Jump to content

Is it real?

Souper

By Souper
in Science & Spaceflight

 Share

Recommended Posts

Darnok

Darnok

Posted
Posted (edited)
19 minutes ago, Scotius said:

Homesite adress: UFOatSection51. Yeah. Totally legit. Nicely done though - only with way too much sunlight that far from the Sun.

So if that video would be posted by NASA you would say it is real or not?

Also same way in background you can put Earth...

Edited by Darnok
Link to comment
Share on other sites
p1t1o

p1t1o

Posted
Posted
30 minutes ago, Darnok said:

So if that video would be posted by NASA you would say it is real or not?

Also same way in background you can put Earth...

Sure, if NASA posted a video that also looked as real as a 1989 sitcom, I wouldn't believe that one either.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Darnok

Darnok

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, p1t1o said:

Sure, if NASA posted a video that also looked as real as a 1989 sitcom, I wouldn't believe that one either.

 

So it is only matter of video quality for you? Having HD video of China landing on Mars today would be enough proof that it does happen today?

Edited by Darnok
Link to comment
Share on other sites
p1t1o

p1t1o

Posted
Posted
13 minutes ago, Darnok said:

So it is only matter of video quality for you? Having HD video of China landing on Mars today would be enough proof that it does happen today?

Not "quality" as in pure resolution or signal-to-noise, but "quality" as in how object appear in reality as opposed to if they are put together unnaturally - subtle effects of light and shade that disagree with the eye, motions of objects with respect to other objects etc. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Darnok

Darnok

Posted
Posted
37 minutes ago, p1t1o said:

Not "quality" as in pure resolution or signal-to-noise, but "quality" as in how object appear in reality as opposed to if they are put together unnaturally - subtle effects of light and shade that disagree with the eye, motions of objects with respect to other objects etc. 

How do you know how Mars or any other planet or moon looks like from around 400km high?

If understand your way of thinking right... you would need at least single video or picture that you can identify as "real", then you only compare new photos and videos with this first "real" evidence you have. So please show me this pattern/standard 1 real photo or video of every larger body in our solar system :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
kerbiloid

kerbiloid

Posted
Posted (edited)

So, "why stars are not seen on the sky", "shadows fall under incorrect angle", "planet color is too grayish", "light disagrees with eye".

Even with a documental video of the best quality, there are some people who sometimes still continue questioning if Russians have been to Saturn.

Edited by kerbiloid
Link to comment
Share on other sites
p1t1o

p1t1o

Posted
Posted (edited)
14 minutes ago, Darnok said:

How do you know how Mars or any other planet or moon looks like from around 400km high?

If understand your way of thinking right... you would need at least single video or picture that you can identify as "real", then you only compare new photos and videos with this first "real" evidence you have. So please show me this pattern/standard 1 real photo or video of every larger body in our solar system :)

No, its not about recognising an object from memory, that video is not just a shot of Saturn from on-high. Its about how real the object look in context with one another. A good example is the fake-CGI "shakycam" effect which is both too bumpy and not-bumpy-enough, its hard to put into words why it looks fake, but it does, and is.

You want me to say "Yeah this *looks* fake but I've never seen footage from saturn before so how should I know?" but I've never seen footage of a shrek in real life before but Im reasonably certain that he is just a CGI construct.

Edited by p1t1o
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Darnok

Darnok

Posted
Posted
50 minutes ago, p1t1o said:

No, its not about recognising an object from memory, that video is not just a shot of Saturn from on-high. Its about how real the object look in context with one another. A good example is the fake-CGI "shakycam" effect which is both too bumpy and not-bumpy-enough, its hard to put into words why it looks fake, but it does, and is.

You want me to say "Yeah this *looks* fake but I've never seen footage from saturn before so how should I know?" but I've never seen footage of a shrek in real life before but Im reasonably certain that he is just a CGI construct.

Shrek was CGI... no way :)

Have you seen movies Gravity, Interstellar and Martian? Does that kind of "quality" would be enough for you to tell this is real?

