I've made a frame viewer for the Chopper 5 footage. Original source is Eric Salter's footage. The plane sequence was stablized in After Effects. Frame numbers were added in Final Cut Pro. Frames were exported as JPEGs image sequence from Quicktime pro.
Link to Chopper 5 Frame Viewer
Tuesday, March 11, 2008
Saturday, March 8, 2008
Judy Falls on her Sword
Judy Wood's paper with John Hutchison, published December 25, could not have been a better Christmas present to me. When I saw it, and being familiar with Hutchison's silly fake videos, I immediately recognized her move for what it was: "falling on her sword". She's made a deal with the devil, just like all the other actors in the 9/11 psy-opera - Jones, Griffin, Greening, and the rest.
Like so many, I've been trying to solve 9/11. Following the researchers has been a roller coaster ride. The original Scholars for 9/11 Truth promised to open the floodgates, and reveal 9/11 to the masses. Instead, they split into two factions,
and began deriding one another mercilessly. Wood and co. made an excellent case for Steven Jones deliberately downplaying the extent of the damage at ground zero, and failing to explain how thermite could possibly account for the disintegration. Yet Wood's theory of directed energy weapons was lacking itself. I was conflicted.
I don't know how the towers were blown up, but I'm a whole lot less conflicted in my mind now. By deliberately associating with Hutchison, Wood sent her message, and I have received it loud and clear. I know Judy Wood personally. I've corresponded with her for a year and a half now, I've stayed at Jerry Leaphart's Connecticut house with her and Morgan Reynolds for 3 days, video taping, drinking coffee in the morning, and gin and tonics at night. We've spent long hours on the phone.
I like Judy Wood. I truly do. She is smart, and not slick. During an earlier episode in her life, she endured more pain than most people can imagine. She has, without doubt, created the most complete study of the visual evidence at ground zero. She asks the right questions. I now believe that Judy was on the "inside" from the beginning, but, like a gang member who wants out of the gang, she is sending disguised pleas for help. She is telling us to look elsewhere for the truth.
She was trying to raise the red flags earlier. Like, never taking the "under construction" tags off her pages. Like drawing the line in the sand on thermite. I proposed to her that perhaps thermite was used in the fire zones only, to melt trusses and columns, causing the inward bowing which would all later be blamed on the fires. This would explain the observed molten metal pouring out of the south tower just before demolition. It would also allow Steven Jones to be "a little bit right".
This thermite in the fire zones sounds very reasonable to me, but Judy and Morgan Reynolds would have none of it. Of course thermite didn't blow up the towers, but why it was SO important to Judy and Morgan that thermite had NOTHING to do with the demolitions? They were VERY adamant about this. In a December 2007 phone call, they went so far as to suggest that the news videos which show the molten metal were faked. I pointed out that while compositing airplanes would be pretty easy, compositing molten metal on a hand-held news shot would basically be impossible.
Then came the "Hutchison Effect". So Judy Wood thinks the molten metal dripping out of the south tower are fake videos, but Hutchison's are real? Please, she does not. She's much smarter than that, trust me people. She's just not allowed to have any point of agreement with Steven Jones. Her hangout was to present the most complete study of the evidence, then associate it with the UFO-and-bigfoot, alternative-knowledge crowd. She's now done that.
In another December phone call, Judy and Morgan tried to convince me that the planes were really missiles projecting holograms. Why was THAT so important? THAT phone call really made me wonder. It bolstered my confidence that my analysis of the Chopper 5 video, and no-planes evidence in general is right on target.
It's a circular firing squad, isn't it? No actor gets the story right, and everybody points out the errors in everybody else's story. Isn't that the plan? Somebody had to be the one to actually present the photo evidence, and we can't have Jones do that. Oh no. He's too much of a real physicist. Too many questions. Leave that to "wacky ol' Judy", and have her spin a story about energy weapons "of some kind".
If Judy Wood actually wants to continue to pursue 9/11 research with any credibility, I strongly suggest that she immediately divorce herself from John Hutchison, and his laughable upside down videos. He dangles things from the ceiling by holding a magnet on the other side. He edits video making things look like they change instantly. Maybe she was fooled, or had an error in judgement, but I doubt it. Hutchison's videos are truly idiotic. At least he could have put in references for "which way is up" or "continuous time". That's what I've done in my fake Hutchison Effect videos. It's called one-upsmanship.
