Fetzer plugs Ace

[Triterope]

The delay would be a little safety net, and would allow the engineers to record the live event, composite the plane in, and run the new video 17 seconds after the fact.

Have you ever operated a VCR?

 

[Corsair 115]

Sadly for the perpetrators, but lucky for those with morals, the safety net was not enough. They screwed up Chopper 5, the nose of the plane image appeared to exit the tower, and they faded to black just a little too late.

Congratulations. Now you've only got about 40 other video angles to prove are fakes. Then you can move on to the stacks of still photos and prove they're all fakes too. Then you can move on to the many, many eyewitnesses on record as having seen the aircraft hit the towers and explain away what they saw.

By the way, do you know what front screen projection is yet? How about a matte painting? Have you read up on what an optical printer does yet? Do you understand what a difference in focal length of a lens does to how a photo looks? Read up on depth-of-field and what effects it yet?

I'm assuming the answer to all these is no...

 

[Foolmewunz]

So, let's see....

The omnipotent NWO has put together all the resources needed to stage the most elaborate (and, it should be added.... inexplicable) hoax in modern history. They've assembled technicians, placed in every major news outlet in the country to make sure they can pull of this video fakery. They've got commanders or managers watching over the technicians, and watchers watching those watchers. Right? This is the NWO, after all.

So they decide that they need a 17 second delay/loop to make sure that everything looks exactly right when they press the big blue button and feed the faked video to the world. And all of these resources are in place, just waiting for that crucial moment, when all they have to do is insert their bogus bit of tape.

And yet, during this 17 seconds, not one of them caught the fact that the video they'd created weeks (or even months) earlier, had this little "Oopsie!" moment when the cloud of debris image of the nose of the plane somehow continued out the other side of WTC2?

Why'd this happen? How'd this happen? Did they make the originals in the studio on Betamax and not realize they had to convert to VHS?

The conceit of this theory just underwhelms me. That this entire plan could be foiled by a google-meister noticing the cloud of debris plane's nose is just absurd. I guess the NWO is like LTW. They intentionally left those errors in there to spark dementia discussion.

 

[T.A.M.]

Now Pistachio can't wait to meet Cashew...

TAM

 

[TruthSeeker1234]

Congratulations. Now you've only got about 40 other video angles to prove are fakes. Then you can move on to the stacks of still photos and prove they're all fakes too. Then you can move on to the many, many eyewitnesses on record as having seen the aircraft hit the towers and explain away what they saw.

By the way, do you know what front screen projection is yet? How about a matte painting? Have you read up on what an optical printer does yet? Do you understand what a difference in focal length of a lens does to how a photo looks? Read up on depth-of-field and what effects it yet?

I'm assuming the answer to all these is no...

You're assuming wrong Corsair. I know what all of those things are, and none of them have anything to do with the video fakery on 9/11, except focal length, which has to do with any lens.

Front screen projection is a movie. I think you might mean rear screen projection, the old technique where they would project a moving background onto a screen behind, say, a stationary car. The actors would sit in the car, and stage hands would wiggle the car around. This was the original "real time composite", developed in the early days of film.

Optical printing is where photographic images are projected making an exposure onto another piece of film. This was the original "offline" method of compositing. They used optical printing when they modified the Zapruder film, we suspect.

I think in another post somewhere you were asking about stop motion. That's like Gumby, where you expose one frame at a time, and move real objects around. Its fun. I made a little go-motion video with my daughter once several years ago.

Focal length, technically speaking, is the distance from the center of a lens back to the point where the image focuses at infinity. In practical terms, focal length is the amount of zoom. Usually measured in millimeters. The smaller the number, the wider the angle, the larger the number, the more zoom.

What else? Oh, depth of field. Jeez, I took high school photography. We have cameras. The wider the aperture, the more out-of-focus are objects farther and closer from the focal point. The smaller the aperture, the better the focus on objects farther and closer than the focal point.

Now, as I said, none of that has to do with video fakery on 9/11. Have you read my paper yet? Last time I asked, you said no. I discuss the relevant technology. They used software-based video composting, not any of that ancient stuff you wanted to quiz me on.

