clerck de bonk said:undecided, but just to show how good they(sfx) are these days, take a look at this:
___http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i2gUuMGP6I0&feature=related
parallel said:I would say fake. Too stable,
Yeah. At the time of writing 'Gods of Eden', Bramley states the same and that's with the old figure of 2% hoaxes, nowadays with easy access CGI it must be well over 75% (guess). A 'friend' once proposed to do a UFO clip- to renjoy the reactions and the challenge of making something photo realisticly believable, which may be the incentive of most hoaxers. PS- my friend did see, after discussion, that this would muddy the waters since he also somehow does believe it to be a real phenomena.Endymion said:CGI tricks create an enormous amount of 'noise' that obscures any signal that might be out there.
parallel said:Yeah. At the time of writing 'Gods of Eden', Bramley states the same and that's with the old figure of 2% hoaxes, nowadays with easy access CGI it must be well over 75% (guess). A 'friend' once proposed to do a UFO clip- to renjoy the reactions and the challenge of making something photo realisticly believable, which may be the incentive of most hoaxers. PS- my friend did see, after discussion, that this would muddy the waters since he also somehow does believe it to be a real phenomena.Endymion said:CGI tricks create an enormous amount of 'noise' that obscures any signal that might be out there.
- whether the switch to digital TV and film was decided on for just this purpose. That is, to make it as easy as possible for CGI images to be inserted into real footage to create noise and disinformation.