‘AMAZING UFO FOOTAGE’
Russel Callaghan co founder of UFODATA and image analyst for UFO Magazine 1996-2004 presents his interpretation of the latest UFO video to hit the world wide web…
Having viewed the Phoenix footage several times and studied the comments of David Sereda I feel that (even though some might start thinking I am just a debunker) I should add some objective comments from my observation of the clip.
David Sereda has a great interest in the UFO subject but his views strike me as being what he wants to see from this clip. Just as the reflections of the camera zoom mechanism in the out of focus sequence in the STS 75 tether sequence were compared to ‘dropa stones’ in his NASA UFOs video presentation of a few years ago.
www.laufo.com/science-sereda.html
I am not critiquing the Tether sequence. It was amazing footage but anyone studying optics and the workings of cameras and lenses are aware that strange reflections can be bounced around the lens tube in certain light conditions. There was something on the sequence but it was out of focus.
Back then to the Phoenix clip.
‘David Sereda’ Quoted on Rense.com
http://www.rense.com/general65/aamz.htm
I am going to tell you why, from a film editor's perspective and my friend who works in Special Effects here in Hollywood, why again the Phoenix UFO would be extremely difficult to hoax:
1. The UFO moves consistently in the video frame with the handheld movement of the video camera.
UFODATA
I would suggest the camera was mounted on a tripod. When the shot is still it is very still. There is a wild wind blowing during the filming, you can hear it and see it on the tape.
2. To create a fake UFO, you need to add an effects video layer that sits on top of the real background footage layer.
UFO DATA
This is one way to hoax footage but there are many others.
3. When the camera is hand-held and has jerky movements, the UFO layer has to move exactly and consistently with those movements. That is extremely difficult to match.
UFODATA Don’t be fooled by Hollywood talk. Even the simplest computer video editing software is packed with powerful effects. I use Adobe Premiere and have for the last 6 years.
You can create many different types of overlay within the software, known as mattes, these lets you replace backgrounds or foregrounds. One type of matte is referred to as a travelling matte.
You can attach an object (animation/picture/more video) to a sequence and have it follow certain pixels on the screen, i.e the bushes, as the camera moves left and right the overlaid object also moves left and right or up and down.
4. Then the camera zooms in on the UFO. As the camera zooms, in the second layer would also have to zoom the same, in tandem with the camera movement. This is very difficult for a special effects Guru to duplicate.
UFODATA The zoom can be mimicked with the overlay. In Premiere you can adjust the video clips motion frame by frame, so were the real footage starts to zoom in you can tell the overlay to zoom at the same time, with a little trial and error you can match the two motions. It would not be so easy to do this if the camera was zooming and shaking all over the place but in the sequence we see yes there is a zoom but no real movement at the same time.
5. As the wind blows, there is a light pulsing from the UFO caused by wind and dust in the atmosphere: the same reason stars twinkle.
UFODATA
The footage is low quality mono or night vision semi green.
If you were creating an animated gif for your UFO sequence it would be easy enough to match grey or greenish shades into the background, there is no need for 3d modelling as there is no colour required and no reflections obvious. Another basic clue in the ‘looks like a fake’ UFO clip.
6. As the camera goes in and out of focus from the auto-focus, so does the UFO. That means you also have to match this.
Because there are so many factors to match in this hand-held video, and so few people who know how to do this, and considering most special effects Gurus stay away from bad camera movement to do multi-layering, I think we are looking at an object (UFO) that was actually there, up in the sky, when the video was shot.
Sincerely, David Sereda
UFODATA
David seems to make a big thing out of this but for my mind there are two distinct parts to this footage.
First part the formation appears, quite focused.
Second there is a cut and the formation has changed shape and the filming is more erratic, the formation is out of focus at the start of this second sequence and stays out of focus but the camera does zoom in.
One thing that has not being commented on is the fact that this is filmed in night mode.
Camcorder night mode is not night vision proper but filters and electronic tweaks enable the ccd to capture more output from low light conditions.
The trade off is resolution, the image normally appears out of focus, auto focus and iris have problems adjusting to changes in the scene.
We see none of this in the clip, nor do we see an effect on the foreground or trees etc as the object illuminates more and more. If this were happening in front of the camera I would expect to see some effect on the image.
Try pointing your video camera at a bright light source on a dark night (a street lamp for instance) see what effect it has on a night vision scene.
Finally listen to the audio. Does this sound like somebody witnessing a visitation from another world, there is a total lack of excitement about the sighting.
It would be great to think this was a genuine event captured on camcorder and shared with the world. However in my opinion there are too many possible clues and pointers suggesting this is a manufactured clip.
Russel Callaghan
UFODATA.