I'll be the first to admit that top-secret energy technology exists. No question. The twin towers were indeed taken apart by something very powerful, very exotic. But John Hutchison has had nothing to do with it. While quantum mechanics is not my area of specialty, video fakery is.
Judy Wood's observations are absolutely correct, and I still highly recommend her site. Ignore Hutchison Effect. The only connection between Hutchison and 9/11 is video fakery, and it's a weak connection. Hutchison uses old-school theater and camera tricks, 9/11 used video compositing.
A unified theory of 9/11 will include Jones, Wood, Reynolds, and the rest. The contributions of all will need to be analyzed in the context of their roles as insiders, and as voluntary participants in the circular firing squad. All of them have brought shattered fragments of the truth, stitched together with lies, nonsense and irrelevancies. We may someday learn how they did the towers. In the meantime, video fakery and no-planes solves 9/11.
Like so many, I've been trying to solve 9/11. Following the researchers has been a roller coaster ride. The original Scholars for 9/11 Truth promised to open the floodgates, and reveal 9/11 to the masses. Instead, they split into two factions,
and began deriding one another mercilessly. Wood and co. made an excellent case for Steven Jones deliberately downplaying the extent of the damage at ground zero, and failing to explain how thermite could possibly account for the disintegration. Yet Wood's theory of directed energy weapons was lacking itself. I was conflicted.
I don't know how the towers were blown up, but I'm a whole lot less conflicted in my mind now. By deliberately associating with Hutchison, Wood sent her message, and I have received it loud and clear. I know Judy Wood personally. I've corresponded with her for a year and a half now, I've stayed at Jerry Leaphart's Connecticut house with her and Morgan Reynolds for 3 days, video taping, drinking coffee in the morning, and gin and tonics at night. We've spent long hours on the phone.
I like Judy Wood. I truly do. She is smart, and not slick. During an earlier episode in her life, she endured more pain than most people can imagine. She has, without doubt, created the most complete study of the visual evidence at ground zero. She asks the right questions. I now believe that Judy was on the "inside" from the beginning, but, like a gang member who wants out of the gang, she is sending disguised pleas for help. She is telling us to look elsewhere for the truth.
She was trying to raise the red flags earlier. Like, never taking the "under construction" tags off her pages. Like drawing the line in the sand on thermite. I proposed to her that perhaps thermite was used in the fire zones only, to melt trusses and columns, causing the inward bowing which would all later be blamed on the fires. This would explain the observed molten metal pouring out of the south tower just before demolition. It would also allow Steven Jones to be "a little bit right".
This thermite in the fire zones sounds very reasonable to me, but Judy and Morgan Reynolds would have none of it. Of course thermite didn't blow up the towers, but why it was SO important to Judy and Morgan that thermite had NOTHING to do with the demolitions? They were VERY adamant about this. In a December 2007 phone call, they went so far as to suggest that the news videos which show the molten metal were faked. I pointed out that while compositing airplanes would be pretty easy, compositing molten metal on a hand-held news shot would basically be impossible.
Then came the "Hutchison Effect". So Judy Wood thinks the molten metal dripping out of the south tower are fake videos, but Hutchison's are real? Please, she does not. She's much smarter than that, trust me people. She's just not allowed to have any point of agreement with Steven Jones. Her hangout was to present the most complete study of the evidence, then associate it with the UFO-and-bigfoot, alternative-knowledge crowd. She's now done that.
In another December phone call, Judy and Morgan tried to convince me that the planes were really missiles projecting holograms. Why was THAT so important? THAT phone call really made me wonder. It bolstered my confidence that my analysis of the Chopper 5 video, and no-planes evidence in general is right on target.
It's a circular firing squad, isn't it? No actor gets the story right, and everybody points out the errors in everybody else's story. Isn't that the plan? Somebody had to be the one to actually present the photo evidence, and we can't have Jones do that. Oh no. He's too much of a real physicist. Too many questions. Leave that to "wacky ol' Judy", and have her spin a story about energy weapons "of some kind".
If Judy Wood actually wants to continue to pursue 9/11 research with any credibility, I strongly suggest that she immediately divorce herself from John Hutchison, and his laughable upside down videos. He dangles things from the ceiling by holding a magnet on the other side. He edits video making things look like they change instantly. Maybe she was fooled, or had an error in judgement, but I doubt it. Hutchison's videos are truly idiotic. At least he could have put in references for "which way is up" or "continuous time". That's what I've done in my fake Hutchison Effect videos. It's called one-upsmanship.
