Startling Footage of a Triangle Craft over the Netherlands

[ArMaP]

The instant it hit UT, I placed my notes first. Wow what a difference, all the good people came out of the wood work and rejoiced.

There were so many great comments that the poo slayers were not heard. They never even posted. So as far as I see it, he who posts first can change the entire thread good or bad.

I have that happening many times, in those cases, if I don't see anyone defending the other possibility I have to post it myself, to point that, even just as a possibility, it must be accepted. But it's usually too late for that, as any post will be drowned by the negative posts.

There is a section that I was talking to Amy about [skype] trying to understand what they would have to do to CGI that effect. She told me it would take her weeks to do it right and even then the replacement pixels would not really match and might be able to be spotted. They would be out of color sync with the next one. Out of gradiant. Unless you spent antother 3 weeks fixing each one to be perfect. Yes it could be done but at what cost?

What kind of experience does she have? I have seen some effects done in AfterEffects in just some 5 or 10 minutes, the fact that someone would take weeks to do it doesn't mean that other person wouldn't take just some hours.

[ArMaP]

What I see........

This is what I see after some gamma adjustments.

And that is a crop of the event. The actual lines went way off the crop. The program finds patterns. I see a full pattern of light here that radiated what 10 times the craft size. Is it CGI?

I think it's possible, if they added more than just the triangle and also added the glow around it, superimposing it on the video. That gradient would be picked up by the Deuem process.

[Amaterasu]

What kind of experience does she have? I have seen some effects done in AfterEffects in just some 5 or 10 minutes, the fact that someone would take weeks to do it doesn't mean that other person wouldn't take just some hours.

We were speaking of the cloud movement.  I have worked with AfterEffects, but I do not believe there is anything in that program that could "fake" that cloud swoosh in 5-10 minutes.

[deuem]

Silly? That's more like damn stupid! And an insult ta boot

Yea, but one gets used to it somewhat. If they only knew what to really look for they would shiite their pants. lol

The Deuem process is a revelation  ( nice choice of word lol)

I like to think so, the only problem I have is, that I can't disect the photo as much as I would like too so I am still wondering what to do with it. It seems to work really well when run against standards but that is also a judgement. All in all it is the best I can offer for now. I still tweek it from time to time but would need another large cash flow to go to the next step to get out some math results. Maybe some day.

For me it shows that there is "life" to the objects. That's some impressive work on the craft!

Agreed, more real than CGI in my book...But I don't want to leave that option out. It is possible but with a lot of work or maybe they just get luky and blow by me. I am the first one to say it is possible. I do the best I can and I am sure so do they.

I do have a grasp on the Deuem process. Enough to be confident in saying that is no cgi.

There you go! I think there is enough in this video even without Deuem to bring it up a level and onto our boards and disect it. I wish we had a disect team as good as the inventors group. We almost started one on another forum but the negative vibes killed it. See I want to get to the bottom more than you do otherwise I would not do it at all. I try to put my money where my mouth is. How much do you think Deuem cost me to build? I figured it out at around 15,000 USD. So there is a new car in Deuem. Next level would be about 5 or more times that. At least and maybe a years work. [if luky]

WOW just wow the tell tall 3 light configuration! We have a winner!!

Looks like a bingo moment.  Can you see it in the original? Why would a CGI artist do that, just for me, Thanks.  I see no reason for them to design so many levels to to plaster white all over it. On the cheap ones there is only a white blob....But yea, you could spend countless computer time and build it up step by step and tweek every pixel, but why?

Now it's really interesting. That needs copyrighting and a re-post on the tube
Nice job. Oh boy the video footage!!!! Full Deuem!!!!

I was on YouTube with zero results. UT wants fake work and the comments there are even worse. There was a time when you posted a swear word you got banned. Now anything seem to go. The pys guys win.  Besides, unless i sell or give away an original the stuff you see is what I call garbage. It is less that 1/10 of the quality of the original. Maybe some day someone will get close but I say, even if I gave you the program the results would vary. It needs human tweeking and that is why some people don't like it. I like it just because of that reason. So even if it is hacked they cant do much. The key is still in my head and fingers. On sold Deuem I do place my © and on the new ones I have added my real signature. On some of the good ones there is an embedded gliff you can only see with a scope or mag glass.

