Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Brumsen
It's important to know when and by whom it was put into a digital format. The judge ordered the release of the video; don't you agree that it would be strange to digitize an analog video before releasing it, thus widely opening the floodgates to claims that it has been manipulated?
Anyway, the guy's claim is: it was first put into digital format, and then back, to make it look like a VHS copy. Should this prove to be true, wouldn't you agree that that was suspicious?
|
I'm not an expert in video manipulation or photographic enhancement. But I do have, what I think, is a possible to take a VHS recording, transfer it to digital, then back to VHS. The security camera we had at the store where I worked made tapes that could not be viewed on regular VCRs. This is becasue each frame was 4 seconds apart. It was mentioned a bit above. If the tape that had a 2 frame per second rate could be shown in a regular VCR, it would have displayed at about 15 times normal speed.
Playing it in a VCR that could play it at the correct speed, but still have the 2 fps framerate, and recording that image on a normal VCR would produce 15 or 16 identical frames for each frame of the video. Putting it on a digital format first would have two benefits that I can see. It would make it much easier to make a lot of copies for rapid release to the news agecies. And, it coluld reduce any of the analog noise that would change from frame to frame, allowing for a 'cleaner' master copy of the video.
Also, it's really hard to post analog anything on a website.
So no, I don't think it's suspiscious at all. What would be suspiscious would be if they really did manipulate the footage, and this is the best they could come up with.