UFO 'Mother Ships' Over Peru 2011, TV News Report..!

[jackovesk]

2011

Note: Checked, but not sure if this has already been posted..? If so please merge or remove.



This was broadcast on a Peruvian news channel, the video was captured in the city of Guancayo. Henric Snider Solano de la Cruz shot the video and told the news station he went for his video camera to record the moment as soon as he recognized it was an extraordinary event.

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=bgIIAYQdEGA

[wolf_rt]

Now THAT is really something!

[Flasky]

Well -- well --- wow, it looks so awesome.

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=6QJUH1xLbwA

Similar?

[Paladin14]

I'd like to see the original source video, but if it is a fake then it's a pretty good one. The quality is too poor to tell if its CG or not.

You can track camera movement and that blue sky against the clouds would be extremely easy to mask out, even the not so full transparent areas of the clouds- because of the range of values in that top left area where you can sort of see it behind the cloud.

It almost looks like the clouds are sort of trailing with it though, but again the quality makes it hard to tell whats actually going on there. It could easily be just some motion blur of a particle effect blended in with the poor dithering compression of the video.

We would need to see more of the video and the original video. We don't get a sense of where the sun is exactly so we can check shadows and highlights on the object. I can't believe that someone flashed their camera up and cut the clip after 11 seconds from turning it on. Also, after writing that sentence I realize that after he whips the camera up he's all of a sudden in pretty good focus to the scene. He whips up the camera to the sky, the clouds look very bright and the camera extremely quickly adjusts to the seemingly perfect focus. Again, need the original video or better quality to really tell as way too much detail is lost. Why wouldn't the person holding the camera move the camera focused or centered on the craft? Instead of staying with the craft, he holds his camera pointing at the convenient patch of blue- easily masked section of sky, as the object leaves the shot.


The most impressive aspect of this to me is the motion of the craft. The animation of the craft is good, usually in hoaxes the motion of the craft is a dead giveaway. This however has more than just a couple of key-frames in the motion. The thing rotates in all directions subtly, and the way it moves appears to be conscious of it being filmed as it accelerates a little bit to get past the clear patch of sky and eases into the thicker cloud mass. It even tilts to suggest the use of anti-gravity to push against the direction its easing into.

The quality and smoothness of the frame rate where the craft is visible seems to be much better than the frame rate of the video where the ground is shown. That leads me to think where the camera whips up and there's a bright flash/ quick adjustment is where the crappy camera footage ended and the CG starts getting introduced.

I really hope that its real and there exists somewhere more video time with a better source video footage. If its not real then its done by someone who can animate, model, track, light, render, and possibly use special effects.

[Words of Joy]

@ abovetopsecret (amongst others) they are convinced it's fake:

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread709251/pg1#

[joedjemal]

CGI I think. I think they're using a blue screen technique to match the cgi into real video. If you look closely you'll see effect clouds trailing behind the object but the clouds in the real video are unaffected. The object itself displays lazy modelling. It's been created as a pie shaped section and repeated using copying by rotation using one end of the model as the centre of rotation. I used to use tricks like that to create more interesting looking models.

[wolf_rt]

Why wouldn't the person holding the camera move the camera focused or centered on the craft?

That struck me as a little sus too.

[Wiremu2011]

My initial reaction to anything seen is good software trickery. You'd think real craft overuse their 'cloaking' ability, given why we usually end up with poor videos. You'd think with literally millions of HD videos on phones these days, there'd be a influx of uploads all over the net, but usually much of the same IMHO..

[BestLion]

Posted by Wiremu2011 (here)
My initial reaction to anything seen is good software trickery. You'd think real craft overuse their 'cloaking' ability, given why we usually end up with poor videos. You'd think with literally millions of HD videos on phones these days, there'd be a influx of uploads all over the net, but usually much of the same IMHO..

