THE DERAILING ROOM

A place to relax and socialize - to muse, think aloud and suggest
simonshack
Administrator
Posts: 7341
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 8:09 pm
Location: italy
Contact:

Re: Boston Marathon- alLEGed "terror attack"- Apr15, 2013

Unread post by simonshack »

sunshine05 wrote: There were more problems with the cowboy interview than the shaky background. The speed of the pedestrians in the background also seems wrong. I don't see that interview as a camera glitch at all.
Dear Sunshine,

Please know that these two animated gifs I made are speeded up - intentionally so, as my point was to illustrate more clearly the actual background wobbling. But yes, the bottom line is that these independently distorting / rotating backdrops simply cannot be explained by any known 'camera glitch' or image-stabilization processing.

Image
Image

And the "bottom of the bottom line" is that the "Boston Marathon Bombing" imagery, all of it, was probably produced (staged / scripted and manufactured) - wholesale - in a studio (using pre-captured Boston street imagery).
sunshine05
Member
Posts: 307
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2013 6:00 pm

Re: Boston Marathon- alLEGed "terror attack"- Apr15, 2013

Unread post by sunshine05 »

Yes, I agree that it was all done in a studio. I understood that the background people were sped up but even without that, the speed of their movement doesn't look right to me "as is".
Oddfellow
Banned
Posts: 29
Joined: Sun Jun 30, 2013 5:58 pm

Re: Boston Marathon- alLEGed "terror attack"- Apr15, 2013

Unread post by Oddfellow »

The background wavy movement coincides with the movement of the camera does it not? It is easy to see in the sped up version.
simonshack
Administrator
Posts: 7341
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 8:09 pm
Location: italy
Contact:

Re: Boston Marathon- alLEGed "terror attack"- Apr15, 2013

Unread post by simonshack »

Oddfellow wrote:The background wavy movement coincides with the movement of the camera does it not? It is easy to see in the sped up version.
Oddfellow: so now those dancing / distorting backdrops are not an effect caused by some crappy Youtube video-stabilizer processing? Wasn't this your original argument? Now you're arguing that it all looks like natural camera movements? What's it gonna be, Oddy Fellow? You can't have it both ways, you know. But to answer your question : no - the backdrops' wavy movements do NOT coincide with the observed, quite contained camera jiggles (in either of the two above looped clips).
Oddfellow
Banned
Posts: 29
Joined: Sun Jun 30, 2013 5:58 pm

Re: Boston Marathon- alLEGed "terror attack"- Apr15, 2013

Unread post by Oddfellow »

simonshack wrote:
Oddfellow wrote:The background wavy movement coincides with the movement of the camera does it not? It is easy to see in the sped up version.
Oddfellow: so now those dancing / distorting backdrops are not an effect caused by some crappy Youtube video-stabilizer processing? Wasn't this your original argument? Now you're arguing that it all looks like natural camera movements? What's it gonna be, Oddy Fellow? You can't have it both ways, you know. But to answer your question : no - the backdrops' wavy movements do NOT coincide with the observed, quite contained camera jiggles (in either of the two above looped clips).
No, but the parallax distortion caused by the relative motion of the subject in relation to the background, is possibly too much for the software to handle on some catch-all preset, and causes the effect/glitch. You're a musician Simon, you know the factory presets always sound horrible and feature too much effect processing, probably no different here. And every time the camera moves, the flag buildings wave. Find an example of this type of distortion shot from a tripod and not hand held and I'll concede my theory does not hold water.
Oddfellow
Banned
Posts: 29
Joined: Sun Jun 30, 2013 5:58 pm

Re: Boston Marathon- alLEGed "terror attack"- Apr15, 2013

Unread post by Oddfellow »

http://www.theverge.com/2014/6/1/576955 ... tter-movie

Some one did one of the tests for me. Here is a horrible, hand held, major motion picture release processed with image stabilization software. I see flag waving backgrounds.
brianv
Member
Posts: 3971
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 10:19 pm
Contact:

Re: Boston Marathon- alLEGed "terror attack"- Apr15, 2013

Unread post by brianv »

Oddfellow wrote:http://www.theverge.com/2014/6/1/576955 ... tter-movie

Some one did one of the tests for me. Here is a horrible, hand held, major motion picture release processed with image stabilization software. I see flag waving backgrounds.
Are you saying "Boston" was a "motion picture"? Was the crap movie filmed against a green screen?
Oddfellow
Banned
Posts: 29
Joined: Sun Jun 30, 2013 5:58 pm

Re: Boston Marathon- alLEGed "terror attack"- Apr15, 2013

Unread post by Oddfellow »

For lack of a better term yea it was a motion picture.

My main point though is that here we are presented with the same artifacts we are discussing, manifested in a major motion picture release during image stabilization software, just like the cowboy street video. They may have still done it on a green screen, but the wavy buildings are a result or the image stabilization applied, not something inherent in the video clip itself. The distinction is an important one if we are using the distortion as a earmark for what is real and what is not.
simonshack
Administrator
Posts: 7341
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 8:09 pm
Location: italy
Contact:

Re: Boston Marathon- alLEGed "terror attack"- Apr15, 2013

Unread post by simonshack »

Oddfellow wrote:http://www.theverge.com/2014/6/1/576955 ... tter-movie

Some one did one of the tests for me. Here is a horrible, hand held, major motion picture release processed with image stabilization software. I see flag waving backgrounds.
I see nothing, Oddfellow - only this message:

"Update: The video has been taken offline likely because it contained the entirety of a copyrighted Hollywood movie."

