Comments on: Rumor control: UFO fleet over London

By: job finder newfoundland

job finder newfoundland — Mon, 08 Apr 2013 20:57:18 +0000

We’re a group of volunteers and opening a brand new scheme in our community. Your site offered us with helpful info to work on. You have done a formidable task and our entire community shall be grateful to you.

By: Jaap

Jaap — Tue, 05 Jul 2011 18:10:58 +0000

Can you prove that with some source files?

If you’re really behind this viral, chapeau, very well done!

By: Mike

Mike — Mon, 04 Jul 2011 16:56:17 +0000

I guess you caught me!

http://mikepohjola2.wordpress.com/2011/07/04/alright-alright-the-ufos-were-a-viral-for-son-of-man/

By: Sylar

Sylar — Thu, 30 Jun 2011 16:50:28 +0000

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7N9HAH3lBeY

By: sample-d

sample-d — Thu, 30 Jun 2011 00:32:12 +0000

it’s obvious that this did not come from energia as the objects are clear white and move in a stupid way. If this would have been ironSky viral marketing, we would have seen it on CNN this evening and Obama would have prepared the speech to the nation…

By: Ellyn Fasel

Ellyn Fasel — Wed, 29 Jun 2011 20:49:17 +0000

Thanks for the info!! I know it will open some eyes.

By: Jarmo Puskala

Jarmo Puskala — Wed, 29 Jun 2011 18:14:26 +0000

Peter: I was thinking the same about the jelly happening at odd times (ie. when the moves among the clouds that would offer a lot of reference points to see tracking errors…). Also even though it might sound petty, I find the sudden focus blur at 0:37 strange, considering that the rest of the video is perfectly in focus.

The Jerusalem dome video was debunked by running an image stabilization software on it – which showed that the background shook independent of the foreground (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cHOc35nmUDk). That’s very difficult to see, but easy to prove. Let’s see if there’s a smoking gun in this video.

By: Skyler

Skyler — Wed, 29 Jun 2011 18:09:30 +0000

I would like to submit my eye witness account of this UFO. I saw the same thing over a month ago in Manor, TX. I don’t have video, but I did make an animation to show my friends. i.imgur.com/pYsLT Also there’s another youtube video showing the same UFO from a different angle here: http://youtu.be/xw8b8pBW5Sc?t=1m3s

By: Peter

Peter — Wed, 29 Jun 2011 17:36:22 +0000

I think the jelly effect is fake. The distortion should be relative to the movement of the cam and the objects in the picture. Moving cars in a still picture (or moving UFOs) will look slanted to one side and should be more distorted than the still buildings behind them. Also a lot of the jelly is seen during relatively still parts of the video, where in the faster moving scenes the effect is lesser. Cars hardly distort at all towards the end and birds don’t seem to suffer from any jelly. The distortion should also relate to the distance of the object from the cam.

It just doesn’t feel right.. also to me it looks as if the pixels might shake both horizontally and vertically when it should at least favor one over the other, because of the scanning effect.

The basic effect could be described as the lower part of the picture lagging behind the upper part, this effect is not so prominent in the video.

But, anyway.. that’s just some stuff that popped into my head, cool video. :)

By: Jaap

Jaap — Wed, 29 Jun 2011 14:34:56 +0000

As already suggested by serveral people on the internet, it’s most likely just a joke by one of the many VFX artists working in that area.

To be clear to all and everyone: It’s CGI, I’m extremely sensitive for image manipulation. But I think that point has already been made, hasn’t it? ;)

@Energia
Do you have any problems with the rolling shutter of the RED ONE on Iron Sky?
It’s not really an issue on the RED MX in most situations, isn’t it?