Out There

Spectacular video, either real or a finely crafted hoax.

When your Out There editor took a look at this video, I assumed 'hoax.' But then I noticed that none of the usual easily identified signs of an amateur CGI job were present, so I was intrigued enough to send it to one of our video experts, who was intrigued. My conclusion: I still think it's probably CGI, but it is very well done. Our special effects expert is not so sure. This is his reaction:

"It has old style stars and bars on the hull. We do still use them but
usually they are grey. Why our Air force would be so dumb to plant those
on the hull is beyond me. Still the composite work is amazing. Very well done
if it is composite work. Additionally the lighting match is perfect as is the density
of the atmosphere. Not to mention its location when seen again after the car
goes through the underpass. And the tracking is spot on.

"The distortion, despite what others may think, is the compression of the image
for You Tube. I'd like to see the original uncompressed but I'm sure
it would hold up. The camera was having issues with motion blur and frame
rate. Whenever it moves quickly you get a stepped effect from frame rate and
blur. It's how a less expensive camera deals with things.

"The main problem I have with all this is obvious. We don't test top secret
aircraft in day light or near populated areas unless there's an accident.
This thing is huge, too, and would be hard to hide once it landed.

"However, if this is real, we may be looking at a
deliberate attempt to start leaking, which is the way classified
aircraft are sometimes introduced to the public."

"Still, it just looks too good to be true. But that doesn't mean it's not.
Personally it gave me the creeps. Maybe it's a stunt for an upcoming
movie."

--Steve Neill. Steve is a special effects and video expert. His website is SNeillFX.com. You can
find more of his work in progress on his blog, SteveNeill.Wordpress.com


If the media player does not display, please install the Flash plugin

Story Source:

It looks like a fake to me!!!

Despite what Steve says with regards to the tracking, to me, it looks quite obviously off. Look at the video at about 7-9 seconds in. The object jitters with respect to the clouds. My opinion - clearly a fake.

I would ask Steve to have a closer look at that jittering (at the position I highlighted) and do a frame-by-frame analysis of the positioning of the object with respect to the clouds.

HOAXkiller1 has a video about it:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=unaPAUQhZ2s

This is obviously a fake even to an untrained eye. What kind of an expert can Steve Neill be? The tracking is terrible and doesn't even warrant frame-by-frame analysis.

I was being too polite...Geordie, you said it - I was thinking it. What kind of expert?...one that is so tied up in the technicalities of his work, to notice what is right in front of his eyes. What a shame.

Steve didn't say it was real. He said it was good. There is a difference.

I don't know about anyone else but I never assumed Steve thought it was real. What I take issue with are the following two points...

1. "...none of the usual easily identified signs of an amateur CGI job were present...".
2. "...And the tracking is spot on.".

I thought the poor tracking was easily identifiable, without any kind of in-depth technical analysis.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JwqiQi8MeA0&feature=player_embedded

this link to another youtube video that proves it's a hoax: quote:
"In an attempt to read the sign, I stabilized the video and discovered something odd. The sign was moving around! That usually means the object was edited into the video using "match moving" and the motion tracks had a few errors. I also noticed the UFO was bouncing around too, futher proving it is fake, but the real question was why would someone fake a sign?

So to find out what the sign says I took 62 frames from the video that shows the sign and I used a custom "image averaging" program that I am developing to remove the noise and solidify details. I then applied a little bit of a sharpen tool on the sign, and it revealed the name "OONDYLA". It turns out "OONDYLA" is some type of marking company. Searching their name on Google returned a little information:

http://oondyla.com/WhoWeAre.html

"We believe in viral marketing. No, no virus this time. Viral marketing consists to create funny, incredible, shocking videos that run on the net showing the name oondyla worldwide! " - OONDYLA"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JwqiQi8MeA0&feature=player_embedded

this link to another youtube video that proves it's a hoax: quote:
"In an attempt to read the sign, I stabilized the video and discovered something odd. The sign was moving around! That usually means the object was edited into the video using "match moving" and the motion tracks had a few errors. I also noticed the UFO was bouncing around too, futher proving it is fake, but the real question was why would someone fake a sign?

So to find out what the sign says I took 62 frames from the video that shows the sign and I used a custom "image averaging" program that I am developing to remove the noise and solidify details. I then applied a little bit of a sharpen tool on the sign, and it revealed the name "OONDYLA". It turns out "OONDYLA" is some type of marking company. Searching their name on Google returned a little information:

http://oondyla.com/WhoWeAre.html

"We believe in viral marketing. No, no virus this time. Viral marketing consists to create funny, incredible, shocking videos that run on the net showing the name oondyla worldwide! " - OONDYLA"

It's very jittery. Also, just look at the thing! It looks sic-fi. Real UFOs never have all that detail, and are rather smooth and plain. It's like the dumb drone things.

And clearly an object that big would have been seen by many people.

Subscribe to Unknowncountry sign up now