Question about authenticity of films and photos

[ManicMonkey]

Dear forum members,

Hello, I'm new here. I'm not a photographer of any kind. I'm just 14 years old. I live in Brazil. I think this forum probably has some people with very deep knowledge about photography, both artistically and physically.

I'm part of my school's robotic club, and because of that I have a good grasp of practical computation. I have a decent understanding of what a computer image or video clip are made of, even though my main interest is in programming. I know little about non-digital film and photography, though. I understand just the basics.

I wanted to know what non-biased specialists have to say about this video:



it's made by an exopolitics group, something i just recently heard about. I'm not exactly sure what they believe in, but I'm pretty sure they at least believe in UFOs. The video talks about a lady named Stella Lansing and how she was able to film and photograph a lot of weird things over several years.

I don't like to just go believing stuff I see on the internet, unlike most people I know. I wanted to know if any of that make sense. I looked around and I found a skeptics forum with a small thread about it:

Thoughtography - The Skeptics Society Forum

The user named Matthew Ellard makes at least one interesting claim:

regarding this line from the youtube video: "when the Super 8mm film was converted to video, suddenly (audio)voices appeared"
Domestic Kodak and AGFA Super 8mm didn't have a striped audio track. You had to stripe the film yourself. young people forget that film is not video. This claim simply means someone added audio to the video dub, for the first time, which is clear evidence of forgery.

Skeptics are biased and so are believers. I'm looking for a pure grounded answer based on simple facts. Is Matthew Ellard correct? Is that "clear evidence of forgery"?

Also, if anyone else can make any other grounded claims, either why it's fake or why it's a mistery, they are more than welcome.

Thank you.

 

[Designer]

You could think of forgery as having "degrees", and in the example cited, the video portion may remain unaltered, but the addition of audio means at least that part has been altered.

You then need to decide if the video portion has been altered, but you should try to find other types of evidence.

 

[astroNikon]

Maybe there was a short in the wiring someplace which caused the audio .. or an attached microphone during the conversion. Was it top notch pro equipment for the conversion, or cheap home made electronics? Did they, during the conversion, write to another format over an existing tape that had audio?

Seriously, you would have to be overseeing the conversion and audit the equipment before and afterwards to know 100%.

Everything else is speculation.
As you stated the film does not contain audio. Thus in the process audio was added.
You know what A was, and the outcome Z was. You don't know the B-Y process where the audio was added.

 

[timor]

I'm just 14 years old.

No offence man, but it will take you few more year, before you will be able to smell fraud quickly. Well, in such a cheesy field like UFO and alike it should come soonner. Don't bother yourself and others with this topics, they are nothing else but ENTERTAINMENT. And a cheap one to.

 

[astroNikon]

UFOs are interesting.
I've seen photos of UFOs with 3 triangular lights in a fuzzy photo.

I also take photos of aircraft.
In bad weather they seem to turn on bottom lights
which is oddly in the same triangular nature.
and in bad weather I have some photos in the past which look exactly like "UFO" sighting photos.

and of course, photographically, it's easy to create a ghost.

 

[timor]

UFOs are interesting.
I've seen photos of UFOs with 3 triangular lights in a fuzzy photo.

I also take photos of aircraft.
In bad weather they seem to turn on bottom lights
which is oddly in the same triangular nature.
and in bad weather I have some photos in the past which look exactly like "UFO" sighting photos.

and of course, photographically, it's easy to create a ghost.

Hey guys, lets make separate photo theme thread: UFO shots !!

 

[astroNikon]

I'm just 14 years old.

No offence man, but it will take you few more year, before you will be able to smell fraud quickly. Well, in such a cheesy field like UFO and alike it should come soonner. Don't bother yourself and others with this topics, they are nothing else but ENTERTAINMENT. And a cheap one to.

Yes, for instance, what is wrong with this ORIGINAL 1908 photo of the wright brothers first flight ?
Without access to the ORIGINAL negative, everything else in between of what you see and what was originally done can be changed whether a photo, video or audio. (twright33's photo).

 

[astroNikon]

with Video
just go watch an old Godzilla movie

are you watching it in japanese or english?
if in english, does the lip movement match the words?
if not, then HOW did they do that ?
Or, even ask yourself, is Godzilla real?

I would say most of what you see today in film, photography has been altered at some point from the original captured image whether just lighting or, even a Star Wars light saber light and the sound (it certainly wasn't there when they filmed it). Just think of how one produces a film. It's not one roll of film from beginning to end non-stop.

 

[zombiesniper]

Yes, for instance, what is wrong with this ORIGINAL 1908 photo of the wright brothers first flight ?
(twright33's photo).

Dang that some new fancy lens you have there. The ability to make the objects you want so crisp and clean while at the same time the rest has a nice historic fuzz to it.
Where can I get one.

 

[astroNikon]

Yes, for instance, what is wrong with this ORIGINAL 1908 photo of the wright brothers first flight ?
(twright33's photo).

Dang that some new fancy lens you have there. The ability to make the objects you want so crisp and clean while at the same time the rest has a nice historic fuzz to it.
Where can I get one.

Adobe makes a "lens" called Photoshop.
Can do about anything that you want it to do with a photo, or multiple photos, separate images ...

 

[480sparky]

I'm just 14 years old.

No offence man, but it will take you few more year, before you will be able to smell fraud quickly. Well, in such a cheesy field like UFO and alike it should come soonner. Don't bother yourself and others with this topics, they are nothing else but ENTERTAINMENT. And a cheap one to.

Yes, for instance, what is wrong with this ORIGINAL 1908 photo of the wright brothers first flight ?
Without access to the ORIGINAL negative, everything else in between of what you see and what was originally done can be changed whether a photo, video or audio. (twright33's photo).

I can tell that's fake simply because I know Dave there, who's hanging on the wing, very well.

Because Dave most definitely would not be hanging from his left hand since he lost two fingers in a camping accident. Therefore, it's fake because I know full well Dave cannot support his full body weight with just his left hand.

 

[astroNikon]

I can tell that's fake simply because I know Dave there, who's hanging on the wing, very well.

Because Dave most definitely would not be hanging from his left hand since he lost two fingers in a camping accident. Therefore, it's fake because I know full well Dave cannot support his full body weight with just his left hand.

Wasn't this the day of his camping accident?
When he fell off the plane, then the Cretaceous period T-rex came up to him and bit a few fingers off because it was hungry and knew he was finger licking good ?

 

[480sparky]

I can tell that's fake simply because I know Dave there, who's hanging on the wing, very well.

Because Dave most definitely would not be hanging from his left hand since he lost two fingers in a camping accident. Therefore, it's fake because I know full well Dave cannot support his full body weight with just his left hand.

Wasn't this the day of his camping accident?
When he fell off the plane, then the Cretaceous period T-rex came up to him and bit a few fingers off because it was hungry and knew he was finger licking good ?

No. Dave doesn't go camping with early-20th-century home-made biplanes.

 

[astroNikon]

No. Dave doesn't go camping with early-20th-century home-made biplanes.

We can change that in PhotoShop.
Put George Jetson's family cruiser in there instead.

 

[480sparky]

No. Dave doesn't go camping with early-20th-century home-made biplanes.

We can change that in PhotoShop.
Put George Jetson's family cruiser in there instead.

No, he camps with the Jupiter 2. He likes to take the Chariot for a spin in the backwoods on occasion.