[HOAX] Isaac CARET - Drones [HOAX]

Originally posted by 11 11
When I was looking at these renders, I automaticaly thought to myself he is using the render system called Lightwave. It just so happens in the gallery/video section of the Lightwave Official website there is a video made by a guy named Isaac Botkin. I turns out Isaac Botkin is very well known in the Film, and CG business...

[...]

Isaac Botkin runs this following website:

www.outside-hollywood.com... **note the posters name

..Isaac is also the "alias" used when posting here:

isaaccaret.fortunecity.com...

Thank you for this information 11 11.

Although I also think this is a hoax, I doubt this would be the same person.

Doesn't make any sense to me that someone who would go to all that trouble in hoaxing the so called Caret 'documentation' and then end up using his own name as the alias.

Originally posted by Bspiracy
Or show me a render that emulates the noise pattern of the RGB channels of a scanner.. I just haven'tr seen it yet.

Quit claiming it is CGI.. show me in a concise way or by example.

b

Not sure if I understand entirely the rage. These are prints of CG generated images on glossy paper. They are then scanned. Note the cat hair and lint. Cheap glossy paper at that I believe. That paper always seems to leave hills and valleys that scan with a look like I see in these. Then after being created in software, printed to glossy paper and scanned its compressed to a crappy .jpg file. Draw whatever conclusions you want.

So - no its not currently CGI. It is a scanned image of a print made from a CG Image. Since it is a scan, why would evidence it is a scan prove its a photo? You lost me somehow?

Originally posted by Bspiracy
REGARDING CGI HOAX CLAIMERS
refute my earlier posts before you keep claimiingit's cgi. Anything can be modelled.. we all know this. Present logical NEW thoughts please. Show me an opposite to what I claim with the R,G and B noise patterns...

I will place renders and photos side by side if you wish.. in channel separations as well if really good renders are shown to emulate the noise pattern of the Digital Rebel XT shown in one recorded phot set. Or show me a render that emulates the noise pattern of the RGB channels of a scanner.. I just haven'tr seen it yet.

Quit claiming it is CGI.. show me in a concise way or by example.

b

PLEASE... Photoshop, post render.

Springer...

But it clicks so perfectly. Do a background check on Isaac Botkin, he actually worked in film for the Department of Defense. That same Isaac talks about working at the DoD in this website:

isaaccaret.fortunecity.com...

But, of course, he adds his fake storyline to it...


Maybe he wants to be caught, thats why he used his name as the alias. Its for marketing his book or something...

Now tell me, isn't it just a wee bit too easy that 11.11 has found this name? I mean the poster Isaac had to know we would be looking in that area, that we look at everything here. He had to know that, it's just too laid out, like a crime scene where the clues are planted.

NO, I have no proof. But you don't need to be a super genius to smell horse apples. This is our old buddy GR or a clone. And this is a massive game.

And it ain't over till the fat lady sings.

Somebody has declared war on the UFO community, and they are doing it by making us come to believe nothing is real, and at the same time to make anyone with any idea of visiting here, think that all there is to be found are a bunch of hoaxes.

Again, I keep coming back to why?

I think Isaac was trying to throw people off the trail, but did the exact opposite. By claiming that the name Isaac is just an "alias", he was trying to make people think he is hiding his real name. If his "alias" is Isaac, than his real name must not be...

Get it?

I am starting to think that 11 11 might be correct...The name seems way too much of a coincidence.

So I guess that we're all being "Muldered" around by TPTB...they must figure that sites like ATS are dripping with folks who want to believe in ET. Personally, I am a believer that the universe is too big for there NOT to be any other life. I would really like to know if we are being visited, by whom, and why. Someone out there must know for sure, but the perpetuation of hoaxes in the meanwhile will only serve to make any final, real, actual proof seem like yet another hoax.

Any future releases from me will come from the email address I've used to contact Coast to Coast AM, and will be sent to them only.