Corsair, how would you like a special sneak preview of my irrefutable proof of video composting on Chopper 7? If I sent it to you PM, could you give me a little review, without posting it anywhere?

 

[~enigma~]

They used optical printing when they modified the Zapruder film, we suspect.

We????? So "War Of The Worlds" was real and you are one of the Martians.

 

[pomeroo]

You're assuming wrong Corsair. I know what all of those things are, and none of them have anything to do with the video fakery on 9/11, except focal length, which has to do with any lens.

Front screen projection is a movie. I think you might mean rear screen projection, the old technique where they would project a moving background onto a screen behind, say, a stationary car. The actors would sit in the car, and stage hands would wiggle the car around. This was the original "real time composite", developed in the early days of film.

Optical printing is where photographic images are projected making an exposure onto another piece of film. This was the original "offline" method of compositing. They used optical printing when they modified the Zapruder film, we suspect.

I think in another post somewhere you were asking about stop motion. That's like Gumby, where you expose one frame at a time, and move real objects around. Its fun. I made a little go-motion video with my daughter once several years ago.

Focal length, technically speaking, is the distance from the center of a lens back to the point where the image focuses at infinity. In practical terms, focal length is the amount of zoom. Usually measured in millimeters. The smaller the number, the wider the angle, the larger the number, the more zoom.

What else? Oh, depth of field. Jeez, I took high school photography. We have cameras. The wider the aperture, the more out-of-focus are objects farther and closer from the focal point. The smaller the aperture, the better the focus on objects farther and closer than the focal point.

Now, as I said, none of that has to do with video fakery on 9/11. Have you read my paper yet? Last time I asked, you said no. I discuss the relevant technology. They used software-based video composting, not any of that ancient stuff you wanted to quiz me on.

Corsair, how would you like a special sneak preview of my irrefutable proof of video composting on Chopper 7? If I sent it to you PM, could you give me a little review, without posting it anywhere?

By the way, there was absolutley no video fakery on 9/11/01. Your imaginary conspiracy cannot possibly exist.

 

[boloboffin]

You're assuming wrong Corsair. I know what all of those things are, and none of them have anything to do with the video fakery on 9/11, except focal length, which has to do with any lens.

Front screen projection is a movie. I think you might mean rear screen projection, the old technique where they would project a moving background onto a screen behind, say, a stationary car. The actors would sit in the car, and stage hands would wiggle the car around. This was the original "real time composite", developed in the early days of film.

Optical printing is where photographic images are projected making an exposure onto another piece of film. This was the original "offline" method of compositing. They used optical printing when they modified the Zapruder film, we suspect.

I think in another post somewhere you were asking about stop motion. That's like Gumby, where you expose one frame at a time, and move real objects around. Its fun. I made a little go-motion video with my daughter once several years ago.

Focal length, technically speaking, is the distance from the center of a lens back to the point where the image focuses at infinity. In practical terms, focal length is the amount of zoom. Usually measured in millimeters. The smaller the number, the wider the angle, the larger the number, the more zoom.

What else? Oh, depth of field. Jeez, I took high school photography. We have cameras. The wider the aperture, the more out-of-focus are objects farther and closer from the focal point. The smaller the aperture, the better the focus on objects farther and closer than the focal point.

Now, as I said, none of that has to do with video fakery on 9/11. Have you read my paper yet? Last time I asked, you said no. I discuss the relevant technology. They used software-based video composting, not any of that ancient stuff you wanted to quiz me on.

Corsair, how would you like a special sneak preview of my irrefutable proof of video composting on Chopper 7? If I sent it to you PM, could you give me a little review, without posting it anywhere?

 

[8den]

Ace I've repeatadly asked you a simply question. At what point during post production are you usually invited onto a project?

Offline? Online? After the Grade? How do you recieve the copy you work off? Quicktime? Dvd? Beta SP? FTP'd? Do you like a spilt track music on one channel Dial & SFX on the other with BITC?

 

[Tony Szamboti]

Wait a sec...Uncle Fetzer thinks a delay between a TV and Radio broadcast is astonishing proof that TV fakery is possible? And he was unaware of the delay between radio and TV??? Now can someone please explain how he convinces anybody he is smart and how the heck did he become a college professor. Someone should put this into the paperwork new students at the University of Wisconsin all sign so they can see what they are getting into. I now hold that University responsible in part for their stupidity in hiring this clown.

