It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by gortex
reply to post by backpage
Show me some real proof. Not the psuedo analysis I mistakenly read through on the other threads, wasting my time.
Show me proof that it is real
Originally posted by freelance_zenarchist
reply to post by hotrice
Alright I can see you don't know how this was made. The corners weren't darkened, the image was brightened. A separate layer was put on top of the video and a light was added, this light then brightens every pixel that it overlaps. This is why the light flash unrealistically brightens up the back of the tree, the bushes, the ground that is blocked from the light by the bushes, etc. A real light wouldn't have lit up the backs of those objects from that distance.
Your gradient fill does not look to convincing in comparison to the video. I agree that it could be faked, but it would be very difficult to make it look convincing. How many hoaxers would take into consideration the lens characteristic of a camera phone?
Alright I can see you don't know how this was made. The corners weren't darkened, the image was brightened. A separate layer was put on top of the video and a light was added, this light then brightens every pixel that it overlaps. This is why the light flash unrealistically brightens up the back of the tree, the bushes, the ground that is blocked from the light by the bushes, etc. A real light wouldn't have lit up the backs of those objects from that distance.
Originally posted by Planet teleX
reply to post by hotrice
Read freelance_zenarchist's post at the top of the page.
Originally posted by Planet teleX
reply to post by hotrice
You are right you can't prove it's real. But we can and have proven it's not.
reply to post by Turiddu
Each thread deserves due process. Otherwise this site would be a dictatorship.
The corners weren't darkened, the image was brightened.
Originally posted by freelance_zenarchist
reply to post by hotrice
Yup, i read it, it just doesn't make any sense.
Are you sure you mean white balance? Maybe you're confusing your terms.
White-balance
And how do you know this was taken with a cell phone?
Do you know something about this video the rest of us don't?
Originally posted by Planet teleX
reply to post by hotrice
I realise you agree. I hope you understand that the hoaxer wouldn't need to factor in the lens effect due to the point that freelance_zenarchist is making.
The corners weren't darkened, the image was brightened.
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/4a082a668c4d.jpg[/atsimg]
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/652855268d5c.jpg[/atsimg]
Originally posted by cluckerspud[/
Originally posted by backpage
Proven by whom? Guys who use BIG text to make a point? It's astounding looking through this website. I see everything from fake moon landing conspiracies to HAARP causing all the ills in the world. With people actually arguing their points with a straight face irregardless of how insane they appear. And something like this gets immediately discarded by the "HOAX" crowd (emphasis on the BIG letters) because they just hate the fact they might be wrong. Show me some real proof. Not the psuedo analysis I mistakenly read through on the other threads, wasting my time.
Originally posted by cluckerspud
Originally posted by skyjohn
Not sure if anyone said HOAX BIN yet...
The previous videos were proven to be fit for the:
HOAX BIN
So that, in relation with this poorly constructed 6th video, I have made the suggestion for the:
HOAX BIN
And if a 7th video surfaces, most likely it will belong in the:
HOAX BIN
I have watched all the videos and have read both arguments and I have concluded that this is a
HOAX
Therefor it would stand to reason that this belongs in the:
HOAX BIN
But that is just one mans opinion based on the information.
And that opinion again is that this belongs in the:
HOAX BIN
Originally posted by gortex
Hoaxes are Easy
Just to show how easy it isedit on 13-3-2011 by gortex because: (no reason given)