Привет, ребята, я дизайнер продуктов с 8-летним опытом работы с САПР/моделированием. Просто хотел сопоставить некоторые ответы от меня и остального сообщества относительно поста u/Alex-Winter-78. Для контекста: вчера Алекс сделал хороший пост, в котором объяснил, что, по его мнению, видео с дрона ясно показывает свидетельство использования низкополигональной модели дрона, что означает, что видео является CGI. Кажущийся каркас низкополигональной модели Алекс отметил на своей фотографии: https://preview.redd.it/mdqb1pgprmib1.jpg?width=912&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=f0f045427555767fa2e7cf5ac4f79e58b280932c Затем он показывает фотографию низкополигональной CAD-модели дрона MQ-1 из Sketchfab: https://preview.redd.it/avrg80nrrmib1.jpg?width=1195&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=f27020dd7c39362cea0015cc05d2fe3053c7e2de На первый взгляд, это выглядит как довольно хорошее разоблачение, и я должен признать, что оно пока лучшее. Вот подборка ответов от меня и сообщества: **Технические опровержения:** 1. Несколько пользователей, включая u/Anubis_A и u/ShakeOdd4850, объяснили, что видимые вершины каркаса смещаются/изменяются при воспроизведении видео. Вероятно, это связано с артефактами сжатия и/или природой FLIR как метода захвата. u/stompenstein иллюстрирует это на примере ложки, сфотографированной устройством FLIR: https://preview.redd.it/d0s178p8smib1.jpg?width=330&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=3f6059474574d8f99934e28606a4003e8eaa5796.[http://www.aiirsource.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/mq-1-predator-mq-9-reaper-drone.jpg](http://www.aiirsource.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/mq-1-predator-mq-9-reaper-drone.jpg)) показывает, что нос реального MQ- 1 дрон не совсем гладкий. В конце концов, настоящий дрон должен был быть разработан в САПР, в очень похожей программе, которая использовалась для создания потенциального макета дрона для обмана компьютерной графики. Я не инженер, но также скажу, что для такой формы могут быть производственные причины или коэффициент лобового сопротивления. **Контекстное опровержение:** Хотя это может показаться излишним после признания предыдущих пунктов, я также хотел добавить, что, по моему мнению, маловероятно, чтобы мистификатор с этой компетенцией отказался от использования модификатора сглаживания или инструментов подразделения, особенно на объект так близко к камере. Просто не имеет смысла тратить время на совершенствование технических деталей, таких как освещение облаков и эффект, который портал оказывает на перетаскивание объектов, и упускать что-то столь обыденное. **Вывод:** я не утверждаю, что видео настоящее. Я все еще думаю (и надеюсь), основываясь на предварительном кондиционировании, что это подделка, но это не неопровержимое доказательство того, что это подделка. Спасибо за прочтение 🙂
Похожие записи:
Большой сигарообразный НЛО над Землей, сентябрь 2013 г. Фотография сделана НАСА.
MH370 — Официальный отчет — Необъяснимый маневр — Сигналы радара — Падение высоты необъяснимо
Прошлой ночью над городом Наварра, штат Флорида, вспыхнул зеленый огненный шар.
ИДК, выглядит реальным для меня
Project Crystal Knight — Десятилетняя миссия на чужую планету в 40 световых годах от нас.
Лучшее видео Боба Лазара, которое я когда-либо встречал
Ситуация на Мауи значительно хуже, чем о ней говорят
Группа двухпартийного дома настаивает на создании специального комитета, классифицировав слушания как НЛО
Рак начал стремительно расти в 2021 году после внедрения вакцины Vaxx, и сейчас у нас рекордно высокий уровень заболеваемости раком. Мой дядя умер от турборака после повышения. Гейтс, Фаучи, Бурла и другие должны сидеть в тюрьме. Но армия троллей NPC слева и справа будет защищать vaxx до самой смерти.
Вызывало ли когда-нибудь видео с НЛО такие разногласия?
Every smart well-meaning person came out of their shells on these subs these last few weeks.
Got out our FLIR at work to check and yeah. It does all kinds of things to edges. Played a bit bit the settings and had things show up seemingly made up out of polygons and chunky pixels depending on resolution and distance.
Not an expert but distance focus settings seem to change things quite a lot.
If anything this shows is that if anything, it makes it more inconclusive if it’s a fake or not but I lean towards «why slip up here if everything else has so much work put in it» with a lot of people here.
But hey playing around with our FLIR is always fun and I got to laugh about my butt imprint on my office chair
Thank you for your write-up op.
Seemed weird in the previous post to have picked a still from the video showing pixelated lines, while ignoring the stills when it’s round, and to show a drone picture showing it being smooth, while ignoring a picture showing the drone being not that smooth from other angles.
Seemed like the conclusion was arrived at before the evidence.
This sub has been the fucking best thing on Reddit for the past 2 weeks, and what I like more is how civil, well mannered, and experienced people are. Well done OP.
«this isn’t the smoking gun that it is fake» — this was my thought as well from the other post.