I don't think Jim Fetzer is working for the University of Wisconsin. He simply moved to Madison, WI last year and that is where he is holding his conference. I find most of the theories he now backs to be simply out of touch with reality (beam weapon, no planes) and with no rational basis, and so do the vast majority of others who are questioning the government explanations we have been given concerning the events of Sept. 11, 2001.

 

[Zep]

I find most of the theories he now backs to be simply out of touch with reality (beam weapon, no planes) and with no rational basis, and so do the vast majority of others who are questioning the government explanations we have been given concerning the events of Sept. 11, 2001.

So do you think it's reasonable to apply the same level of skepticism to all the other theories doing the rounds among the Truth movement?

 

[Spins]

See you in Madison, Jim Fetzer. I look forward to finally meeting you in person.

You are meeting Uncle Fetzer in Madison; I take it either here or here.

Anyways hope the appointment at the clinic goes well for you both, I know mental health can be a touchy subject but I'm glad you are both trying to come to terms with your illness.

 

[Brainache]

You are meeting Uncle Fetzer in Madison; I take it either here or here.

Anyways hope the appointment at the clinic goes well for you both, I know mental health can be a touchy subject but I'm glad you are both trying to come to terms with your illness.

Well I think it's amusing that they both think they are going to Madison to adress a conference of concerned citizens.

Should we tell them that it is actually a "sting" set up by the government's new Mental Health Police (Nut Cops) to drag them all off to the asylum in strait jackets?

Nah, let them find out for themselves.

 

[Tony Szamboti]

So do you think it's reasonable to apply the same level of skepticism to all the other theories doing the rounds among the Truth movement?

Absolutely. I would not ask anyone to believe anything about something as serious as the tower collapses without them scrutinizing it for themselves.

Everyone should have a healthy skepticism and research an issue as important as this one for themselves.

Remember all of the theories also includes the present government explanation for the collapses.

 

[DavidJames]

Remember all of the theories also includes the present government explanation for the collapses.

Remember, none of the CT have verifiable evidence to support them.

Unless of course, you consider hearsay, conjecture, rumors, speculation, lies, cherry picked quotes and self proclaimed coincidences, verifiable evidence.

 

[TruthSeeker1234]

Ace I've repeatadly asked you a simply question. At what point during post production are you usually invited onto a project?

Offline? Online? After the Grade? How do you recieve the copy you work off? Quicktime? Dvd? Beta SP? FTP'd? Do you like a spilt track music on one channel Dial & SFX on the other with BITC?

For anyone tuning in, 8den claims to be able to get broadcast quality copies of 9/11 videos with a phone call. I don't believe him. I've repeatedly asked him to do this for me and offered to pay him, and he won't.

As with Corsair, none of what 8den is trolling about has anything to do with 9/11 TV fakery. I'll answer for anyone who might be interested in scoring to picture.

In terms of my career experience, the most relevant to 9/11 would be music videos I made 20 years ago at a public access TV studio in Tucson Arizona. I had made up cartoon rooms and scenes on a little Commodore computer. We then composited a live Ace Baker into the scenes using blue screen chroma key. It was fun. I've always been fascinated by TV fakery.

Scoring music to picture is normally done after the video edit is finished and "locked", but on various projects I have been involved at various points. I can remember several action movies I did where I was scoring scenes that had yet to have CGI inserts added into them. They would add titles that say, "asteroid crosses left to right" and "spacecraft blows up" and such. Then later I'd receive a copy with the CGI in there.

Over the years I've worked with all sorts of video formats in scoring - 3/4 beta, 1/2 inch tape. Back then, they'd usually have SMPTE time code on one audio track, and dialog on the other. That way the video is the "master", and I'd slave my sequencer to that. Since it was film and not broadcast television, it would usually be non-drop time code. Picture would always have "window burn" which I think you call BITC, which is "burned in time code". For lurkers, thats the SMPTE numbers burned into the bottom of the picture.

Looking back, the old days were dreadful. I'd speed more time rewinding and fast forwarding than writing.

