Tennessee School Shooting (official, activist, FBI, regular)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It's simply a compression and focusing artifact. The carpet does come fully into focus in other scenes with the feet still there. Such as when walking back through the door to the office.
And the same blurring is occurring in the upper left corner. Video doesn't capture reality. It captures frames while using an auto focus sensor to attempt to keep as much in focus as possible. But with sufficient depth at play it is impossible for everything to be in focus. Your own eyes can't even do that.
would it be a fair question to ask if you understand how different videos with different codecs uploaded to different platforms might look when you forcible try to overcome compression and when you unpack compressed video black oft does shift to red without error correction (it has to do with the twos compliment being used on uncompresseed and that each color needs 3 bytes in 24bit true color???.....just askin...I aint worked with this crap for nigh onto 20 years
Does that look real to you? Let me show you what a screen shot of a YouTube video actually looks like:
That looks like trash too, lol.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GuyNTexas
I get it alright, you are 5 years old. W
The whole damned video could be computer generated nonsense, or some mixture of computer animation blended with b-roll video. One thing for sure is, you’d never be able to convince anyone that blob face is actually a real human being, or at least not anyone would be able to clearly identify.
If all you gonna do is constantly make personal attacks then well,...you lost. Your 'evidence' is weak and you are just searching for things to support your already made up mind.
I already stated Anything can be faked in this day and age. The need to obsess over a particular set of potato pixels when you already claim the whole thing is fake is hilarious.
Why don't they just build a replica of the hallways and film their 'actor' doing all this stuff with a better camera? At least I can entertain that more. But I see no credible reason to think this footage was some comp. I am not saying it is 'not' fake, never have. I am saying your claim of how they are doing it is a dead end.
but keep the insults and arguments of authority coming.
Just look at other examples of surveillance cameras. Like this example from the Michael Irvin drama. Blobby out of focus carpet that an entire coffee table disappears into until someone walks by it.
Here, take a look at the very center of the image. Notice that the area that looks “smudged out” cannot be caused by shadow and light …. because right in the damned center a blotch of carpet detail pops out! Absolute, unequivocal evidence of doctored video. That little spot of carpet detail popping right out there? Ooops, missed a spot. What that is is amateurish sloppy crap, that’s what it is.
[SNIP]
Now, if that fails to register with you, let’s try something more painfully obvious. Look at “blob face”. That’s now the name I shall use moving forward … blob-face.
Does that look real to you? Let me show you what a screen shot of a YouTube video actually looks like:
Notice the difference? Oh wow, there is actually a face there! Need more?
[SNIP]
The anomalies that you point out _could_ be at least partially explained by compression artifacts, esp. if it's a video recording of a video recording (e.g. someone using their phone to record the screen of the security system). One way to tell would be to look at the previous and subsequent frames. Security systems alas often have very aggressive compression enabled to save on storage space often leading to more extreme artifacts. One of the first steps in modern video compression is to split an image up into larger blocks (e.g. 8x8 pixels), the pixels in those blocks are then "compressed" (not totally correct, but good enough for this explanation), so information (e.g. detail) is lost. The codec will then compare a block from frame A to that same block on frame B and determine if anything has changed, and if it hasn't doesn't actually encode the frame B block. Bottom line is that the resultant video quality at any area of the image depends greatly on the amount of variability within the block and whether there is motion in the block. So someone standing still but moving their head quickly will have significant detail in the non moving parts but will be blurry and blocky in the moving head.
All this is not to "disprove" the notion that the image has been "tampered" with, just to say that to rule out things like compression artifacts, we need to see more of the frames, esp. the ones immediately preceding and following the frames in question. Comparing a highly compressed security camera frame to a much higher quality, less aggressively compressed youtube video frame really is apples and oranges.
In 1967 when my skinny 17 old girlfriend asked me, "what does a tampon and James Brown have in common?", and when I said, "Um, I don't know", she said "both are "uptight and out of sight". She had before, told me she had a joke for me.
However, my thinking knew the difference between "out of sight" and "out a sight". James Brown followed up with "I FEEL GOOD".
To me, though, she conflated, properly, both the OF and the A, and the up tight and the uptight.
She was trying to snag me as a husband - She said to me, "the meat closest to the bone is the sweetest".
Well, you seem to have it all figured out, dontcha? Then you shouldn’t have a problem explaining that small block of carpet that I estimate is about 3 square inches in size that pops out in sharper contrast at the center of the blob of smudged out nothing surrounding it? Splain that Lucy? There can be no depth of field or auto focus issue there. And video compression can’t explain that away either, if you actually understand what video compression does and how it works.
Furthermore, surveillance cameras use a wide aperture focus to capture a larger field of focus, as can be seen in the following still frames. Notice the detail in the floor all the way down. Look at the detail of the open door in the near foreground, compared to the second door further down in the background. There is no noticeable loss of focus or detail. Even the floor detail is very distinguishable 20 feet down, and the entry way to the right, even in the shadow area detail can still be seen.
Now, again, compare that to this image which is again showing the obliterated contrast surrounding the feet and pant leg, which you see the camo detail, as well as the shoe detail in much sharper contrast than the ground underneath. Looks like she is standing in a puddle of gray mud water.