I don’t know why there’s a lot of «It’s obviously faked!!» comments almost trying to dissuade others from continuing their own investigation.
> Afterall, the real drone would have been designed in CAD, in a very similar program used to create a potential mock drone for a CGI hoax.
The equivalence here isn’t quite right. The 3D software used to hoax something like this would be mesh based. Circles aren’t really circles they are polygons.
The software used to design this for manufacturing would be spline based. The CAD file provided for manufacture has no facets. A circle is a perfect circle in that case, thanks to math.
The approximation would happen when the CNC tool paths are built for the tooling. That approximation would be on the order of thousandths of an inch and then smoothed/polished via other processes.
He only made one post trying to debunk the MH370 video and in his history comments he’s been trying to debunk multiple video’s ranging from 2 years ago till now. No other post have been made nor has he been active in other subs than /UFO’s and /Aliens.
If that isn’t sus i don’t know what is.
And inb4 people comment things like «conspiracy theories» and «if it doesn’t fall in your point of view then it’s automatically a government shill».
He managed to get that many rewards and upvotes in such a small amount of time based on what exactly?
The post has been removed
I definitely need to see more pictures of round shit from a FLIR camera because that spoon must be a 3D model
I personally think that “debunk” was one of the weakest so far. I have to admit, however, that debunker OP’s “gotcha” tone made me chuckle. Really does make you wonder who’s posting. There seems to be some desperate attempts of hiding this under the rug and moving on. Nothing to see here, boys.
Thank you.. That post was painful.
It was so sketchy that the post had so many awards and upvotes. Goes to show who’s really on this sub.
At this point, I think the only way it can be debunked is if the original unedited footage surfaces and it shows something different than what we’ve seen. Even if someone could re-create it perfectly it means little. If I take a picture of a building, and then make a perfect render of that building does that mean the building is debunked?
As someone with like, 90 hours practice of 3d modeling, just self learning what the functions do. Even I would know to, and know how to smooth out the wireframe if what I am trying to model is smooth.
95% of that video is beyond my capabilities to recreate or even imitate, that being said, the one thing I absolutely wouldn’t fuck up is having visible rough edges where there should be none. Subdivision (smoothing, basically) was like one of the first concepts I was able to grasp and make use of.
That was like a swamp gas level debunk for real, and I do not believe was done in good faith. That user had a post history which was nothing but half assed debunks and comments insisting shit is a fake with nothing else behind it.
They also isolated the green color channel which compounds with the multiple layers of video and photo compression to turn it into absolute shitcan quality.
Genuine question, do the clouds in the flir video match up with the clouds in the other video?
Do the orb trajectories also matchup between the video ?
I wondered why a shabbily constructed gotcha argument with a single frame still shot was getting so many awards. Who is really in this sub anyway? 🤔
Still leaves the question why the aliens waited for MH370s fuel to run out before they made it disappear.
Has anyone else noticed that the account that said it’s CGI has the username [name]-[name][#] and is 2 years only with only very few posts trying to debunk UAPs vids?
the amount of awards the post got ticked me off, artificial support to push it.
Good shit OP, love seeing a debunk get debunked. Though deep down I hope it is fake.
I still don’t get how the camera sees that view and the wing. Do we have a confirmed model for a camera positioned like that?
The average Hollywood minute of CGI costs $570,000. The level of detail here and how well thought out it is really intrigued me. The fact it’s laid there dormant for 9 years with nobody trying to openly push it. The fact the planes electronics were all disabled which would essentially mean a person climbed down a locked basement in first class secretly without anyone seeing and knew how to disable all electronics instantly. The Remote Viewer who described this as happening in 2014 and openly predicted each of the coming events. The cover ups and political fall out. This is wild, I’m mind blown but leaning towards this is actual footage.
Link to remote viewer blog:
https://psychicfocus.blogspot.com/2014/03/malaysia-airline-mh370.html
I wonder if u/Alex-Winter-78 is based somewhere around Elgin AFB?
> It just doesn’t make sense to spend ages on perfecting technical details such as the illumination of the clouds and the effect the portal has on dragging the objects, and missing something so mundane.
I agree with you that I don’t think this proves it’s fake. However, I work in 3D animation, and I must admit that there are instances when details like subdividing meshes can be overlooked. Depending on the software and hardware being used, it’s not uncommon to disable the subdivision while working to make things quicker. Sometimes people can forget to reactivate the modifier for rendering. I’ve experienced this myself.
There were some examples posted last week of both the satellite and FLIR videos where redditors made their own versions in less than a day. They weren’t as good, but good as examples. A couple days or weeks of more work would’ve been hard to tell they were fake.
In regards to part of your rebuttal, wouldn’t illumination be one of the easiest things to do. Put a fixed light source in place and mask any areas you want to illuminated.
One thing I’ve been saying/thinking about these videos since way back is a flight simulator could’ve been used. That would allow for many views/perspectives of the same flight path. Then take that simulator video, mask it and layer it into a real satellite image. And do some more editing from there. Likewise, take that flyby view and make it look like infrared drone footage.
