|Welcome to The Last Resort, thanks for visiting!|
Please feel free to join the forum and help contribute to a free and open investigation into the events of September 11th, 2001.
If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.
Join our community!
If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:
|ABC TV Analysis|
|Tweet Topic Started: Aug 21 2009, 04:47 PM (1,235 Views)|
|broken sticks||Aug 21 2009, 04:47 PM Post #1|
Parts 1-7 of my on-going research into ABC's coverage of 911.
Part 8 will hopefully be out soon (how many times have i said that...), but it features the strangest anomaly i have yet seen from ANY 911 video.
|Matt||Aug 22 2009, 07:08 AM Post #2|
The suspense! You've got us guessing now. Is it the shaky WESCAM zoom shot? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q9bRsB2d-TQ
I do wonder about that.
From your videos above, one thing that sticks in my mind most is the remote joystick-operated camera observation you made. I just put together enough material for a new thread, so I'll cut and paste it elsewhere, then come back and link it here...
2nd Hit Camera Angle Change:
Edited by Matt, Aug 22 2009, 10:26 PM.
|broken sticks||Aug 26 2009, 10:35 PM Post #3|
What ABC didn't want you to see - 911 Live TV Analysis - Ep. 1, Pt. 8 (ABC cont.)
Part 8 is now up - i hope it makes sense, i personally was flabbergasted when i spotted that they had access to an undoctored version of their brightened second strike.
It made me wonder why they didn't play it. They'd already replayed the 2nd strike twice by that point, then there appears to have been some confusion with the next replay, and it involved the one with the original colours.
I doubt any of us here know how things work in an editing suite at a tv station, but i'd quite like to get people's opinion on this.
Edited by broken sticks, Aug 26 2009, 10:38 PM.
|broken sticks||Aug 27 2009, 11:17 AM Post #4|
|having a great chat about this with someone on the youtube comments page - i think he thinks i'm being a bit annoying, but i'd really like to get to the bottom of this, and if something about this doesn't make sense, i'd like to know if it doesn't make sense to this former TV guy as well.|
|broken sticks||Aug 27 2009, 11:34 AM Post #5|
the character limit is very annoying on the comments page >.
i wish this guy would sign up here so i could ask some proper questions.
|RasgaSaias||Aug 27 2009, 09:24 PM Post #6|
I found it puzzling but the guy on YouTube made me think about a solution.
Here's how I'm trying to visualize it:
The image adjusts are made in the control room.
The footage arrives there in the darker version.
Maybe, for some reason, they were adjusting the image setting for chopper 5 during the live broadcast.
That's why we have the brighter version live.
Then they aired the replay. But too fast. Wasn't ready yet.
The footage wasn't fully rewound and the image setting weren't on for the tape.
So they tried again and this time they put the image settings back on.
Edited by RasgaSaias, Aug 27 2009, 09:36 PM.
|broken sticks||Aug 28 2009, 12:02 PM Post #7|
"Maybe, for some reason, they were adjusting the image setting for chopper 5 during the live broadcast."
spot on man - it happens at about 9:30am, a colour change live. i think its a different chopper then (chopper 7 is on it way out, another chopper turns up), but they are indeed changing the chopper's feed live it would appear.
what caught me was that the next replay comes in over the top of the darker replay, as in, its either two tapes, or the machine has the ability to freeze an image and keep it there while it rewinds. i don't know much about these types of machines, but they would be pretty state-of-the-art i would guess. two tapes sounds more likely than real-time digital effects.
that guy said it looked to him like it had a magenta cast, because the darker version looked more purple, but even on the brighter version you can see that purple shade around the clouds.
i'm trying to step back a bit to have another look at it:
if they were adjusting the colour live, which they were, it indicates the colour adjustment is in the control room.
if the replay retains its colour, pretty much throughout history, as the brighter version, that means the other networks just received what ABC were showing live, which was the brighter version.
if ABC exclusively replayed the brighter version, then without looking at them, the logical explanation would be that the brighter version was ABC's stock version, the closest to a raw feed from chopper 7's camera.