I'll be the first to admit that top-secret energy technology exists. No question. The twin towers were indeed taken apart by something very powerful, very exotic. But John Hutchison has had nothing to do with it. While quantum mechanics is not my area of specialty, video fakery is.
Judy Wood's observations are absolutely correct, and I still highly recommend her site. Ignore Hutchison Effect. The only connection between Hutchison and 9/11 is video fakery, and it's a weak connection. Hutchison uses old-school theater and camera tricks, 9/11 used video compositing.
A unified theory of 9/11 will include Jones, Wood, Reynolds, and the rest. The contributions of all will need to be analyzed in the context of their roles as insiders, and as voluntary participants in the circular firing squad. All of them have brought shattered fragments of the truth, stitched together with lies, nonsense and irrelevancies. We may someday learn how they did the towers. In the meantime, video fakery and no-planes solves 9/11.
Wednesday, March 5, 2008
How Silly Can it Get?
Monday, March 3, 2008
Ace Baker Declaration in 9/11 Lawsuits
Since my publicly exposing John Hutchison and the "Hutchison Effect" as mere video fakery, Judy Wood has been silent. Now she has suggested that perhaps the defendants in her 9/11 lawsuit would appreciated my testimony. I highly doubt that. Honest truthseekers love what I have to say, which obviously excludes the defense contractor defendants in Wood's Qui Tam lawsuit.
Here's what I would declare under oath, if ever I got the chance. You can bet this stuff will be in my movie. Copies sent to Judy Wood, Morgan Reynolds, Jim Fetzer, Rosalee Grable (Webfairy), Nico Haupt, Killtown (whoever he turns out to be), Steve Jones, Richard Gage, Stephen Goodale (my executive producer), and Russ Gerst.
It also includes Judy Wood's email stating her current (yet evidently malleable) position on Hutchison Effect, and my previous email that triggered it.
Here's what I would declare under oath, if ever I got the chance. You can bet this stuff will be in my movie. Copies sent to Judy Wood, Morgan Reynolds, Jim Fetzer, Rosalee Grable (Webfairy), Nico Haupt, Killtown (whoever he turns out to be), Steve Jones, Richard Gage, Stephen Goodale (my executive producer), and Russ Gerst.
It also includes Judy Wood's email stating her current (yet evidently malleable) position on Hutchison Effect, and my previous email that triggered it.
Dear all,
Please ask yourself why 1-18 are not in evidence in either Reynolds v the world, or Wood v the world, or Steven Jones v the world.
I highly doubt any defendants would be desirous of my testimony in your case, Judy, but if called, by any party, I would testify as follows:
1. I, Alexander Collin "Ace" Baker am a 47 year old professional musician living in Sherman Oaks, California.
2. I have expertise in video production, editing, and special effects processing.
3. I have broad general knowledge of the events of 9/11/01.
4. I have produced the world's leading scientific analysis of the apparent motion of the airplane image in the WNYW FOX 5 live news broadcast at 9:02-9:03 a.m. September 11, 2001, footage otherwise known as "Chopper 5".
5. Based on my research, the motion of the airplane image in Chopper 5 becomes more unstable after the video sequence is stabilized.
6. In authentic airplane videos, the motion of an airplane image must become more stable after the video sequence is stabilized.
7. Based on my research, a real airplane would be present in the opening 170 video frames of the Chopper 5 video.
8. There is no airplane visible in the opening 170 frames of the Chopper 5 video.
9. Based on my research, the nose of the airplane appears to emerge from the back side of WTC2 in the Chopper 5 video.
10. It is physically impossible for the nose of a real airplane to emerge from the back side of WTC2, or any steel framed hi-rise building. Also, there was no "exit wound" present on the back side of WTC2 where an airplane nose would have come out.
11. A "layer mask" is a video software tool which allows one area in a video to become transparent, making any video object which enters this "layer mask" area invisible. A false airplane image escaping a layer mask is the only reasonable explanation for the "nose out" observation in the Chopper 5 video.
12. Based on my research, a video technician faded the picture to black after realizing the the nose of a false airplane image escaped the "layer mask".
13. The Chopper 5 footage was never replayed, indicating "mens rea" (a guilty mind).
14 The Chopper 5 footage was replaced on the official government archive with completely different footage, indicating "mens rea" (a guilty mind).
15. The CNN - Michael Hezarkhani footage shows a plane entering a tower with no damage, to either the plane or the tower.
16. A later frame in the same video shows a clearly visible hole in the tower.
17. Therefore, in light of 15 and 16, the tower damage was created at a later point in time than when the airplane image appeared to pass effortlessly through the wall.
18. Therefore, something besides the airplane image caused the observed damage to WTC2.
19. I have studied the many videos produced by John Hutchison involving the so-called "Hutchison Effect".
20. In my opinion, the Hutchison Effect videos are fake. That is, they depict ordinary physical events photographed in such a way as to deceive the viewer in to thinking that something highly unusual is taking place.
21. Many Hutchison videos depict objects flying upwards. In reality, they are objects falling downwards, photographed upside down.
22. Many Hutchison videos depict objects wiggling around, and appearing to defy gravity. In reality, they are typically objects photographed upside down, and manipulated via hidden magnets and/or hidden strings.
23. One Hutchison video depicts a toy UFO moving up and down, and a control string is clearly visible on the upper left side of the screen.
24. One Hutchison video depicts a toy battleship floating in a tub of water. It appears to move spontaneously, ripples of water appear and disappear spontaneously, and flames appear and disappear spontaneously upon the deck of the toy ship. In my expert opinion, the movement of the ship is caused by a human hand out of view, the flames are caused by the ignition of "flash powder" or similar, the water ripples are caused by a vibrator touching the tub, and that all these explanatory activities have been detectably edited out of the video sequence. Video editing is indicated by the instantaneous changes in flame, water, etc.
25. Various Hutchison videos depict metal objects changing shape instantly. Given time and temperature, the shape changes are not unusual at all, per se. The instantaneous nature of the changes is most easily explained by video editing.
26. I have produced several videos reproducing many of the same type of video trickery as John Hutchison. In my opinion, considering my published explanations of how my videos, and also Hutchison's videos were made, this convincingly and permanently dispels the notion of any and all "Hutchison Effect".
27. In my opinion, based on overwhelming evidence, the events of 9/11 were "an inside job", perpetrated by the U.S. government and the mainstream news media, not Islamic terrorists.
28. In my opinion, based on publicly available photos and videos, the World Trade Center was demolished with very powerful explosives or weapons of some sort.
29. I do not know what sort of explosives or weapons were used on 9/11.
30. In my opinion, the so-called "official story" of 9/11 is not only false, it is physically impossible, and provably so.
Sincerely,
Ace Baker

On Mar 3, 2008, at 2:18 PM, Judy Wood wrote:
Group, and Ace Baker,
Ace Baker challenges the validity of some of the videos originated by John Hutchison in demonstration of aspects of the "Hutchison Effect" and Ace considers some of us to have failed a test that he sought to put us through surreptitiously.
John asserts Ace's claims are false and I am choosing to side with John, notwithstanding Ace's certainty of his position.
An affidavit from John Hutchison has been filed in the case entitled Dr. Judy Wood ex rel. USA v ARA et al (1:07cv3314) (GBD) as of this date, 3/3/08, all as more fully confirmed in the court notice incorporated below.
If a a later date a change in my reliance is warranted I will do so. Ace can feel free to contact the lawyers for ARA and SAIC and other defendants if he'd like to work in their behalf and against me in my case.
Judy Wood
_________________________________________________________________
U.S. District Court
United States District Court for the Southern District of New York
Notice of Electronic Filing
The following transaction was entered by Leaphart, Jerry on 3/3/2008 at 10:48 AM EST and filed on 3/3/2008
Case Name: Wood v. Applied Research Associates, Inc. et al Case Number:1:07-cv-3314 Filer:Judy Wood Document Number: 61
Docket Text:
AFFIDAVIT of John Hutchison in Opposition re: [13] MOTION to Dismiss Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(1), 12(b)(6) and 9(b)., [42] MOTION to Dismiss Complaint., [37] FIRST MOTION to Dismiss., [46] MOTION to Dismiss., [52] MOTION to Dismiss., [25] MOTION to Dismiss pursuant to Rules 9(b), 12(b)(1), and 12(b)(6)., [18] MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction., [55] MOTION to DismissComplaint.. Document filed by Judy Wood. (Leaphart, Jerry)
1:07-cv-3314 Notice has been electronically mailed
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
At 03:49 PM -0800 3/2/08, Ace Baker wrote:
Russ,
Q & A for you.
Interesting. We figured you for an op back in the fall shortly
after we were in NY. Always throwing out flares trying to get
everyone upset.
LIke what?
We realized after the first one that all you were
trying to do was get everyone distracted, so we just let them
slide.
Like what?
That was the reason no one responded to your hoax video.
Not because we all were willing to follow John H. over a cliff, but
because we had smelled you out.
I'm explaining how Hutchison's videos are made, and that makes me a rat?
Hutchison makes provable, obvious fake videos, and he's fine?
You ARE following Hutchison over a cliff. That's a great way to put it, perfect metaphor. The only question is whether it's an accident, or on purpose.
Your behavior just as Judy is
trying to finish her Qui Tam work was quite expected and if you
notice, she has ignored your carrying on.
I know, I know, it's CB Brooklyn that's replying.
I didn't know about it at the time, but it turns out, my intervention on H-Effect was IN TIME to prevent the filing of Hutchison's affidavit. Now you have an obvious, provable video faker in evidence in Judy's case. Nothing could be worse. This was a terrible move. Unless you're trying to discredit energy weapons, and 9/11 truth in general, in which case it's a great move.
There is nothing more
important to her and the rest of us than doing the right thing to
expose 9/11. That you would try to continue the charade with near
hysterics has been most comical, if I may say so myself.
What charade?
What is
another hit-piece on Judy? She's had them before, we expected this
from you. As the three little pigs said to the Wolf while sitting
safely inside the house of bricks: "Blow your brains out." It
really won't affect what she is doing. We realize what she is up
against. All the odds are against her work, but she may be so
close to solving this thing that all the stops are being taken from
the agents provocateur.
That's how I feel too, Russ. I think the fake plane videos are really the key to the whole deal, because no-planes proves demolition. Everybody, including Judy and Morgan, have been trying to throw me off track in solving video fakery. Perhaps you don't know about the phone call that Morgan and Judy made to me in mid-December. It was VERY important to both of them that they convince me that there were missiles projecting holograms. Judy said she had evidence for this. I find the idea ridiculous, and a clear effort to protect WNYW.
Seems like SOMEBODY (read: Morgan Reynolds and Jerry Leaphart) should sue WNYW, and subpoena a broadcast-quality copy of Chopper 5 (Ace Baker repeated for the 5th time).
Russ, I'd be curious to get your take on missiles projecting holograms. I'm also still waiting for evidence that Judy may have on this.
Maybe the H-effect is not quite it, but
something similar did this that obviously no one understands.
I agree, something exotic did the towers. But there is NO H-Effect. It doesn't exist. It's video fakery. Hutchison hasn't discovered energy effects any more than I have. You all had me going until Christmas. Hutchison Effect! LOL. Good one.
That
someone with your background could be so schooled in physics,
economics, and virtually anything else that might be discussed
seems a bit amazing.
Thank you.
Just as Stephen has contacts with everyone
and anyone related to 9/11 and any other potential conspiracy ever
dreamed up. It was just too good to be true, but the behavior
always gave you two away. Don't know what you are being paid, but
obviously, they didn't get their money's worth.
I don't really know Stephen Goodale any better than you do. As far as I can tell, he's exactly who he says he is. He introduced himself to me at the conference. He followed through with what he said. We spent time talking in the car driving around Indiana and Toronto. He seems like a nice, progressive liberal left-wing kinda guy, divorced, looking for love, and interested in producing documentaries on things like 9/11 and Chemtrails.
Russ Gerst
rdgerst@iname.com
319-447-6000
-----Original Message-----
From: Ace Baker [mailto:ace@acebaker.com]
Sent: Friday, February 29, 2008 6:42 PM
To: econrn@suddenlink.net
Cc: Judy Wood; Russell Gerst; stephen goodale; Jerry Leaphart
Subject: Re: May All This Be Sorted Out.
On Feb 29, 2008, at 9:47 AM,wrote:
> May all this be sorted out.
I'll sort all this out right now.
1. No, we don't have a deal. There is no meeting of the minds, no
contract, no agreement of any kind controlling this film.
2. I've deleted everything I had on the film. Flushed down the memory
hole. I have all the raw files, but all the edits are gone
permanently. If you want to know what is was like, it mostly matched
the script. I've thrown the script out too.
3. I am making a 9/11 documentary film. My desire is to make it the
best 9/11 documentary in history.
4. I will send Steve a copy of the film when it's done.
5. Steve, I am a man of my word. If, having seen the film I make, you
like it, you and I can be partners. If you don't like it, I will give
you back every dime of your money that I have taken. Every dime. My
only request is that I finish the film before you see it and make
your decision.
6. Hutchison is a fraud.
7. It's still a movie about Judy's work, in part. It's about 9/11.
8. Hutchison is in the movie, for sure, with a sit-com laugh track.
It will lighten the mood, in contrast to . . .
9. I am going on camera and personally accusing WNYW television
executives of treason and conspiracy to commit mass murder. Why
Morgan and Judy are suing the defense contractors but not WNYW is
frustrating. People can argue physics and energy weapons til the
cows die. There's no freaking plane in Chopper 5 wide shot. The nose
comes out. They fade to black. The motion is unstable. They never
replayed it. They cleansed it. It's unarguable. I would think
somebody would subpoena a broadcast quality copy of Chopper 5.
>
> To paraphrase "What's My Line?," Will the real charlatan please
> stand?
>
My little tesla coil hoax was a well-crafted information gathering
experiment. It's my second one, the first being the Engineer Ed Hoax.
Engineer Ed was patterned after the Sokal Affair, and it proved the
profound bias of Wikipedia administartors. I only let it run about
two weeks. Hutch-Hoax 2008 only ran a month or so. Then I came right
out and laid the cards on the table. Engineer Ed got me permanently
banned from Wikipedia. Will busting Hutchison get me banned from
Scholars? We'll see. I hope not.
You guys didn't answer when I brought the anti-gravity video because
you couldn't. Of course, you all knew it was fake, just like you know
damn well Hutchison's videos are fake. What you didn't know was my
mind. Was Ace going to admit the fakery, or was he actually going to
claim to have produced the effect? Ahhh, that's was a dilemma, wasn't
it? Well, now you know.
-Sincerely,
Ace Baker
Saturday, March 1, 2008
John Hutchison is a Fraud - Part 2
In response to seeing my videos, John Hutchison sent me the following comment. I find it very illuminating.
Red Bull Can
The can must have a piece of steel or iron in the bottom of it, it's being controlled via a magnet on the other side of the thin, wooden floor. The entire little room is rotating around, like the Fred Astaire room, see below. At the point when the can appears to fall over and hang sideways, it's actually hanging down, but the room is rotated. When the can falls upwards, it's actually falling down, having been released by pulling the magnet away.
When the can appears to spontaneously change shape, these are edits. The can was bent back and forth repeatedly, anytime someone reached in to do it, those bits were simply edited out.
Red Bull, Ace Baker Style
Here's my Red Bull BS. My little dollhouse is not rigged to be able to rotate. It's hanging upside down, and I've glued two steel screws in the bottom of the can. I'm holding it in place with a horseshoe magnet on the other side of the dollhouse floor.
The motion of the can looks pretty strange, almost like stop-motion photography, but it isn't. Rotating the magnet rotates the can. Tipping the magnet at an angle makes the can almost let go, tipping over and hanging just by the rim.
Many times I reached in, and crushed the can a little. Eventually it became all bent out of shape. I edited out all the parts where my hand came in the picture. I separately edited the audio, to get the nice crunching sounds in there.
At the end, the can falls down out of the picture. I shot a second version of the can falling down, and eventually inserted that shot running backwards.
To "prove" that this was filmed right side up, and that there were no edits, I shot the two clocks on my floor. The background was removed from the dollhouse layer using layer masks in Final Cut Pro.
Hutchison's Hilarious Toy UFO
Oops, you're supposed to crop out the string. Look on the upper left hand side. You can see a string, and it moves exactly corresponding to the movement of the toy UFO. Evidently they had the shot framed differently, and the camera accidently was moved, or zoomed out.
This particular video is cleansed off of Hutchison's site, and is not presented on Judy Wood's site either. Originally Hutchison denied the string, claiming it was an electrical high voltage wire. Later, Hutchison actually admitted the string fakery, and said he did it because he felt pressured to perform for a television show, and was unable to reproduce his effect.
Originator of the Hutchison Effect?
This is Fred Astaire in the very famous scene from "The Royal Wedding", 1952. The entire room, including the camera and lights, rotates around. The furniture is all securely fastened in place.
It seems Hutchison has a small rotating room also.
cool stuff makes it easy dont forget my ex had her own motion picture company in los angeles and showed me cool stuff on a grand scale look for fred astaire revolving room also the movei cleopatra was done images bolted onto the camera giveing the top section to the movei sets she blw up a mountain it looked like that but it was styrofoam with strings in a studio plus she showed me how cars ride on 2 sets of wheels and also the never ending story realy neet stuff are you working in the industry now ??? love to meet we are going ahead with the network tv show and you would be great to have around robert drake my producer wil be on with
-John Hutchison, to Ace Baker, February 27, 2008
Red Bull Can
The can must have a piece of steel or iron in the bottom of it, it's being controlled via a magnet on the other side of the thin, wooden floor. The entire little room is rotating around, like the Fred Astaire room, see below. At the point when the can appears to fall over and hang sideways, it's actually hanging down, but the room is rotated. When the can falls upwards, it's actually falling down, having been released by pulling the magnet away.
When the can appears to spontaneously change shape, these are edits. The can was bent back and forth repeatedly, anytime someone reached in to do it, those bits were simply edited out.
Red Bull, Ace Baker Style
Here's my Red Bull BS. My little dollhouse is not rigged to be able to rotate. It's hanging upside down, and I've glued two steel screws in the bottom of the can. I'm holding it in place with a horseshoe magnet on the other side of the dollhouse floor.
The motion of the can looks pretty strange, almost like stop-motion photography, but it isn't. Rotating the magnet rotates the can. Tipping the magnet at an angle makes the can almost let go, tipping over and hanging just by the rim.
Many times I reached in, and crushed the can a little. Eventually it became all bent out of shape. I edited out all the parts where my hand came in the picture. I separately edited the audio, to get the nice crunching sounds in there.
At the end, the can falls down out of the picture. I shot a second version of the can falling down, and eventually inserted that shot running backwards.
To "prove" that this was filmed right side up, and that there were no edits, I shot the two clocks on my floor. The background was removed from the dollhouse layer using layer masks in Final Cut Pro.
Hutchison's Hilarious Toy UFO
Oops, you're supposed to crop out the string. Look on the upper left hand side. You can see a string, and it moves exactly corresponding to the movement of the toy UFO. Evidently they had the shot framed differently, and the camera accidently was moved, or zoomed out.
This particular video is cleansed off of Hutchison's site, and is not presented on Judy Wood's site either. Originally Hutchison denied the string, claiming it was an electrical high voltage wire. Later, Hutchison actually admitted the string fakery, and said he did it because he felt pressured to perform for a television show, and was unable to reproduce his effect.
Originator of the Hutchison Effect?
This is Fred Astaire in the very famous scene from "The Royal Wedding", 1952. The entire room, including the camera and lights, rotates around. The furniture is all securely fastened in place.
It seems Hutchison has a small rotating room also.
John Hutchison is a Fraud
John Hutchison is a video faker, pure and simple. He's been making odd little videos for over 25 years, claiming to have produced bizarre and powerful energy effects. In his videos, objects are seen spontaneously flying upwards, and moving around with no apparent cause. Samples bend or bulge instantly. Bent pieces of metal appear to defy gravity, leaning sideways but not falling over.
A recent (Novemeber 2007) Hutchison video depicts a toy battleship floating in a tub of water. The ship moves around, little flames instantly appear and then disappear on the deck, the water has patterns of ripples which come and go just as immediately. Another 2007 offering shows a Red Bull Can, leaning over sideways, but not falling all the way onto the table top. The can bends in the middle, and eventually flies upwards out of the picture.
Hutchison also presents video of metal samples which he says have been transformed by the "Hutchison Effect". A butter knife is embedded in some other kind of metal. A metal rod is bent. A copper pipe is bent into a U-shape. A pile of tiny chunks lays next to the scarred sample which spawned it.
I'll dispense with the metal samples before moving on to the video fakery. The butter knife is probably stainless steel, the surrounding metal looks like a very soft aluminum. He poured liquid aluminum around the knife, and when it cooled, he ground off the face. The bent metal is . . . bent metal. He heated up pieces of metal and bent them. Notice that the samples are charred in the area of the bend. He took a grinder and attacked the one sample, gouging out a pile of little metal chunks. So what?
Stuff Wiggles and/or Falls Up
The "falling up" trick is just silly. Obviously, when we see video of an object falling upwards, our first suspicion is that the camera is upside down. Hutchison has given us no reason to think otherwise. I quickly recognize another trick, magnetism. Gravity-defying objects are upside down, being held in place by a magnet on the back side. Moving the magnet around makes the stuff wiggle. Try this at home! I did!
