Hue Jorgan
Striker
Some reet silly billiys on here mind, trying to be WUM'S funeeeee guys.
-
The first stage of the forum upgrades has now been completed but they remain in a degraded state with some features missing, normal posting/reading should now be possible.
Please read this thread for more details.
New user registrations are currently disabled.
Some other features of the forum are also currently disabled.
Artemis 2 Going back to the moon.
- Thread starter Hue Jorgan
- Start date
errant
Striker
errant
Striker
Which bit?
Yankee Mackem
Striker
If you mean the phone screen comments, then Yes, in post production its common to blur out distracting elements in the forground in order to isolate the subjects. It also avoids screen flicker. If you are asking if they have been edited digitially then yes, most news pieces are these days. If you are asking if they were really there, then here is a shot from someones phone just to the right.
You must be logged on to see media items
if you are asking if they are space vampires then pause it at 0:18. This is camera footage from the Boston Globe, but has a camera screen that is clearly visible, without wide angle lense (making people smaller) that has not been blurred in production.
Last edited:
Read the comments, the astronaut's are not on the phone screens.
DaveH
Striker
Lets imagine that you were trying to fake a space mission and had actors in as astronauts. What would be the easiest?
1) Do a publicity stunt with the actors in front of people then take them off somewhere telling people they were launched into space.
or
2) Do a fake publicity stunt with nobody there. Get the crowd to film that there was nobody there but pretend there is. Then get the actors in a studio pretending they were there and then edit it all together, including fake mobile phone footage, and hope it all adds up and the end of the day?
Try applying some common sense will you?
There are over 300 comments on that video pretty much all of them asking why the astronauts are not on the phone screens. Its common sense to ask why. Can you explain it I'm genuinely interested.
DaveH
Striker
What the hell are you talking about? There is only one phone screen appears in the shot on 20 seconds, from the left. There you can see the astronauts.
I think you've watched the wrong video. I'm talking about the video on post #903.
DaveH
Striker
Oh.
So back to my point. Are you seriously suggesting they faked a publicity thing without people there and edited them in after? The crowd were told to act as if people were there?
errant
Striker
DaveH
Striker
Of course. I have seen the minutes of the planning meetingSeems legit!
"Right, we need to stage a publicity shoot before the actornauts get on the bus to the fakeship"
"Ok, I will arrange some press, and a small crowd"
"Brilliant, can you make sure the crowd are compliant and will pretend the actornauts are really there, oh and after that arrange a green screen session for them to be edited in later?"
"Well I can I suppose, but is that not complicated and expensive?"
"Hey, it is on the budget of the illuminate"
"Ok, so is there not a risk that some of the crowd will one day admit the actornauts were not really there, I mean they will be filming it on their phones and stuff? That is going to be quite a lot of material out there showing it is staged."
"Of course not you are exaggerating risk. So we are settled, crowd of actors pretending there are people there, then the actornauts in a studio pretending the crowd is there, then get the effects guys on merging the two together. How much and how long?"
"Well for a professional job, we are looking at $25k and about a week."
"Great, any other suggestions?"
"Well we could just put the actornauts in front of the crowd, it will be done and dusted in half an hour and cost about $300. The best thing is, it will not even look dodgy if anyone does question it, because the people will really be there."
"You are new to this. One day you will learn some finesse. Do you think they went for the simple flawless way back in the 60s?"
errant
Striker
Logon or register to see this image
I'm not suggesting anything I'm asking a question. Can anyone explain why they don't appear on the camera screens?
DaveH
Striker
The camera screens are so difficult to see in that shot, slightly out of focus and not bright enough to be picked up by the camera in much detail, as the camera is adjusted for the brightness of the surroundings. There are a couple of shots early on where you can not see one camera at all and another where the middle bit of the screen is obscured by the mount.
I stopped watching on 4:10, in the 12 seconds leading up to that you do get shots of two camera screens and while you can not see in detail, you can see a big bunch of orange on both screens.
So from what I can see, they do appear on camera screens.
I think this says a lot about the whole conspiracy theorist community. Since some comedian back in the last 70s started talking about fake moon landings for a laugh in his act, some have picked it up and ran with it. Now, people are absolutely desperate to find anything about any space mission that does not meet personal expectations. I bet if we looked at footage of any event where phones were being picked up by a camera, appearing blurred and dark, we would be left wondering what is on those screens. The main lesson is, if something is blurred and dark it is hard to see and that something will appear blurred and dark if it is not the main focus of the filming like this.
Sunderland Brand
Full Back
Probably an age thing but I could not get interested or excited in the whole Artemis mission. I followed the Apollo missions avidly in the late 60s and can remember the actual moon landing in vivid detail. Artemis just felt like a mundane sequel.
CissesUnderpants9
Striker
Well for those of us, who weren't around in the 60s.. its been very interesting, and i followed and avidly checked the mission, i suspect i will do the same with Three, and most certainly four.