So was it taken offline only hours after you posted the above link to it yesterday? Or what ? What exactly are you up to, Oddy?
HonestlyNow
Member
Posts: 473
Joined: Mon Sep 12, 2011 11:15 pm

Re: Boston Marathon- alLEGed "terror attack"- Apr15, 2013

Unread post by HonestlyNow »

*
Suppose the 'Arrendondo' video is stabilized. How does one get a view of the non-stabilized version?
(I'll bet it doesn't exist.)
hoi.polloi
Member
Posts: 5060
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 7:24 pm

Re: Boston Marathon- alLEGed "terror attack"- Apr15, 2013

Unread post by hoi.polloi »

Oddfellow wrote:For lack of a better term yea it was a motion picture.

My main point though is that here we are presented with the same artifacts we are discussing, manifested in a major motion picture release during image stabilization software, just like the cowboy street video. They may have still done it on a green screen, but the wavy buildings are a result or the image stabilization applied, not something inherent in the video clip itself. The distinction is an important one if we are using the distortion as a earmark for what is real and what is not.
No, that's not right. It isn't exactly the same. Furthermore, the point doesn't stand — not since Hollywood is complicit in adding subliminal reinforcements of their hoaxes to movies since before the 1960's. We have shown both overt and subtle versions of explanations and excuses for their virtual reality. We have seen online entities and members of the forum stick with us for years, only to implant a single doubt in an otherwise good point being made, and then they turn out to be a sim. And one that is markedly improved from the previous sim exposed online as a sim.

So are we to assume that, suddenly, the pattern is going to stop? The creators of false online personas created to support a falsified reality are going to give up?

In any case, we don't really need to move a benchmark unless it is seriously normal for news events and we can demonstrate it is. Until then, it even remains a bit of a mystery why it happens at all. It could be many reasons.
Oddfellow
Banned
Posts: 29
Joined: Sun Jun 30, 2013 5:58 pm

Re: Boston Marathon- alLEGed "terror attack"- Apr15, 2013

Unread post by Oddfellow »

simonshack wrote:
Oddfellow wrote:http://www.theverge.com/2014/6/1/576955 ... tter-movie

Some one did one of the tests for me. Here is a horrible, hand held, major motion picture release processed with image stabilization software. I see flag waving backgrounds.
I see nothing, Oddfellow - only this message:

"Update: The video has been taken offline likely because it contained the entirety of a copyrighted Hollywood movie."

So was it taken offline only hours after you posted the above link to it yesterday? Or what ? What exactly are you up to, Oddy?
The video on the page was the movie "Cloverfield". Cloverfield was a terrible monster/action/suspense movie that featured nausea inducing camera shake, as the premise was it was recorded by a guy using a HD camcorder or something similar, fleeing a large monster in a city with a group of friends. The lack of a single steady shot made many viewers more than a little motion sick or gave them headaches. This article featured the movie after image stabilization treatment, and it showed fairly stable subjects (the focus of the stabilization), and wavy backgrounds, like the cowboy video. In fairness, it also was not fully cropped, so they would center on the subject, then the border of the image would move around a bit to counter the camera shake, but the backgrounds of some of the scenes (I did not watch the entire movie) did exhibit the flag waving characteristic we have been discussing.

As far as the video being removed, I don't know what to tell ya, the article is fairly recent. I found it googling for image stabilized films. I have tried to find the source video elsewhere but am coming up short.
HonestlyNow
Member
Posts: 473
Joined: Mon Sep 12, 2011 11:15 pm

Re: Boston Marathon- alLEGed "terror attack"- Apr15, 2013

Unread post by HonestlyNow »

Oddfellow wrote:. . . that featured nausea inducing camera shake,
. . . made many viewers more than a little motion sick or gave them headaches.
So, H-ll-wood goes from regularly inserting vomit scenes into their productions . . . to creating conditions that could make them an actuality.
simonshack
Administrator
Posts: 7341
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 8:09 pm
Location: italy
Contact:

Re: Boston Marathon- alLEGed "terror attack"- Apr15, 2013

Unread post by simonshack »

Oddfellow wrote: As far as the video being removed, I don't know what to tell ya, the article is fairly recent. I found it googling for image stabilized films. I have tried to find the source video elsewhere but am coming up short.
So ... did you even watch that "stabilized version of the Cloverfield" movie yourself, Oddy? If so, WHERE?
Oddfellow
Banned
Posts: 29
Joined: Sun Jun 30, 2013 5:58 pm

Re: Boston Marathon- alLEGed "terror attack"- Apr15, 2013

Unread post by Oddfellow »

simonshack wrote:
Oddfellow wrote: As far as the video being removed, I don't know what to tell ya, the article is fairly recent. I found it googling for image stabilized films. I have tried to find the source video elsewhere but am coming up short.
So ... did you even watch that "stabilized version of the Cloverfield" movie yourself, Oddy? If so, WHERE?

Sorry I thought I made that clear. I DID watch some of it on the page I linked to originally (maybe 2 minutes worth spread out across the film, enough to verify the artifact was present), at the time the movie was up and the link worked.




********************************
ADMIN NOTICE (simon): Well, Oddfellow, enough already - I think you're full of it and am moving your "stablization argument" over to the derailing room where it belongs.
Post Reply