You can see in the pic provided from a FLIR that the hottest color is white. It doesn’t matter what temp anything is in the sensors view. Whatever the sensor picks up as the hottest points will show up as white. How come in the video the supposed fire does not show any white and the exhaust plume from the engine doesn’t show any white? Either the fire or the engine exhaust would be the hottest point in this frame but they are just red like almost completely red. It does not make sense. The shape of the exhaust plume is a blob. Just Google thermal images of planes and you will see that the exhaust plumes show a range of temps from the hottest directly out of the engine and it cools down going back. The real exhaust plume from a jet is also not just a fat blob it looks nothing like what we see I. The thermal imaged video.
Is nobody talking about the fact that high end aircraft based thermals DON’T use predator vision and are exclusively black/white hot systems?
[better pictures do show that the nose appears to be completely smooth](https://i.imgur.com/WLOg37x.jpg)
[another](https://i.imgur.com/WWcalPY.jpg)
Edit: These are both referred to as MQ — 1C drones btw. The drone that I had assumed was the agreed upon drone in the MH370 footage.
Links to where I got the pics:
https://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/articles/2020/3/6/armys-gray-eagle-prepping-for-multi-domain-operations
https://en.defence-ua.com/news/the_us_lawmakers_to_accelerate_sale_of_mq_1c_gray_eagle_drones_to_ukraine-4315.html
Edit:
Also the pic in OP’s post appears to be a screen cap from this vid:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=rBHMKBcIu6w
The nose also appears smooth here
here you go
to be clear, I think these look extremely different
https://imgur.com/a/ZqjiEo2
[deleted]
Yup, I agree here. So yes the opposite angle that was shown in the post in question of a specific drone does not mean that this drone does not look this way from a FLIR pod under its wing.
I figured only the low hanging fruit here would bite on that but apparently this is a bigger conversation than I would’ve thought.
While the drone and wing look a bit plain, they are literally designed this way as OP here states ( manufacturing and aerodynamic reasons ). This is post 2000 folks, planes are designed in the same program that can mock up a fake and will have the same features because that is how it is made.
To be fair, there is an airframe under the skin of the plane..so the actual real predator itself is a “framed” aircraft, hence the skin not being perfectly rounded, anyone who has seen an aircraft frame knows it’s composed of concentric circles that get smaller and smaller, the skin then is secured to each framing member
This sub is everything good about the internet, coming into its own just when I thought those days were over. 💛
Disclaimer: I’m somewhat skeptic about this whole UFO thing you guys believe (either aliens or other dimension beings), however I still lurk on this subreddit because I enjoy some of the discussion. I also doubt the video is legimate.
HOWEVER, the post by u/Alex-Winter-78 was CLEARLY astroturfed and boosted beyond normal. Look, I’m no video effects professional or nothing like that, but for me his arguments were clearly flawed. A laughable attempt at debunking LOL, even.
What was weird to me was that a lot of the TOP comments were already calling the OP out, but that didn’t seem to impact on the voting or some of the comments at all. Very sketchy.
Idk if this helps but I work with these drones extensively and I won’t say more than that.
But I would add a couple of things.
— MQ-1 are mostly used by forces that have no maritime presence.
— Most maritime operations are conducted by MQ-9 platforms
— That camera angle seems like a wrong configuration since cameras almost never slung under the wing, especially with MQ-1s
— operating that close to civilian aircraft would definitely been a HUGE deal and would not be tolerated.
— to address previous comments this does not match the profile of Gorgon Stare models
Exactly as you said. Anyone with more than 6 months of 3D software knowledge would know how to apply a sub-surf modifier to clean up the shape and most likely would if they had the skills to replicate everything else. As a 3D artist, I would shit myself if I posted a render with a model that I left in a low-poly state.
Damn I got endlessly flamed in that thread yesterday for being skeptic against the debunk. The debunkers REALLY want this video to be fake, without providing data to support their narrative.
Why can’t you guys just acknowledge pilot suicide makes the most sense?
«No this is soooo fake, everyone thinking it’s real is &#!#&!! You are all dumb for falling for this CGI which looks way better then anything Disney has produced in the last decade using teams of CGI experts!» -Sponsored by Eglin Base.
Also the panels that make the skin of the drone are attached to a skeleton framework. Those panels will over time dent inwards and give a polygonal appearance.
As a fellow product designer with 20+ years experience in 3D CAD, I agree with OP.
I’ve also used FLIR-brand imaging equipment in product development and testing. Even a $50K FLIR IR cam produces dreadful, jaggy images. There is an option on some models to have it juxtapose the IR image over footage from a secondary conventional camera to aid visual identification, but the results can be confusing.
One thing to consider is that the drone is a propeller aircraft. All that periodic shaking from the propeller and engine is bound to leave some artifacts.
Why isn’t the drone visible in the satellite footage? In the IR video the drone seems to almost cross the exhaust trail of the plane. Yet in the sat video there is no drone to be seen.