So far the there's only a couple people who I'm sure have profitted from this. I've got a strong suspicion who's responsible for the whole thing.

Man, I thought the new chapter in this ongoing hoax would come on Saturday or Sunday.
Guess I was wrong!

Seriously though, some of the "documents" look to me like high res laser prints. What was laser printer res in 1986?. Others look like the hoaxer printed to a pdf file, and then 'added' the scanned black marked out sections in photoshop. Plus, these days one can print directly to a photocopier, so these documents do not impress.

Not that I am pushing the Transformer angle anymore, but some of the hoaxed documents that are part of their ongoing viral campaign look a lot like these.

I plead the 'fifth' in regard to past deeds in the early 90s, but lets just say it is my opinion that these documents are modern forgeries, not scans of any old document, unless of course "Issac" happened to correct the whiteness of the paper. Or the "CARET" group liked to use acid free paper. I dunno... maybe I am off base.

Doc Moreau

So can we offer a summary of potential errors in this story? Well I guess to be fair, PROS and CONS should be listed...Anyone, heres a casual list, anyone want to write one up more comprehensively, links images etc...?

CONs

CGI like models in the images of device;
CGI artifacts and evidence there as well, reflections errors etc;
Documents missing normal classified markings and other standard doc. formatting;
Documents not exactly very scientific when dealing with alien tech.;
Documents look too 'clean' and formatted to be produced on computer dinosaurs;
Similarities with crop circle designs and symbology (can go either way)
Website is BRAND NEW, setup just for the C2C radio report (This one is a weak CON);

PROs

Detailed reports and detailed models (this one is fairly weak of a PRO);
Back story seems authentic (this ones weak as well);
Fonts seem to agree with era (this can go either way and can be faked);

Eh can't really think of any other PRO's for this story, maybe I misse em'

Anyone can take a real or CGI quiz and see how you do:

www.autodesk.com...

To be honest with you, I don't know anything about CGI and I can easily tell you which ones are CGI and which ones are not.

The images that Isaac had provided on his Fortunecity site have artifacts in them, so if they are CGI, it's not so easy to tell.

If they are CGI, Isaac went through a LOT of work to make sure it wasn't so easy to tell.

Even the drone photos when they came out.... and everyone that wanted to re-create the drones in their preferred software rendering program didn't even come close to fooling me if it was CGI or not. Either it was too much work to do it, or they weren't all that interested in recreating the effect to make it more realistic because they didn't have the resources or maybe they saw that it was TOO much work to do just for a silly drone.

My point is... I still don't buy the CGI ... no matter how many people claim it's CGI... it will take a lot more to prove it to me than just your say so.

Originally posted by greatlakes
So can we offer a summary of potential errors in this story? Well I guess to be fair, PROS and CONS should be listed...Anyone, heres a casual list, anyone want to write one up more comprehensively, links images etc...?

CONs

CGI like models in the images of device;
CGI artifacts and evidence there as well, reflections errors etc;
Documents missing normal classified markings and other standard doc. formatting;
Documents not exactly very scientific when dealing with alien tech.;
Documents look too 'clean' and formatted to be produced on computer dinosaurs;
Similarities with crop circle designs and symbology (can go either way)
Website is BRAND NEW, setup just for the C2C radio report (This one is a weak CON);

PROs

Detailed reports and detailed models (this one is fairly weak of a PRO);
Back story seems authentic (this ones weak as well);
Fonts seem to agree with era (this can go either way and can be faked);

Eh can't really think of any other PRO's for this story, maybe I misse em'

Actually I have proven earlier this could have been made on an Apple in 1985 and Apple Laser writers of 1985 all have this font or could be printed to film (Agfa Machine) or several other off set devices. Which is more likely the case then the Apple Lasers at this time. But Apple came with 10 fonts this being one of them. Also very popular machine in Palo Alto , since thats is where it was created.

Also to me it says its an inventory report and more of a management document then a technical layout .

On the CGI side, one thing that isnt being said ism if this guy fake this, the he is the author of the original drone photos as well or at least in on it.