10 minutes ago, Gaarst said:

If the Chinese went to Mars I'm pretty sure we'd have more than a single YouTube video to prove it.

Unless they would lost it somewhere in storage :wink:

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
p1t1o

p1t1o

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, Darnok said:

Shrek was CGI... no way :)

Have you seen movies Gravity, Interstellar and Martian? Does that kind of "quality" would be enough for you to tell this is real?

Unless they would lost it somewhere in storage :wink:

 

Im not sure I understand? Watching those films doesnt tell me anything about the "realness" of this clip.

I can say though, that Gravity (being the best remembered one to me at the moment) looks a hell of a lot realler than the Saturn video. When common mass-market fiction looks more real, you are not making a very convincing fake video.

You dont need to compare this footage to *space* footage to be able to make a judgement, you need to compare it to *real* footage (of anything) to make the judgement. 

Dont compare the Saturn clip to movies, compare it to the onboard footage from a space shuttle launch, or footage from an ISS spacewalk or any industrial record-keeping footage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Darnok

Darnok

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, p1t1o said:

Dont compare the Saturn clip to movies, compare it to the onboard footage from a space shuttle launch, or footage from an ISS spacewalk or any industrial record-keeping footage.

So we are back to "if NASA released it it must be real" :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Elthy

Elthy

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Darnok said:

So we are back to "if NASA released it it must be real" :)

Which is pretty good assumption. I would say NASA is the most reliable source for anything space related...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
razark

razark

Posted
Posted (edited)
7 minutes ago, Darnok said:

So we are back to "if NASA released it it must be real" :)

Well, NASA does release footage of things they do, and tend to be pretty clear when they're showing artists' representation.

 

But why look at the video in the first place?  There's no way something like a mission to Saturn could be kept secret for this long.

Edited by razark
Link to comment
Share on other sites
p1t1o

p1t1o

Posted
Posted (edited)
8 minutes ago, Darnok said:

So we are back to "if NASA released it it must be real" :)

No, we are back to "if it looks real then its probably real, if it looks fake, then its probably fake." Because it is VERY hard to make something fake look *really* "real" to a human eye. That is not opinion, it is due to the nature of our biological components. Even the very latest state-of-the-art CGI only fools you for a little while, and that is without close scrutiny.

I did not say compare it to NASA footage, ok I mentioned the space shuttle and the ISS which both have heavy NASA involvement, but there are other people aboard the ISS at least. What I meant was, *any* type of industrial recording, specifically from the space industry but other footage would count as well. What Im getting at is footage shot in similarly heavy-machinery and human-safety types of environments, regardless of which organisation is involved.

But even if we take footage comparison out of the picture entirely - compare it to your own eyes, your own eyes should tell you there are things "off" about the Saturn footage. Even strange things that dont look how you expect dont look fake, "fake" is a specific property and the saturn clip has it.

i do never get why people ask if thing are real or not, as long i you write thing, well they are real, word are real and the caracter we use to write word are real as well

 

 

Ah well now you're moving towards philosophy - are *we* real? Is *anything* real? What IS real? Am I an AI? Are you talking to a bot? Is this a pre-recorded reply?

To have any kind of meaningful discussion, you have to make some (usually un-said) assumptions.

Edited by p1t1o
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WinkAllKerb''

WinkAllKerb''

Posted
Posted (edited)

image are real , you can see them ... interpretation of image are another concern wich fall in shamanism - 50 000, cult place - ???? now, school all the crappy stuff and bloodbath around religion in history book and crusade

also remind that prehistoric don't use internet ... and school allow to build stuff loccally in the whole not locally, undereducated population don't help at all ...

now if you ask me a country list of less educated people ratio ... ask UTF-8#q=who%20there%20leader%20and%20what%20do%20they%20expect (blabla politics i don't care either)

 

Edited by WinkAllKerb''
blablabla religion, i don't care, this is archeologi and museum
Link to comment
Share on other sites
This thread is quite old. Please consider starting a new thread rather than reviving this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...