Probabbly nothing but what is this camera attached to?

I s in the first seconds of the footage I don't really understand the camera and the chopper would anyone please be so kind to explain it to me?
Thank you

Its attached to a rotating swivel between the skids. This allows the camera to turn 360 degrees and look straight down. You see this frequently with FLIR cameras as well.

Mostly what I mean is why the camera is not moving while the elicopter is.
Do they have some kind of stabilizer?

Its gyro stabililized, and pointed by an operator inside the cabin.
www.aerialexposures.com..." target="_blank" class="postlink" rel="nofollow"> www.aerialexposures.com...
So the operator just points it at something and it stays pointing that way until its told to point another direction.

Originally posted by piacenza
what is this camera attached to?

Pixels.



````````````````````````````
please read ABOUT ATS: Warnings for one-line or short responses

www.abovetopsecret.com...

[edit on 12/5/07 by masqua]

Some doofus has tried to manufacture some fake conspiracy footage by keying a shot of some helicopter skids (and a tight shot of a chopper passing in front of the camera lens) to footage of the WTC).

If you look at the arc of the skids, you'll notice a sharpness to the edges that isn't apparent in anything else in the image.

Someone's being a jerk-off

Here this is a better photo of the type of camera which apparently shot that footage:
www.gaelichelicopters.com...

Specific features of the system are as follows:
* Gyro Stabilised Gimball System
* Panasonic AW-E800A Camera
* Fujinon HD HAS 18x17.6 HI DEF Lens
* Sony DVW 250 Digital Betacam Recorder
* 360 Degrees Continuous Field of View

defcon,

Neither cameramount is going to show that degree of differentiation of movement from the platform (aka helicopter). As I said in my previous post, somebody's trying to fake-out some footage (badly, I might add)

Actually it appears to be an add, and one in poor taste if I may say.
At the end it says to "Google Wescam", and it comes up with a sight which sells gyro stabilized cameras. Mostly to the military, but a civilian organization would be able to buy that type of gear as well.
www.wescam.com...



[edit on 5/12/2007 by defcon5]

It's no ad, defcon. Wescam is legendary for their stabilisation, most often seen in film. Like I said, some dimwit's trying to make something out of nothing

So, they are trying to say that because these cameras are used by the military that it was shot from a military helicopter, or what? I guess the conspiracy here is eluding me at the moment. Military gear is available to anyone as long as its not classified military equipment, and you have the outrageous money to pay for it. I personally have seen folks buy stuff from Korry Electronics to build private flight simulators, and they are perfectly happy to sell folks anything right up to the MFD used in fighter planes, as long as its not classified, and you have the cash for it. So if that is the video makers point, then you are correct, he is a dimwit…

[edit on 5/12/2007 by defcon5]

Originally posted by defcon5
So, they are trying to say that because these cameras are used by the military that it was shot from a military helicopter, or what? I guess the conspiracy here is eluding me at the moment. Military gear is available to anyone as long as its not classified military equipment, and you have to outrageous money to pay for it. I personally have seen folks buy stuff from Korry Electronics to build private flight simulators, and they are perfectly happy to sell folks anything right up to the MFD used in fighter planes, as long as its not classified and you have the cash for it. So if that is the video posters point, then you are correct, he is a dimwit…

No, defcon. The point is that this video is a bull#e attempt by someone to make something out of nothing. The shot of the WTC and the shot of the helicopter were put together by some amateur who has nothing better to do. This stuff is hardly credible

I am sorry but I think this shot is real it has nothing to do with 2 shots put it togheter.
So is it aa stabilized camera?
Thats a very good one.

what may be confusing some people is that this is a shot taken from a helicopter moving away from the WTC. The camera is facing backwards as the helicopter moves away.

Fitzgibbon -- the "sharpness" of the skids compared to the background looks fine to me...the skids are closer, so they'll be more in focus thna the background. I see absolutely no reason to suspect that this is fake footage.

It didn’t look fake to me either which is why I was not getting the point I guess. The helicopter that flies in front of the camera is quite a ways from the aircraft which is filming but looks close because of the level of zoom. The rest looks normal to me.

Originally posted by piacenza
I am sorry but I think this shot is real it has nothing to do with 2 shots put it togheter.
So is it aa stabilized camera?
Thats a very good one.

No piacenza; it's a faked shot, a badly faked shot I might add. The zoom in at the end of the first shot? Whoever did the luminence key of the helicopter skids (badly too, I might add) also tried to zoom the image of the WTC to make it look like there was a zoom happening on that element. Trouble is, his keyframe's about 2 frames late so the 'zoom' starts on the skid and the WTC shot's still sitting there doing nothing when it should be zooming in as well.

This dog don't hunt

Originally posted by Soylent Green Is People
what may be confusing some people is that this is a shot taken from a helicopter moving away from the WTC. The camera is facing backwards as the helicopter moves away.

Fitzgibbon -- the "sharpness" of the skids compared to the background looks fine to me...the skids are closer, so they'll be more in focus thna the background. I see absolutely no reason to suspect that this is fake footage.

Nice try guys. I work in television and have for many years. I'm not confused by any stretch of the imagination. To refute your post:

1. The camera image of the WTC is static with a poorly-executed attempt in the last 8-10 frames of the shot to mock-up a 'zoom' that corresponds with the zoom on the camera skids element

2. Obvious disconnect visually between the 'helicopter' that's reputedly taking the foreground image and the movement of the 'helicopter' parts that should be moving in lock-step, camera stabilisation or not

3. Camera mounts on airplanes and helicopters are mounted on the front for a clear, unobstructed view. How about you come up with a believable explanation that explains a second camera-mount being in-frame?

4. By sharpness, I meant that there's a clear sharp edge to the skids that shouldn't be there and that can't be explained by optics. That edginess doesn't match anything else in the frame, ergo points directly to an amateurish attempt to luminence key a shot over an existing shot.

If this fake satisfies something for you, good. However, it's a fake. Period.

Originally posted by defcon5
It didn’t look fake to me either which is why I was not getting the point I guess. The helicopter that flies in front of the camera is quite a ways from the aircraft which is filming but looks close because of the level of zoom. The rest looks normal to me.

defcon,

the helicopter that is 'flying' in front of the camera would have to be pretty damn close to completely obscure the frame as it does. Plus it would have to be an interesting helicopter to display DV-video key artifacting in the manner that it does.

Don't try to teach granny how to suck eggs, fellas














0-0

It does look very tacky. For a start, the cameras are designed not to get the skids in shot...

^
^^
not unless it's shooting the photo backwards (towards the back of the helicopter) while the helo is moving away from the WTC, such as the case with the beginning of this video. If the camera was pointed towards the forward (towards the direction the helo was heading), then you would not see the skids.