there were fewer cancelations than average on

I have a link. Anyone could find the link with 5 minutes of effort.

My apologies. Many of these posts dont read as if they are sincere. If someone cant find this file, you that is in public domain, they arent qualified to comment on investigating it.

By qualified. I mean typing on a keyboard.

 

[Pixel42]

Flight 11. 63 cancel. 17 no shows.
That is enough for me.

You seem to be just assuming that's an exceptional number of cancellations and no shows. Surely you understand that, in order to conclude it's exceptional, you first need to look at past data for that and similar flights? For all you know that might even be less than is typical. And even if it's more than typical, if that's mostly due to a single block booking cancelation it might still not be cause for suspicion. Again, you'd first need to check how often such block cancellations occur before you could reasonably conclude there's something suspicious about this particular one.

And what about the other three flights? Are their cancellations and no shows outside the typical range?

 

[nt1]

I think most posters are assuming what the OPs theories and conclusions are based on years of seeing truthers come and go here. But unless I missed it, has OP succinctly stated a claim? Or “just asking questions?” If there is a claim somewhere that might help to enrich our understanding of what happened on 9/11 I would appreciate a recap (in OPs own words, not screenshots.)

Hello. Your post sounds sincere and i would enjoy engaging with it. Thank you*


I am commenting to keep it relevant and to revisit it. I am looking through looking for helpful comments in some of this mess.

Claim. I will make a couple for you that are focused when i return.

A claim that i can make that covers the reason for any of this.


The level of investigation from multiple agencies was not to the level that should be acceptable for the magnitude, significance, and precedent of the event.


I forgot "thank you". Thanks for the response

 

[nt1]

Cancellation by some Nat Geo film crew?

I did find this in an article. Ill reply back with what it was that had them on the flight.

The second question is what is the source?

Public document. Found easily. Flight 77 cancellation.

Fbi files.

I see you have screenshot there but its a bit blurry

My apologies. Ill provide again anything of interest.

Maybe provide more and different evidence

I will do my best. Please asmmk if there is something the interests you and ill bring what i find

IDK, some third-party photo expert that agrees with you?

Thank you for an example. Its helpful. Ill see what i can do.

Edited by Agatha: 

Edited to correct quote attribution. Please ensure your quotes of other members go to the correct posts.

 

[nt1]

This plus Al Qaeda repeatedly admitted they did 9-11.

Politely. Its the word "repeatedly" that makes it sound like it was a closed question in the first few months. Here is an article saying "for the first time" dated 2004. Maybe repeatedly after 2004. Although searching "Alqaeda admits to 9/11" does not come up with the amount of results that reflect "repeatedly"

Yes they admitted it. Words and facts do matter though.


Bin Laden claims responsibility for 9/11
CBC News · Posted: Oct 29, 2004 3:08 PM CDT | Last Updated: October 29, 2004

Al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden appeared in a new message aired on an Arabic TV station Friday night, for the first time claiming direct responsibility for the 2001 attacks against the United States.

Thank you for your comment. It was a factual statement that i purposely focused on one word, only for the importance of the distinction. There are multiple facts about the event that require it.

 

[nt1]

It would be pretty funny if we could do nt1's avatar revealing a masking halo using his program.

Its so funny. I never thought to. He is looking pretty good. I hope he did get a halo though.

 

[nt1]

He still hasn't shown how he tested his methods with pictures or video he knows to be free from tampering.

Photo Curves - Color Grading - Apps on Google Play

Color correction - Color Wheels, RGB/CMYK/LAB/HSL curves, create 3D LUT files.

play.google.com

Photo Editor - Apps on Google Play

Photo Editor is a small but powerful photo editing application

play.google.com

I included two free easy ones. I have several and use them to fact check the result of one.


See the guy dancing. He says the left ine is AI and the right one is him. Both ai. Both controlled by computer. Rotoscooping likely. Notice the feet on the right. No shadow. No natural lighting. Not the lighting nature gives.