i always doubted this was the case, because the darker version is much clearer, i mean you can literally see details much better, and the sky colour was a lot closer to what appear to be unbias recordings.
if they were adjusting the colour live, i didn't think that same adjustment would be made to a replay that was just at stock settings.
but after the brighter replay, we go to a new chopper, and it has darker settings.
ok, i'm thinking:
they had chopper 7 on bright.
they set up the other channel for the next chopper (dark, because its round to the west, staring into the sun).
they go for a replay.
its dark. they played the replay through the channel they had setup for the other chopper.
they go to normal replay.
they then go to the new chopper on the dark setting.
ok, problems with this:
they missed the replay point. they've just replayed it twice in the last 3 minutes, so thats a bit odd, but if you have to cue it manually every time then that would explain it.
the brighter replay fades-in over the top. this is a technical question that could well be answered with just a bit of knowledge about TV control rooms.
i was thinking that this all also rested on the brighter version being the raw feed, but if it was only ever replayed through the same colour settings (apart from that one time) that would explain that i guess.
you guys are gonna have to forgive me being anal about this lol until i've done a few networks i won't be able to tell for sure if there are any signs of media foreknowledge. so far pretty much all questions have been answered apart from the sounds at the time of impact, and unless i find correlations between networks, i haven't found much. i'm surprised they don't have a news-headline thing or something at 9am. i don't think any of the stations did. maybe thats to be expected.
i'll try and find an answer from someone who knows these machines regarding this colour change/replay thing and keep on truckin. not much more to gain on ABC now, other than to see what sort of replays they have on the rest of the coverage. coz i'm holding-off on destruction-analysis, i won't be analysing the destruction of the towers in these videos. i doubt there was much covering up done then, but i was thinking about the pschology of watching the towers go down today:
the first tower goes down, most networks its either obscured by the first tower or they're down on the street. firstly, you have to remember this is purely circumstantial, but from a psychological perspective you don't see how ludicrous the destruction of the towers looks when the first one goes down. its hidden between tower 1 and the smoke (like i say, circumstantial, the wind is south-easterly).
but by the time tower 1 goes down everyone was fully expecting it to happen (at the time i mean), i'm sure you were if you remember the day, so when tower 1 goes down we already knew it was going to happen, so its just not as shocking an occurrence to our brains.
ah fuck it, i'll get to the towers at some point.
Edited by broken sticks, Aug 28 2009, 01:32 PM.
|RasgaSaias||Aug 28 2009, 01:31 PM Post #8|
LOL I meant chopper 7, not 5.
The key question here is "If the original feed was the darker one, then why did they brighten it live?".
We need to know if it is a normal procedure and why. That would help us to understand it.
Then with some knowledge about what happens in a TV control room during replays, we'll have a better view.
I don't know much about these specific technical procedures either.
I'm just guessing and trying to visualize simple possibilities before I jump into any conclusion.
It's easy to misinterpret something when we're trying to fit old suppositions under knew questions.
Let's be patient and we'll get there.
|broken sticks||Aug 28 2009, 01:37 PM Post #9|
|RasgaSaias||Aug 28 2009, 02:27 PM Post #10|
I have to disagree with this.
The bright version is clearer and shows more detail. Look at the antenna and the west wall.
It's almost as if they used these settings to filter the atmospheric haze a little bit since the chopper was far away.
There's also another thing. The footage limits change (The dark limits around the image).
Pay special attention to the lower corners. The dark version seems narrower than the live one.
There's something wrong between the banner and the image.
If I match the images in time, the banners don't match in position.
If I match the banners in position, the images don't match in time.
(I use the A from "COVERAGE" and the tower edge as reference)
I can only explain this with two different copies from same shot (or two different channels). One wider, the bright one, and one narrower, the darker one.
Then they applied the banner independently to each one of them. That's why it doesn't match in position when compared.
Am I making sense?
Edited by RasgaSaias, Aug 28 2009, 03:39 PM.
|1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)|
|Go to Next Page|
|« Previous Topic · Media Coverage · Next Topic »|