That's made my night. Made me think too. Cool

That makes mine!

[deuem]

[snip] as any post will be drowned by the negative posts.

I guess one persons negative is another persons positive. It is a point of view thing.

What kind of experience does she have?  She meaning who? the person that took the video? And experience in what field, CGI? or baking cookies? On the video I recieved the original format and worked off of it. I saw no CGI ever and she does make great cookies also.

I have seen some effects done in AfterEffects in just some 5 or 10 minutes, the fact that someone would take weeks to do it doesn't mean that other person wouldn't take just some hours.

I guess the best answer to that is show me the money ! I now have After effects. I got it to try and run Deuem in full video mode. Ok the plugins worked but my computer just sat there and laughed at me. Say an areage single frame needs to be 25 to 75mb. Use 50 average. 50 x 1sec or 30 frames = 1,500 mb for 1 second x 60 seconds = 90,000 mb for a minute.. Right around there my computer went on strike. This video was over 2 minutes or over 180,000 mb.  I think I will need a upgrade to run that. Even worse is, I don't know how to present 180,000 mb without losing the special high quality. I can only relate it to something like I max.

There is also no reason that it can't be done live if the equipment was in place, even in a camera. Wow what a world one would see with Deuem glasses. Move over Google....

[deuem]

This is what I see after some gamma adjustments.


I think it's possible, if they added more than just the triangle and also added the glow around it, superimposing it on the video. That gradient would be picked up by the Deuem process.

Your photo processed, Sorry it took so long, so many lines to draw.  lol



Now what do you see guys and gals. What is different between the 3 triangle engines. What story would you write. And the center engine is doing what?

Would a CGI artist alter the state of the 3 engines you cant even see? maybe. But why, you cant even see them the way the Deuem program does. Start with counting the 3 sets of rings.

Am I just fooling myself or is there something really there and you heard it here first. I would say this video needs to go to the next step and looked at by other pros. I would want the original not the UT post. I would want to interview the man and scout the location. Check the camera, check him, check, check check....

Deuem

[ArMaP]

We were speaking of the cloud movement.  I have worked with AfterEffects, but I do not believe there is anything in that program that could "fake" that cloud swoosh in 5-10 minutes.

Thanks for the explanation.

As I have said before, I don't think the clouds are CGI (no need for that), only the triangle.

[ArMaP]

I guess one persons negative is another persons positive. It is a point of view thing.

Unless they do not share your opinion about the Deuem process, in that case is always negative.   

She meaning who?

The person you had just mentioned, who else?

Would a CGI artist alter the state of the 3 engines you cant even see? maybe. But why, you cant even see them the way the Deuem program does.

Do not underestimate the hoaxer's ability or knowledge. Anyone knowing the type of "craft" people are looking knows what to do to fool them.

[deuem]

Unless they do not share your opinion about the Deuem process, in that case is always negative.   
No, only the people who after a year can't see what I am doing. Was there ever one time were I blasted someone for not liking what I do or seeing what I do. I think I have been as open to differences as one can be. You do give me the feeling that since you can't do it or bust it it is worthless. My feeling, not yours.

People should either like it or not like it, see it as it is or move on to other things. You read UT comments, Have I ever been like that? Should I? Should I call people ****'** stupid like they do there on UT. No way would I do that. I am not that kind of a person.

I do think that little snipit was rather rude of you but I consider the source. You seem to toss out these little spikes in the road when you start to lose your ground as it looks like here on this thread.

Seems that when your answer-less you go on the hunt instead of learning something new. Kinda of like you lost first place and now you have to defend the hill. I have also posted in my own writing that YES, this maybe CGI done very well but I can not prove it, Can You? 

Please don't prove it with words. Words anyone can write..


The person you had just mentioned, who else? Then I guess I answered that. An Old member of another site thst helped me prove the UT slander routine.
Do not underestimate the hoaxer's ability or knowledge. Anyone knowing the type of "craft" people are looking knows what to do to fool them. You see, that is just a lot of words on a forum. We all need including myself abolute proof it is CGI. Until then all we can do is prod at it and see what the story is. 

