Merged Skeptics vs. Knowers/Believers

WooTubeLogoSmall.jpg


King of the Americas said:
So, you haven't looked, have you?
Click to expand...

Yes of course I have. In fact I spend quite a lot of my spare time browsing the latest credulous UFO nonsense on YouTube. Every now and then doing detailed examinations of the various videos. Some of the one's if looked into in great detail are the Turkish one from a few years ago, someone flying a kite in LA, and some GCI ones trying to be passed off as real (the ridiculous Pyramid flying over Moscow!! etc).

But if you have any favourites, please feel free to post them. :)
 
King of the Americas said:
No...
Click to expand...
No you didn't spot the disappearing tree or no you haven't heard about Vue?

http://www.e-onsoftware.com/products/vue/vue_9_infinite/

Amazing 3D photorealistic animation software used by pro sfx/cgi studios that is available for less than $1000 on your home computer. Have a look at the show reel on the link above.

King of the Americas said:
I would have liked there to have been fewer high wires.
Click to expand...
Find out who made it then and write and ask them to re-render a version of it with less. Also ask him to fix that disappearing tree. :)
 
King of the Americas said:
What disappearing tree?
Click to expand...
When the white drops fall from the big thing and the camera points down to the thing that looks like a rocket launch that is expelling smoke rings. The rings go behind a rather large tree/bush. At the end of the sequence when the camera pulls back to show a fuller scene, the rather large tree that the smoke rings went behind isn't there anymore.
 
Stray Cat said:
When the white drops fall from the big thing and the camera points down to the thing that looks like a rocket launch that is expelling smoke rings. The rings go behind a rather large tree/bush. At the end of the sequence when the camera pulls back to show a fuller scene, the rather large tree that the smoke rings went behind isn't there anymore.
Click to expand...

Could you, or someone more capable, do a stilled screen shot with a nice red circle around the missing tree?
 
I've left the YouTube time code on so you can match them up to the footage.

Pic-1.jpg

Smoke ring goes behind the big tree

Pic-2.jpg

Here it is getting lost in the foliage


Pic-3.jpg

As the lower light blinks out (the light was emitting the smoke rings), the camera zooms out.

Pic-4.jpg

Revealing a rather treeless foreground.
 
Last edited:
Stray Cat said:
I've left the YouTube time code on so you can match them up to the footage.

...

Revealing a rather treeless foreground.
Click to expand...

Very cool.

Although, I assume, a slight change in camera angel could account for that too. The large trees look relatively close, and there is a cut before the tree disappears, right?

Isn't it more likely that someone took a few steps to the left, rather than editing a tree out of a video clip?
 
King of the Americas said:
Very cool.

Although, I assume, a slight change in camera angel could account for that too. The large trees look relatively close, and there is a cut before the tree disappears, right?
Click to expand...
There is a momentary 'shake' of the camera where the trees go out of the field of view, but no detectable 'cut', then when the trees come back into view, they match up accurately with how they were previously and at that point the camera zooms out.

King of the Americas said:
Isn't it more likely that someone took a few steps to the left, rather than editing a tree out of a video clip?
Click to expand...
As the camera pans quite a distance to the right showing no sign of a tree in the foreground and also remember that when the disappearing tree is in shot, the camera is zoomed in so it's not as close as it appears, I would say it's highly unlikely that a simple move to the left would result in the tree not being within the field of view of the camera.

But I also don't think it was "edited out". With Vue, you can simply set something to not be there anymore. No work required apart from setting a keyframe at that point and deleting the object you don't want (two mouse clicks and it's done).

Also a massive red flag is that there is no information with this video.
No location, No names, No Date, No nothing.
 
Stray Cat said:
There is a momentary 'shake' of the camera where the trees go out of the field of view, but no detectable 'cut', then when the trees come back into view, they match up accurately with how they were previously and at that point the camera zooms out.


As the camera pans quite a distance to the right showing no sign of a tree in the foreground and also remember that when the disappearing tree is in shot, the camera is zoomed in so it's not as close as it appears, I would say it's highly unlikely that a simple move to the left would result in the tree not being within the field of view of the camera.

But I also don't think it was "edited out". With Vue, you can simply set something to not be there anymore. No work required apart from setting a keyframe at that point and deleting the object you don't want (two mouse clicks and it's done).

Also a massive red flag is that there is no information with this video.
No location, No names, No Date, No nothing.
Click to expand...

So, there's a 'shake', possibly caused by someone running a few steps?

And in the scene where the tree(s) are missing, the shot doesn't pan as far to the right, as the first, does it?

I am sort of building a mobile podcasting studio, but all I have available is iMovie, which is minimalistic to say the least. Vue sounds awesome! My next purchase was going to be a version of Final Cut.

*I NEVER shoot with the time and date stuff on. It is ugly, takes up space, and is utterly meaningless for most of what I shoot. To turn it ON, you'd have to set it correctly, and then turn it on within the Menu and Settings area. If I saw a U.F.O., I'd probably just hit the record button and start shooting. But that is just how 'I' roll...I don't presume to speak for anyone else.
 
Last edited:
King of the Americas said:
So, there's a 'shake', possibly caused by someone running a few steps?
Click to expand...
No, the camera inexplicably just points up for less than a quarter of a second, not enough time to move a significant distance.

King of the Americas said:
And in the scene where the tree(s) are missing, the shot doesn't pan as far to the right, as the first, does it?
Click to expand...
If you look at my first and second screen grabs, they actually overlap (the branch the white arrow point to on both). So you can see the extent of the pan to the right in relation to the distant tress I've outlined.
In the last shot where the camera has zoomed out, it actually pans a lot further to the right in my screen shot and on the video continues to pan right (at 0.37) even more with still no sign of any tree.
Then take into consideration that the foreground (disappearing) tree is not as close as it looks in the zoomed in shot and it actually overlaps and is much higher in the frame than the distant trees.

King of the Americas said:
I am sort of building a mobile podcasting studio, but all I have available is iMovie, which is minimalistic to say the least. Vue sounds awesome! My next purchase was going to be a version of Final Cut.
Click to expand...
Depending on what you're doing with it Final Cut is good for video editing. Adding Adobe Premier will give you plenty of great sfx. Vue is not video editing software, it is 3D modelling and animation. It's a great bit of software though and eventually I'd like to buy a copy too.
At the moment I use 'Bryce Pro' for 3D animation, modeling and landscape generation. but I still edit my videos in iMovie. I only use the new iMovie for uploading though as it's a bit crap for doing complex editing. I have a souped up version of iMovie HD with tons of third party plug ins that allows hundred of extra transitions, extra title styles and video fx.

King of the Americas said:
*I NEVER shoot with the time and date stuff on. It is ugly, takes up space, and is utterly meaningless for most of what I shoot. To turn it ON, you'd have to set it correctly, and then turn it on within the Menu and Settings area. If I saw a U.F.O., I'd probably just hit the record button and start shooting. But that is just how 'I' roll...I don't presume to speak for anyone else.
Click to expand...
I wasn't really talking about 'on-screen information'. I hate that too. What I was talking about is that the video is not accompanied by any information relating to it. So the location can not be identified (as you would expect if the location was totally fictitious and only generated on a computer).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom