new sandyhook info

[spacemaverick]

As I said, I don't see any problem with those images.

I can see (by the lack of depth) that the video camera has a telephoto lens, so I suppose the other cameras had them too (the natural choice when taking photos in an event like this, where proximity was going to be difficult or even lethal).

If that was true, what we can see as a slight change in perspective may be the result of one camera being two or three metres away from the other, so I don't see any problem in one camera capturing one window while the other (more to the right) captured two.

I am not adept at camera setting or angles but it just didn't look right to me...

[Littleenki]

Clearly some hanky panky going on there MicJer...too many anomlaies to deny it.

ArmaP you might want to try a new set of glasses...those to images were angled the same regarding the three people...what are you saying, they held the pose and turned slowly for the various cameras?

Good posts MicJer!

[zorgon]

I am not adept at camera setting or angles but it just didn't look right to me...

There is no way camera angle accounts for the differences in those images. bottom of the window frame in one shot is above head line while in the other its below waste level. To move a back ground that much that is that close behind would require a major angle change and that would drastically change the look of the figures

Make a model ArMaP and show us how you can match those angles, even roughly

[burntheships]

Not only is the window missing, the siding on the side of the firehall loses its lines just above his head. 

Yes, I noticed this right away, nice to know I am not
seeing things. WTH?

So many ofthe really key pillars of the story dont seem to
mesh, its very chilling.

[micjer]

Another point I would like to make is in the video.

At the point where the woman is very upset and looks like she may throw up......look behind her.

It shows all of the cop cars ...... ok......but behind her there is a brown building with a boat or something stored in it...


Well look at the overhead pic.  Where is that building?

I went on google earth and there is a building but it is way way back.  More proof that photoshopping was going on in that video.  Ironic isn't it that was the only one that looked half real  (as far as emotions go) until we analysed it.   LOL



At about the 4:10 mark

[ArMaP]

Not only is the window missing, the siding on the side of the firehall loses its lines just above his head.

The lines are there, just out of focus, you can see them where they touch the darker sides of the windows.

Yes it was a slightly different angle but not enough for half of the building to dissapear.

A little difference in the angle may make a lot of difference in the final result, that's why when I was in school, having electricity classes, the first thing they told us was how to use the mirror in the instruments to avoid making the readings from an angle that was not perpendicular to the face of the instrument, as it would give wrong readings.

There had to be a blue screen behind and this was photoshopped in the vimeo screenshot.

That's something I always find amusing in cases like this; someone has an idea and, from that point on, nothing else can explain it, it must be that. Have you thought of the possibility of being wrong?

One other thing.  In the first photo the car window is behind the guy in the red coat and the other pic the car window is in front.  Different angles doesn't explain that.  Photoshopping does.

Two cars also explain it, one in front the other behind.

[ArMaP]

ArmaP you might want to try a new set of glasses...those to images were angled the same regarding the three people...what are you saying, they held the pose and turned slowly for the various cameras?

I do need new glasses, but I can still see angles.

Do you think that the two red lines in the images below have the same angle?




Not only the people appear more in line on the second photo, we can also see that it was taken from a higher place than the first one, as the heads of the people are more at the same height than on the first.

[ArMaP]

To move a back ground that much that is that close behind would require a major angle change and that would drastically change the look of the figures

One of the problems with your thinking is the "that close behind" part. How close were the people to the wall? How can you know?

I suppose you know that a telephoto lens "squashes" depth of field and things look closer to each other, right?

Make a model ArMaP and show us how you can match those angles, even roughly

I don't have enough information to make a 3D model, but I will try to make a top view.

[ArMaP]

I went on google earth and there is a building but it is way way back.  More proof that photoshopping was going on in that video.

No, proof that you don't know (and never noticed) how telephoto lens work. Look at the video about the 0:50 mark, when we see those armed man approaching the camera. At that moment, how far do you think they are from the camera?

Ironic isn't it that was the only one that looked half real  (as far as emotions go) until we analysed it.   LOL

But the possibility of the "analysis" being wrong must be discarded, obviously, as people are never wrong...

[spacemaverick]

What happened?  I brought up google earth and typed in Sandy Hook Elementary School Newtown Conn.  Skyview had it blocked with black.  So just for the heck of it I put the cursor over it and right clicked with the mouse and it came up with a little box that said Hide Building and when I clicked it took the black color away.

I am currently taking screen shots of the school from 3-2012.  I cannot get a street view of it though.

[rdunk]

I think, as already mentioned, the biggest problem I see in these pics is.....the windows make no sense. It is obvious in that both shots are taken pretty close to the same horizontal angle/position. What we see of these four people is basically the same in both shots.

What is not the same is the added window, on our right in the top pic shown, and it is very easy to see that it is not there in the lower pic. If there was a second window, the lower part of it would certainly be visible in the lower pic, because of the similar horizontal angle, and because we can see the lower part of one window.

And yes, the lines made by the siding on the outside of the house do obviously disappear some in both pics! Has nothing to do with camera angles!

Yes, they are different pics - - the guy in the jacket - - his eyes are open in one pic, and they are closed in the other. 

[zorgon]

I do need new glasses, but I can still see angles.

Do you think that the two red lines in the images below have the same angle?

No the angles are not the same, BUT they do not account for the background. Frankly in this case I am surprised that you cannot see it.

To get TWO windows into the frame the shot would have had to been from the other direction entirely as the two windows are to the left of the three people

[spacemaverick]

As for the siding that seems to disappear.  I have the same issue with my digital camera.  When I take a picture that has too much light it tends to blank out the detail  I discovered this when taking pictures and did the flash and had plenty of light and the detail was obliterated.  One picture is closer and a different angle and shows the edge of a vehicle whereas the other does not.  Just my closer observation than I did before.  IMO

[ArMaP]

What is not the same is the added window, on our right in the top pic shown, and it is very easy to see that it is not there in the lower pic.

On our right? The window that appears in both photos is the right window.

If there was a second window, the lower part of it would certainly be visible in the lower pic, because of the similar horizontal angle, and because we can see the lower part of one window.

The window that doesn't appear on the image taken from the video is to the left (from our point of view) of the other window, I thought that was obvious.

Here is what Google Street view shows of that building. The difference is the vegetation below the windows.

[ArMaP]

No the angles are not the same, BUT they do not account for the background. Frankly in this case I am surprised that you cannot see it.

Well, I'm surprised that I am the only one seeing things as they are (or so I think).

To get TWO windows into the frame the shot would have had to been from the other direction entirely as the two windows are to the left of the three people

Yes, from other direction, that's why the angles are different. For the second window to appear the photo must have been taken to the right of the position from where the video was made. As the people were in the same place, the camera would be pointing more to the left than the camera that made the video, so it would show more of the building, including the window and the bush.