|
|
Post by echnaton on Jun 21, 2010 14:30:39 GMT -4
Pretty good work from a self-acknowledged hoaxer.
|
|
|
|
Post by drewid on Jun 21, 2010 17:19:42 GMT -4
Nice work there. I thought the fire stuff could have done with another pass, (stagger the explosion a little for instance), but the rest of it was solid enough. That first one is probably already doing the rounds with the credits snipped off  |
|
|
|
Post by Ginnie on Jun 21, 2010 18:30:04 GMT -4
Interesting.
I'm watching the rest of the "Faking Hoaxer" ;D
Some comments:
"get a live and stop sharring you weird movies to people "
"Hey you would make a great UFO dis-info agent, hmm maybe that is what you are, trying to discredit UFO videos and 9/11 truther's. CGI on the UFO issue is a fraud and in poor taste but very well though out - you even admit being a fraud, a clever disguise but I am not falling for it. "
|
|
|
|
Post by gillianren on Jun 21, 2010 20:48:22 GMT -4
Wait--the person isn't falling for the fact that the guy who made it is a fraud?
|
|
|
|
Post by Ginnie on Jun 21, 2010 21:54:43 GMT -4
I'm not really sure. The comment is kind of ambiguous.
|
|
|
|
Post by drewid on Jun 22, 2010 1:05:21 GMT -4
That sentence makes my head hurt.
|
|
|
|
Post by randombloke on Jun 22, 2010 4:56:26 GMT -4
Hey, that's it! You know how primitive artificial intelligences can (according to Star Trek) be disabled by presenting them with a simple logical knot such as "I am lying"?
I think once we get past that stage, we should start testing the more advanced models with YouTube comments.
I just hope the survivors don't perceive it as cruel&unusual/collective punishment and resent us for it...
|
|
|
|
Post by AtomicDog on Jun 22, 2010 10:51:32 GMT -4
That second video was scary to watch.
|
|
|
|
Post by LunarOrbit on Jun 22, 2010 15:13:49 GMT -4
I found the second video very disturbing, but it's a very good demonstration of what one person with modern video effects software can be capable of.
|
|
|
|
Post by echnaton on Jun 22, 2010 16:45:49 GMT -4
The music in the second video really made the difference. Sure some of the shots looked a little off, but it was still shocking. I also liked how he put his name on the shuttle wing at 1:15 minutes. A pretty obvious trap for any one trying to use it for nefarious purposes.
|
|
raven
Jupiter
That ain't Earth, kiddies.
Posts: 509
|
Post by raven on Jun 23, 2010 5:06:49 GMT -4
The last one of the second video was brutal. I knew it was fake but, God, that's something I never want to see.
|
|
|
|
Post by Obviousman on Jun 23, 2010 5:09:21 GMT -4
I don't waste bandwidth on hoaxer vids.
Would someone give a summary?
|
|
|
|
Post by PhantomWolf on Jun 23, 2010 5:43:25 GMT -4
I don't waste bandwidth on hoaxer vids. Would someone give a summary? They are computer generated space incidents, compositing real footage with CGI, the first supposedly footage of the returning Eagle after the Apollo 11 landing, taken from inside the CM. The second are Shuttle "accidents". |
|
|
|
Post by echnaton on Jun 23, 2010 9:30:54 GMT -4
The author, Faking Hoaxer, is upfront about how and why he made the vids. He is not trying to fool anyone. But he does use radical themes such as the UFO and Shuttle destruction scenarios above or the faked news cast of the destruction of Air Force 1. He put his name on the shuttle wing to show it was not intended to fool anyone.
|
|
|
|
Post by blackstar on Jun 23, 2010 15:30:41 GMT -4
Hey he's convinced me of one thing, I really need to update my rendering software.  |
|
