update: I've just had a phone conversation with Genghis, and learned that an interlaced copy of the "new" Chopper 5 is available. It's in MPEG2 format, and available here. It is not frame-blended. It is still a digitization from what is most assuredly a VHS source, the same VHS source as the original Dylan Avery version, as evidenced by a distinct analog noise band just before the fade to black.
------------
Indeed, a small blurry flying object is now seen in the wide shot of this footage, and I have no doubt it originated as the image of a 767. I have no reason at all to think it is any real object, and every reason to think it was added to the footage.
1. This is not really a new version of Chopper 5. It is a somewhat better quality copy of the Dylan Avery / Anthony Lawson version. It has the exact same VHS-style noise event before the fade-to-black. The other known version - Jim Hoffman / Eric Salter - has no such noise event, therefore the noise did not occur at the source. This "new" version is obviously the same old Avery / Lawson.
2. Like the previously available version of Avery / Lawson, it is frame blended. Each existing frame of video has been created by blending together what were originally two separate video images, taken 1/59.94 seconds apart. This causes the airplane images to be blurry and elongated. It's terrible for trying do things like measure velocity. I suspect that's by design.
3. Unlike the previously available version of Avery / Lawson, there are no duplicated frames.
4. While the previously available version of Avery / Lawson did not show the plane in the wide shot, you could see an airplane image for about 3 frames during the zoom in. We knew that this added image had been frame blended differently than the overall footage, because a particular airplane image appeared on 3 separate frames, instead of just 2.
5. We also knew that the tiny airplane image had been added after the fact, because it does not appear in the Hoffman/Salter version. It is true that the Hoffman / Salter version was brightened significantly, and brightening could certainly cause a tiny airplane image to disappear. Or not, depending.
Click image for full size.
To test whether or not Hoffman / Salter could have been brightened enough to disappear the tiny airplane, I tried to brighten and color-match Avery / Lawson. I was able to match colors pretty closely, and make Avery / Lawson considerably BRIGHTER than Hoffman / Salter, and still not disappear the tiny airplane. Therefore brightening did not disappear any airplane image in Hoffman / Salter.
I suspect there were problems in attempting to add matching airplanes to the two different VHS versions of Chopper 5. It was decided to add a plane to Avery / Lawson, de-interlace and frame blend it for confusion, while brightening Hoffman / Salter without adding an airplane, and leave it interlaced.
6. The "new" version comes complete with a silly story about somebody named "Dr. Ebbets" who allegedly hounded the networks and used his connections to obtain the footage.
Why then would he end up with another version of the same old VHS tape copy? OK "Dr. Ebbets", who are you? Can I please talk to you? Could you please make an interlaced copy of your "new" video? Better yet, could you please use your connections to get broadcast quality?
7. "Dr. Ebbets" evidently created a DVD called "911 As it Happened - A Composite". I suspect the use of the word "composite" is another information warfare tactic, diffusing the important meaning of "composite" in the context of 9/11.
8. Matt is touting the "new" version as "near broadcast quality". It's nothing of the sort. This was recorded on VHS tape, then digitized, then de-interlaced and frame-blended, and finally compressed with mp4 compression. Broadcast quality is none of that.
The govern-media just digs itself in deeper. But don't worry guys, almost nobody's paying attention.
-----------------------------------
Received this email from Matt
From: "xxxxxxxxx"
To: acebaker1234 [At] yahoo {dot} com
Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2009 10:38:34 PM
Subject: plane in the wide shot
Ace,
Matt here, after just reading your post at 911movement:
http://forum.911movement.org/index.php?showtopic=539&st=540
... which was linked at pumpitout:
http://s1.zetaboards.com/pumpitout/topic/1140450/3/#new
... which is a thread I started after Genghis pointed out the plane in the
footage I found and pointed out to him:
http://z15.invisionfree.com/911taboo/index.php?showtopic=1059&st=0
Knowing your investment of time and energy in this piece of footage, I
thought I would tell you the story of finding the "new" version of the
Chopper 5 WTC 2nd hit footage.
You must have already searched and found the source:
http://www.demonoid.com/files/details/1772645/?report_comment=7596344&show_files=&page=1&rel=1232820944
...and read the statement by Dr. Ebbetts, who made the DVD "September 11,
2001 - As It Happened - A Composite"
I googled (scroogled, really: http://www.scroogle.org/cgi-bin/scraper.htm)
that title, which is in the "more info" for the YouTube video "September
11, 2001 - As It Happened - The South Tower Attack" -
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1lKZqqSI9-s -- after having scroogled it
many times. This past weekend that search picked up a brand new, day-old
torrent. I jumped on it.
I'm sorry to hear doubts as to its authenticity (see Simon Shack's post
linked above), but the quality of the footage from that torrent is
undeniably top notch.
Thought I'd share.
Thanks again for all you've done. I'm glad to help here, even though the
"no plane in the wide shot" theory seems to be defunct.
Simon wants to carry on the legacy, obviously. I hope you don't, perhaps
out of my own gullibility in believing the authenticity of the torrent/DVD
files. I do believe it, nonetheless.