So, spare us all the details about how cameras work. Nowadays, everyone has both a still frame and video camera built right into their phones. We know what video is supposed to look like, or at least we should. Some of us, obviously don’t.
There are several such blurred areas in that hallway picture you show. The doors to the children's ministry just blob and become one with the floor. Last pic the left foot is similarly affected.
In 1967 when my skinny 17 old girlfriend asked me, "what does a tampon and James Brown have in common?", and when I said, "Um, I don't know", she said "both are "uptight and out of sight". She had before, told me she had a joke for me.
However, my thinking knew the difference between "out of sight" and "out a sight". James Brown followed up with "I FEEL GOOD".
To me, though, she conflated, properly, both the OF and the A, and the up tight and the uptight.
She was trying to snag me as a husband - She said to me, "the meat closest to the bone is the sweetest".
Here is the man, feeling good, and lookin alright, even though it’s a screen shot from a poor quality YouTube video, we can still see that it’s old James Brown
And here is the “shooter” who apparently has a name, but doesn’t seem to have a face! Where is her face? It’s missing … no doubt a trick of shadows …. Only the shadow knows who’s’ face that is.
Yes they will harden that school and hire more security, that will make them safe.
People buy cars and pay thousands and thousands of dollars in additional features to include safety bumpers, crumple zones, airbags, seat-belts, adaptive cruise control, collision avoidance systems, ABS brakes, AWD, traction control, so they can drive five minutes to buy groceries. And yet it's considered too extreme to install bullet proof glass and armed security at school, to protect thousands of children eight hours a day????
Well, you seem to have it all figured out, dontcha? Then you shouldn’t have a problem explaining that small block of carpet that I estimate is about 3 square inches in size that pops out in sharper contrast at the center of the blob of smudged out nothing surrounding it? Splain that Lucy? There can be no depth of field or auto focus issue there. And video compression can’t explain that away either, if you actually understand what video compression does and how it works.
Furthermore, surveillance cameras use a wide aperture focus to capture a larger field of focus, as can be seen in the following still frames. Notice the detail in the floor all the way down. Look at the detail of the open door in the near foreground, compared to the second door further down in the background. There is no noticeable loss of focus or detail. Even the floor detail is very distinguishable 20 feet down, and the entry way to the right, even in the shadow area detail can still be seen.
Now, again, compare that to this image which is again showing the obliterated contrast surrounding the feet and pant leg, which you see the camo detail, as well as the shoe detail in much sharper contrast than the ground underneath. Looks like she is standing in a puddle of gray mud water.
So, spare us all the details about how cameras work. Nowadays, everyone has both a still frame and video camera built right into their phones. We know what video is supposed to look like, or at least we should. Some of us, obviously don’t.
this is not true either...
there is a difference between a camera and the recording device when it is dedicated, such that every frame - adjustable in both frequency and size makes it to the preformatted memory blocks on the recorder. You have heard of 'buffer-under flow' where is not enuf frames to fill a block so the partially filled block becomes unusable, then you have multi-cameras and 1 device where the frame rate is timesliced between every camera.
IF you are recording 32 fps and you have 16 cameras then you get 2 frames per second per camera which is pretty stop motion so many.most systems allocate memory in a leapfrog: a block, b block, c block etc such that the number of active cameras is a hashed to each block...in my example, 4 blocks, 4 cameras per block so at 32fps you get 8fps - still jumpy.
when playing it back, the image software tries to restore it to the correct 'p' 320, 480, 720, 1080 etc and invents frames in between the actual frames. for most of the picture - as shown, detail remains, but for parts of the picture where movement occurred the detail has to be lost so they invent a color pixel in those spots that is the average of any 2 endpoints, hence you get that blurred cataract view for only a portion <---this is not at all unlike how CDs unpack 44.1Khz music sampling which was made from true analog, every once in a while a 'direction vector' drops a sign and you get a 'blurp' in the music, or red from black in video.
from my understanding of how the technology works, and have written some of the storage technologies (we use it for far far more than just wussy video and sound) and seen the videos, they are proper...they are CLEARLY different cameras on different systems and different resolutions and frame rates. I see exactly nothing nefarious. if you have a static view camera - use a 1080p camera at 24-32fps to get movie to just a little better than broadcast tv (30fps or 29.97). HD would need 60fps. if you have a set of timesliced cameras into 1 system then dumb it down to 480p (close to old tv) and 24fps to lower memory requirements and processing speed. Are our video processors that good today? sure (we wont get into internet and broadcast of 1080P and 4k etc which aint...) saving 1080p requires a bandwidth of 5mbps which is well over 600K of memory a SECOND (which is why a 2hr 1080p movie with no alternate tracks requires almost 4.5G to store uncompressed single layer (hello DVD) a $100 commercially available Tb box would be top of my head 2 weeks of uncompressed video...so the location needs to determine how long to keep a log, do we dump it to mag tape and what resolution and frame rate.
all of this long winded discussion means is that whatever they chose to use, they chose to use and I see no reason to think it was morked with
If you have people telling you different, hang around different people.
Last edited by RetireinPA; 04-04-2023 at 01:18 PM..
Reason: bad math - my bad
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