Nowadays, we work with digital video of course. I use Logic as my main sequencer, the show is a quicktime movie. I order DV compression, because that's set up to be native to Logic. I've a firewire box that sends the video to the big screen, or I can just pull the video up in a window in Logic. Either way. If I use the firewire conversion, there is a delay that must be compensated for. I usually check by comparing the embedded audio with the extracted audio. When those line up, we're locked.

I'll get a copy with just dialog, and it plays fine from the audio embedded in the video, but I can also extract the audio from the quicktime file and play that as a track in Logic. Sometimes there will be "temp" music as examples, so eventually I always need a copy with no music.

If the SFX (sound effects) are final, I want to hear them, because it affects musical choices. Sometimes they pan dialog one way and SFX the other way, thats cool if I can separate them out, but not necessary.

There is usually a flash and a beep (a "two pop") at the head and tail of each video. Those are good, I'll usually bounce the pops onto my final audio file, so the video editor can just line that back up with the video, and there's no question about where it belongs.

Yes, there is still window burn (is BITC an English thing?). Since its an Amercan TV show, we're using drop frame.I always want to compare my time code numbers in Logic to the ones on video, just to make sure they agree. It's an old habit from the tape days. To be honest, as long they have the head and tail pop, there's no question about where my music file goes.

There is also time code stamping which is cool. You can embed a time code position into a file, and then when an editor pulls that up in Avid or Pro Tools or whatever, it will jump to the correct location. But lately we haven't been bothering with that. The editors on the show like audio pops, and so do I. It works.


What else?

Oh, FTP. Yes, often we transfer files by FTP (file transfer protocol). I have an FTP site on my end, and most of my clients also have theirs as well. If there's time, it's usually less hassle to just get the video on a DVD. I often deliver my finals by uploading to someone's FTP site. Though I like bringing musicians and singers into my studio and working together, nowadays many of my session people have their own studios, and can do their bit at their place, and upload their parts to me.


Does that answer you questions?

 

[~enigma~]

I don't think Jim Fetzer is working for the University of Wisconsin. He simply moved to Madison, WI last year and that is where he is holding his conference. I find most of the theories he now backs to be simply out of touch with reality (beam weapon, no planes) and with no rational basis, and so do the vast majority of others who are questioning the government explanations we have been given concerning the events of Sept. 11, 2001.

Where was the loon a professor?

 

[8den]

For anyone tuning in, 8den claims to be able to get broadcast quality copies of 9/11 videos with a phone call. I don't believe him. I've repeatedly asked him to do this for me and offered to pay him, and he won't.

no you muppet I told you I regularly work with it in my job as a tv news editor. I suggested you try and contact several news agencies, and told you to eff off when you expected me to fetch it.

Does that answer you questions?

Yes it does it tells me that you are brought it at the usual point between offline and online.

In order to preserve drivespace on feature film compression is added when the footage is digitized. A feature film can often have a 10:1. The film/tv is cut using this compression. After picture is locked, copies are sent to out to finishing facility where an uncompressed version of the edit can be reassembled and work can start on grading and VFX. In tandem copies of the composer are sent to the composer, and sound mixer.

ACE YOU DON'T COME INTO DAY TO DAY WORKING CONTACT WITH UNCOMPRESSED VIDEO.

Hell compression artifacting is what you'll see constantly in the videos you work with. Mosquito noise, contouring and posterizing on smooth gradients this stuff in all the video you've worked with.

You are a man who has a photocopy of a book on the old masters and proclaims himself an expert in Caravaggio.

 

[leftysergeant]

Forget the wonkish arguments over how the tape could be faked. Ace postulates that there are visual clues in the tapes themselves that show something that should not be there, like the nose of the aircraft coming out the other side of the building.

No such thing occurs. The dark object which he claims is the nose changes shape and turns incandescent orange before our very eyes. It never neatly fills the phonied-in blue outline.

It's a cloud of fuel vapor that deflagrates within less than a second of exiting the building. Nothing continues on from that point separate from the flames.

It only looks wrong to those who do not know what it is supposed to look like.

 

[simakperrce]

Soccer is an inside job. No way could so many people find such a boring sport so fascinating. They must all be paid shills for the Soccer World Crime League.

I guess you are on to something here... How about Loose Balls, First Edition ?