Anti-Gravity Goop
Unlike Hutchison, I have provided a reference to up and down. That's me in the background juggling. I messed up the bounce juggle. I was going to redo my part, but the camera battery died. I don't mind, I'm not trying to prove I'm the world's greatest juggler. Juggling makes the illusion much more believable. But it's still video fakery.
The blue dollhouse is actually hanging upside down. The paper cup has a piece of steel wedged into the bottom of it. On the other side of the floor, I'm holding a magnet, which holds the paper cup strong against the floor, keeping it from falling. The chilled honey glops down, eventually I pull the magnet away, and the cup falls down too.
In Adobe After Effects, the dollhouse video was rotated 180 degrees, and the background was masked off, revealing the juggling video underneath.
Tesla's Dancing Screw
The background video of the German guy playing synthesizer and tesla coil was found on YouTube. Evidently, he actually triggers the coil with the notes. Pretty cool. I couldn't resist using it. If you analyze carefully, you will notice repeated frames in the background, while no frames are repeated in the foreground dollhouse. I could have taken out the duplicates, but I didn't care.
Once again, the dollhouse layer was shot upside down. I'm manipulating the dancing screw with the magnet on the back side. I could make it hang straight down, or wiggle, or flap sideways up against the floor. When the screw fell down, it crossed the triangular layer mask in the dollhouse window. I had to do some un-erasing in a few frames to prevent the falling screw from disappearing into the mask. Maybe I should have let it disappear, and blamed it on the Hutchison Effect :-)
A recent (Novemeber 2007) Hutchison video depicts a toy battleship floating in a tub of water. The ship moves around, little flames instantly appear and then disappear on the deck, the water has patterns of ripples which come and go just as immediately. Another 2007 offering shows a Red Bull Can, leaning over sideways, but not falling all the way onto the table top. The can bends in the middle, and eventually flies upwards out of the picture.
Hutchison also presents video of metal samples which he says have been transformed by the "Hutchison Effect". A butter knife is embedded in some other kind of metal. A metal rod is bent. A copper pipe is bent into a U-shape. A pile of tiny chunks lays next to the scarred sample which spawned it.
I'll dispense with the metal samples before moving on to the video fakery. The butter knife is probably stainless steel, the surrounding metal looks like a very soft aluminum. He poured liquid aluminum around the knife, and when it cooled, he ground off the face. The bent metal is . . . bent metal. He heated up pieces of metal and bent them. Notice that the samples are charred in the area of the bend. He took a grinder and attacked the one sample, gouging out a pile of little metal chunks. So what?
Stuff Wiggles and/or Falls Up
The "falling up" trick is just silly. Obviously, when we see video of an object falling upwards, our first suspicion is that the camera is upside down. Hutchison has given us no reason to think otherwise. I quickly recognize another trick, magnetism. Gravity-defying objects are upside down, being held in place by a magnet on the back side. Moving the magnet around makes the stuff wiggle. Try this at home! I did!
Anti-Gravity Goop
Unlike Hutchison, I have provided a reference to up and down. That's me in the background juggling. I messed up the bounce juggle. I was going to redo my part, but the camera battery died. I don't mind, I'm not trying to prove I'm the world's greatest juggler. Juggling makes the illusion much more believable. But it's still video fakery.
The blue dollhouse is actually hanging upside down. The paper cup has a piece of steel wedged into the bottom of it. On the other side of the floor, I'm holding a magnet, which holds the paper cup strong against the floor, keeping it from falling. The chilled honey glops down, eventually I pull the magnet away, and the cup falls down too.
In Adobe After Effects, the dollhouse video was rotated 180 degrees, and the background was masked off, revealing the juggling video underneath.
Tesla's Dancing Screw
The background video of the German guy playing synthesizer and tesla coil was found on YouTube. Evidently, he actually triggers the coil with the notes. Pretty cool. I couldn't resist using it. If you analyze carefully, you will notice repeated frames in the background, while no frames are repeated in the foreground dollhouse. I could have taken out the duplicates, but I didn't care.
Once again, the dollhouse layer was shot upside down. I'm manipulating the dancing screw with the magnet on the back side. I could make it hang straight down, or wiggle, or flap sideways up against the floor. When the screw fell down, it crossed the triangular layer mask in the dollhouse window. I had to do some un-erasing in a few frames to prevent the falling screw from disappearing into the mask. Maybe I should have let it disappear, and blamed it on the Hutchison Effect :-)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)