Same here. This aint the 1970s where only a small few like Billy Meier can fake cause he has models and a decent camera for the time. One thing we need to learn from fakes like the Meier case is to not only get one source! (example in Switzerland, why we only have ONLY Mieir producing these pleadians crafts, and no one else) now millions of people have cell phone cameras, digital camera, video cameras..and thus an object like this should be taken by 100s or sources..not just 1.
Also something about these UFOs they always tend to be smeary..or hard to see..this is generally then a hoax. To make the craft-lights blurry.
As i said..lets get the same craft viewed-video taped, photos from many other people-sources..then we can then build a compelling case from there.
I recently seen a hoax done in Russia..somewhat of the same as this video..and only one source took the footage..And yet in Russian now even babushkas in villages have cells phones with cameras..and yet something like this you'd think everyone in a 10 mile radius would be snapping pictures and taking footage.
I carry my phone on me at all times it has a 4.mp camera and video camera..and I can assure you if I seen something like this..I'd be filming, snappin ect "and my camera on a mobile phone is much better quality then this footage in video 1.
This film is blurry and that craft looks like the craft form the TV serial V..More less placed in a homemade video.

[Realeyes]

I saw this clip some time ago. I have seen with my own eyes craft in the sky and my instincts tell me this is absolutely fake.

The craft is very clumsy in its moves. The numerous craft I have witnessed over the years are quick and numble, smooth travel even when doing zig zags and if there are clouds nearby, the clouds normally become exctied/distorted/glistening as they react to the craft's energy fields.

The real cool craft IMHO are the ones that are there in the sky one moment for all to see, then 'blip' - gone - without any travel involved.

I really should carry a camera around with me - although when I have had a camera, I become so mesmerised by what I am seeing I forget to take a photo.

[Olam]

With all the great cameras out there today, you wonder why we always get low-fi video on those.
Well the answer is that its much easier to fake!
To me, thats a classic cheap CG.
The chinese pictures look real?
Someday!....someday, we will get the real stuff, great footage and undeniable.
2012!....might be that year we all go "AAAHHHHH"

[truth4me]

yer,I'm not buying this one.....

[ceetee9]

I'm no video/cgi expert, but two thoughts came to mind (given the limited footage): 1) how did the videographer know the craft was about to appear in the blue sky area (i.e., I saw no craft in the prior blue sky shot as he whipped the camera up to the larger blue sky area and I didn't see the craft through the clouds), and 2) why wouldn't he center the camera on the craft?

[RMorgan]

Well,

In my opinion, there´s a 99% chance it´s CGI.

Even a cell-phone can film with a better resolution than that. As long as they don´t show a high-res version, or at least a decent quality version, I´ll go with the CGI.

Doing videos like this is a great challenging project for people learning CGI software, that´s why many people do that.

Here´s a video that some friends of mine did in 2006, in my city, with very few resources. It was 6 years ago, so now CGI technology is much better and easier to achieve better quality.

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=i1hNguRcxrM

Cheers,

Raf.

[BestLion]

Rmorgan, nice video! Cool. I also have this program on my PC i can do these videos..Ive done one with an Alien 'a reptilian' , and one with an explosion like your. The Alien one I did I should upload to youtube and post here, but its cheesy and was my first production.
Here is a video of a spacecraft via CGI..looks pretty real.

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=raUemSRP3gk

[WhiteFeather]

Posted by BestLion (here)
Rmorgan, nice video! Cool. I also have this program on my PC i can do these videos..Ive done one with an Alien 'a reptilian' , and one with an explosion like your. The Alien one I did I should upload to youtube and post here, but its cheesy and was my first production.
Here is a video of a spacecraft via CGI..looks pretty real.

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=raUemSRP3gk

I was more impressed from the chemtrails at O:18 in the background. How did they make those chemtrails look so real?

[BestLion]

I was more impressed from the chemtrails at O:18 in the background. How did they make those chemtrails look so real?

They use real footage, and the CGI is a type of animation that is fairly real looking and insert the CGI into the real imagine. Its kind of like photoshop done to a video. Its prety cool, and well used in Hollywood now..lots of Avatar and V was done via CGI

[wolf_rt]

Posted by WhiteFeather (here)
I was more impressed from the chemtrails at O:18 in the background. How did they make those chemtrails look so real?

WhiteFeather, you should have been an Aussie...

[Eric J (Viking)]

Check this ne out guys ...

Hmmm cant remember who said this .... ""We are increasing our presence in your skies" !

https://youtube.com/v/xZipbgXOJoc

https://youtube.com/v/xZipbgXOJoc

viking

[DreamsInDigital]

Guys that's not CGI and they are NOT mother ships, they're way to small to be mother ships. They can be large scout craft or something similar, but mother ships at the very least are about 400 MILES in diameter. Generally more like almost a thousand miles to double the size of Jupiter. And are not capable of entering the Atmosphere of a planet. Hence why they have scout and other "smaller" type ships in the first place.