*disclaimer. I am not interested in going back and forth about a dancer. If you disagree. Do so in one or two sentences. be direct. Concise. I will address it. Please. Do not do the 10 quote breakdown about this dancer. Do it to my event photos.

 

[nt1]

What if I say something similar to this:

You have not convinced me so far that you have anything of value to say about video trickery. If you think you're persuasive enough to make anyone invest their time in seeking out an eleven hour video in Spanish which you imply will contain a clue, then you are sadly mistaken. If you have evidence of something, show us.

The post you replied to asked what purpose pre-recorded videos would have if events didn't go to plan. That's what you said they were for. It makes no sense. Can you explain?

Hi Jack. I will review in full and do my best to explain. Thank you for the feedback, comment and question.

 

[nt1]

I have asked what pictures and video he has used as a control but didn't get a reply

Hi Andy. Politely i believe i answered this. Id be happy rmto provide and answer you were interested in. My apologies if i missed it.

 

[nt1]

You have no theory, as thinking persons understand the meaning of the word. Even as a hypothesis your words are lacking coherence.

Hi Steve

This is the first reply i see from you. I would be happy to provide a response to anything id it interests you.

Thanks

 

[nt1]

Okay, so if I'm reading it right - and I'm not sure I am, so I'm open to being corrected - nt1 has manipulated an image and used that as proof that the image has been manipulated.

Luma curve. Manipulated photos to find manipulation. Correct.

 

[nt1]

No, you are using photos that are copies of copies of copies. Or photos taken from video that was either 480p, 580p, or the network 780p footage taken with telephoto lenses. This does not include the thousands of images taken on 35mm film stock, and other smaller film used in instamatic camera common for the average person on 9-11-2001.

To put it politely, your source material is crap.

This is true. This is important. It is not fully true.

It does not make a difference to finding cause for concern.

It does not make the level difference to make them void.

Now.

Yes. Resolution. compression. Pixel rate changes. There are things that would void any finds.

But not having the meta data filled original or even a 2nd generation is necessary for these finds.

Dont worry. Tech is so advance that this wouldnt work on modern events. Almost. There are a few you can spot.


The 35mm statement is an important one. We need to address that at some point in time. Its very important.

 

[nt1]

@nt1 Can you be amenable and use the image button to post screenshots, not the attachment button?

I did not know that was perferred.

Yes. Absolutely. Thank you. Thank you.

I did not know that was better for the group

Why is that?

 

[nt1]

No you aren't. You are arguing what shape the negotiation table should be.

This is just poor. I disagree. I will address any questions or rebuttals that interest you. Thanks for the reply though

 

[nt1]

Is this all you are going to do on the subject?

What are you referncing?

 

[nt1]

You seem to be just assuming that's an exceptional number of cancellations and no shows. Surely you understand that, in order to conclude it's exceptional, you first need to look at past data for that and similar flights? For all you know that might even be less than is typical. And even if it's more than typical, if that's mostly due to a single block booking cancelation it might still not be cause for suspicion. Again, you'd first need to check how often such block cancellations occur before you could reasonably conclude there's something suspicious about this particular one.

And what about the other three flights? Are their cancellations and no shows outside the typical range?

Sir. The importance of the event. Not simply the number.

5 cancels would be enough. Zero cancels would be enough if the average was more than 1.

The other three.

Only 2 flights supplied cancel lists to investigators. 11 77. There is not complete data on the other two.

 

[Pixel42]

Sir.

Madam, actually.

The importance of the event. Not simply the number.

The importance of the event in retrospect is irrelevant unless it was also known in advance, when the cancellations and no shows happened. That is what you appear to be arguing the number shows - that the importance of the event was known in advance - but you can't assume that as part of your argument to show it. That's called "begging the question".

Unless you can show that the cancellations and no shows for the four flights were significantly greater than is typical for such flights there is no rational reason to find them remarkable, let alone evidence of foreknowledge of what was going to happen to them. You have yet to do so.

BTW the quotes you attributed to me in your post #727 are not from any of my posts.