Carry on.
Sincerely,
Matt
9 comments:
Dr. Ebbets Story
----------
"September 11, 2001 - As It Happened - A Composite"
Label: Dr. Ebbetts
NTSC
Description from Dr. Ebbetts:
"As many of you may know, I have spent the better part of four-and-a-half years working on a project
for a friend of mine in Colorado who was directly affected by the September 11, 2001 attacks on New
York and Washington. I don't want to get into specifics, out of respect for this person's privacy, but I
was asked to compile as much video as I could find of the original newscasts of September 11, 2001,
from as many networks as possible, covering the events as they unfolded on live television. Being a
video editor by trade (among other vocations), I had no problem taking this project on. The attacks
touched me very deeply and profoundly and I was happy to do it once I knew what was desired.
The problem, naturally, was in finding the footage requested. To say the least, this was a task almost
impossible in its undertaking. In short, I was asked to create a video record of the day as it played out
on live television, from the initial bulletins, to the impact of the second airplane on live television, to the
attack on the Pentagon, to the collapse of both towers. In fact, I was asked to create a kind of documentary
- a montage, if you will - in a cohesive, watchable presentation, that captured that morning in an "as it happened"
kind of way. Many fine documentaries have been produced depicting the events of that day, but there had never
been an "as it happened" compilation, employing original newscasts, meant to encapsulate that morning in a
video timeline. This was right up my alley.
Of course, this wouldn't be easy. Let's face it, unless someone happened to be rolling live on "Good Morning
America" and the "Today Show" at 8:00AM that morning (for reasons unknown), how would anyone happen
to have the "breaking news" announcements of a plane crashing into the North Tower? And if someone actually
did have the presence of mind to start rolling a few minutes into the bulletin, it still wouldn't be absolutely
complete. Many people changed channels to try and get the "latest" information, so getting a complete telecast
was as close to impossible as it got, especially for those first couple of hours. And if there were people with
VCRs rolling that morning, how on earth would I find them? And if I could find them, how could I get them to
loan me these precious tapes?
I spent literally years going to the networks and the local stations in New York to try and get help, but many
wouldn't even talk to me, and others still wanted ridiculous copyright fees.
To make a long story short, being "Doc Ebbetts" does have its benefits, I guess.and after arduous, painstaking
tenacity, I was able to collect the footage I needed, many of which have STILL not been seen publicly since that
fateful morning. I spent months editing this program, as simple as the finished product ultimately is, after watching
these telecasts over and over to try and piece it together in such a way as to recapture the horror, the mayhem, the
confusion and the shock of that morning. As we approach the sixth anniversary of the event, I have been given the
"okay" to make this available to you. The program was actually completed last year, in time for the fifth anniversary
commemoration, but I couldn't make it available to you then.
I am offering a DVD, printed and created in the true "Ebbetts" style of quality, artwork and design called "September
11, 2001 - As It Happened - A Composite."
This video program tells the story, in a timeline fashion, of how the events of September 11, 2001 unfolded on live
television, utilizing the original newscasts from that horrible morning. This program serves as an archival video record
of how the national and local (New York and Washington) broadcast networks covered the event, as it happened. The
newsclips employed are not flashback clips..these are the ORIGINAL broadcasts from that morning."
Why can't Boeing provide silent airplanes to the airlines? Many people who live under flight patterns would appreciate that, even though their airplanes only fly at a puny 125 mph on the standard approach.
Curious how the Dr. Ebbetts' of the world can ignore the realities. Makes for a nice Alice in Wonderland world.
"(among other vocations),"
Clearly not engineering or piloting, let's hope not.
Why does this "amateur" video not show the impact?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r3AwEz0K-UI&NR=1
Very interesting.
Thanks, Ace.
No thoughts at present about this post or comments.
Ace......there may be no such thing as a silly question but here goes. I recently came upon this article by Bollyn which was written just months after 911.
http://www.serendipity.li/wot/bollyn1.htm
Scroll down where he talks about possible use of infared weapons. I remember an eyewitness who described the WTC buildings immediately after collapse as having an almost orange glow for quite some time after the collapse.
My question is...is there any way we could view videos in an "infared" type style of lighting to see if we can detect the energy required to do what Bollyn is describing may have happened? Or would it need to be filmed in a infared to detect any kind of "laser weapondry"?
Interesting to note the cooperation with Israel to develop this technology just 5 years before 911?
I guess this is what happens when you film in FLIR?
http://www.americanfreepress.net/html/waco.html
backround on dr ebbetts
he is a well known and loved beatles fan who specialises in the audio remastering/upgrading of old pristine unplayed beatles vinyl records onto cd as they actualy sound better than the officially released Capitol/EMI cds, the poor soud quality of which beatles fans often complain about. He applied his audio/video editing skills to create a tribute to the victims of 911. i own several of his remasters and he is well respected among beatles fans.
I don't believe you Cammie. Can you please provide some contact info on Dr. Ebbetts? I have questions.
Post a Comment