First of all AfterFX is not a 3D program so some one would have to design a rotating model in say 3d max. Design a motion path in another program and then layer it in somehow. After FX can not spin a 2d object to give it 3D THe object would have to be on the same plane all the time. Even in photoshop as far as I know this is true. Unless the newest versions are 3D, then I stand corrected.

But then you would still have to build a model and spin it and rotate it and tilt it. Not easy. This thing goes inside of one of the clouds. How do they alter the layers, with a frame by frame pixel by pixel cut in and out. Again hours and hours of work for a 2 minute UT video. Not a resume or Star Wars. So why?

I am beginning to think that most of the people who say BS or CGI have no idea of what CGI really is and could not reproduce even 5 seconds of some films. Otherwise they would. No different that what I do, They would belong to CGI forums and write threads on how they did something and present work to members.

There are many camera Forums, Are there any CGI forums? They must sit around talking about how many people they screwed this week...nice people..

Bragging about something and doing something are 2 different things. Please come to the table with 100% proof it is CGI and I will listen and learn.

Your turn........

And all I wrote was "One persons negative is one persons positive" One persons garbage here is anothers income" There are many opposites in the world.

Deuem

[Sinny]

Nice work guys.

I'm quite proud of myself, as I already gathered it was 'tumbling/falling' - and I had a strong supicion it was/is real.

Deuems, done a good job, and makes a strong point about the engines.

Of course, my upper hand was the fact I have saw a very similaiar UFO - think I may have breifly mentioned it before.

The one that was white/translucent, was rather big (I was observing from approx 4-5 miles away), it circled a large clock tower, in a 'carrier bag in the wind'/boomerang like way for about 40 mins - (or I walked away at that time at least)

As I say, if your still a UFO (sighting) virgin - just keep looking up, they're always there for those who have eye's to see 

[deuem]

Sinny, daytime or night time?

[Sinny]

Sinny, daytime or night time?

Day time, on a rather 'fluffy' cloud, blue sky sort of day... 2012 I believe.

[deuem]

Interesting, I think that the only way we start to see colors is at dusk and later. When the nobel gasses light up in the day, the color is absorbed by the brightness of the sun. Even lightning looks white in the day time but colors out at night. So it leads me to believe you saw a Eltrogravitic powered craft similar to the one in this video. If this was at night it would be very colorful.

It equates to me like looking at fireworks in the daytime. Bla and no one wants to see them. I think this is why so many daytime UFOs are seen to be so white and maybe why, If you can see them they might be CGI. lol The ones you can see are the ones I have the most problems with finding any power source or atmospheric interference.

Everything that makes sence to me that we are working on here has some type of Electrogravitic/Eltromagnetic field . That field would need to be larger than the craft to work. That field needs to be very powerful. It is so intense that it has to mess with the nobel gasses. [read area 51 on these] I see no way around it. If it is possible to pick that wave up then we might get a fix on the event, I hope I do that to some extent. Again I may be as wrong as I think I am right but it is a dart board to start with.

Deuem

[robomont]

This is why we need a neon sign guy.he could get us closer to frequencies voltages etc.theres probly a simple chart some where.if we attack it from multiple directions.it should be more viewable.does anybody know a neon guy?
I have a theory that the thing has thre small corner thrusters and one large center thruster also three thrusters on the back tale end.the three on bottom cant handle the weight.the large one must not be working.so he uses the three on bottom to angle itself then uses the three on the backend to go forward.without the main thruster its probably very hard to keep aloft but not impossible.that would explain three corner bright light as those are maxed out to compensate.

[deuem]

Hi Robo, Area 51 has done extensive work in the nobel gasses. He even had me process all of them he could find. I say he is the Peggy expert there. What would you like to know about them and if it is too far off topic we can take it off line if u wish.

When we do them 1 by 1 they all glow different but they are very well mixed in the air so it is hard to figure out which one is excited or if they all are.
Deuem