Website is a free hosting website BTW, where you might put material you don't want to be traced by credit cards etc. Just a thought though.

Originally posted by 11 11
I think Isaac was trying to throw people off the trail, but did the exact opposite. By claiming that the name Isaac is just an "alias", he was trying to make people think he is hiding his real name. If his "alias" is Isaac, than his real name must not be...

Get it?

that doesnt make much sense though why not just say his name is Fred? Then you would'nt have even found him. Seems like that a pretty glaring error considering the work gone into this if its a Hoax

I'm still not buying that the pictures are CGI. I'd really love for one of our "experts" to come out and reproduce a model at that quality. I can see reflections and I can see a sort of haze which I've never seen in CGI models before. It's just not crisp enough. It's crunchy. Yes, I understand that with photoshop you can add such after effects.

While up until now I've agreed with the "it's CGI" squad from all the other picture threads. I'm going to have to say, not anymore with this one. Does that mean this is the real deal? No.

Theory:

I think this Isaac fellow is the ringleader of all these pictures appearing. It's starting to seem more and more like a viral marketing campaign. Lots of folks seem to be working on this possible hoax. I don't believe it's Halo 3's campaign since that has already gone public. I'm also starting to think it has nothing to do with the Transformers movie. I'm pretty sure the movie comes out July 3rd and that's way too close, unless if they wanted to create a huge explosion of visual interest RIGHT before the movie came out.

Isaac seems to have some truly physical models in his grasp. I don't think they're extra-terrestrial though. Not even influenced by it. In fact, the lettering and plot for this so called "code" is straight out of the Sci-Fi mini series "Taken" which to me is enough evidence of a very terrestrial thought process.

Could it possibly be the beginning of the announcement for Taken 2? Who knows, it'd make sense though. The story didn't seem to be over and it has been 5 years since it ended.

Originally posted by promomag

If they are CGI, Isaac went through a LOT of work to make sure it wasn't so easy to tell.

No actually, he didn't. There are several flaws in his work that I can see. These are amature mistakes, or his software lacks a certain functionality. When you examine this image pay attention to the reflection's on the objects..



The object on the right is not reflecting the object on the left like a mirror. The objects are so close together that they should be refecting each other, but they are not. This is because the amature CG guy wanted more glossyness, so he used "Specularity" instead of "Reflection".

Here is the Specularity VS Reflection information from Texturing for Dummies, from the exact program "Lightwave" which I believe he used:

www.newtek.com...


As you can see, these are pictures are CG. Real CG guys would have noticed this.

Originally posted by Donoso
I'm still not buying that the pictures are CGI. I'd really love for one of our "experts" to come out and reproduce a model at that quality.

Donoso, I suggest you take a stroll through the Gallery at Lightwave's website, you will see projects 100x better than his. Actually, go to the video section and you can see Isaac's video. Here look:

www.newtek.com...

I actually see a reflection there.

and if they are alien (foreign) materials, we dont know the exact properties that they deal with when it comes to the reflections of them ... as well as density, and weight, etc.

11 11 ... i dont understand your point... with the graphic design programs now and the talented artists now... ANYTHING can be CG ...
just come out and say it... any proof you see is not good enough. period.

I buy that. This could be cgi that was printed on glossy, then scanned and compressed.

But what really gets me is this guys story. Thats what makes it so well put together. This guy definitely needs his own series on Sci-Fi. The whole thing about "the language *is* the code" is a great and original thought. How everything is context oriented, so existential... I read everything first, prior to seeing the photographs. I had a great deal of fun with this one. So much so, that I want to see more.

I REALLY hope this guy is an author, and this is all part of his writing experiment.

Originally posted by isitmagic
I actually see a reflection there.

You are not seeing real time relfections, you are seeing fake reflections. Just compare both objects, on the front part of both objects, they both have identical reflections. The shading on both objects should not be identical. But on the photos they are:

See:



I fixed them to show how they should look: