Acosta's white house pass removed ..

[Sparko]

So if I understand you correctly they show exactly the same thing but at the same time they don't show exactly the same thing?

In my version, they lined up perfectly as far as I could tell. I didn't notice any missing frame but I wasn't looking that close - I was looking for signs of tampering with the actual video like in special effects. I will open it back up and check again on Monday when I get back to my computer system.

But if there is a missing frame it is because of the frame rate difference in the two videos as I mention above. Not because of "doctoring"

[Charles]

Apologies if I'm missing something (which is possible), but the only video I'm seeing on that page is a 15-second one that Sanders posted, the one with the zoom-ins. I wasn't seeing a video where they point out the differences.

There is a 4 minute video that starts of by itself (at least in my browser). Perhaps you have changed your settings in order to prevent that?

[Charles]

it was at the top of the page. He found a single frame that appears to be missing from Sander's version of the video. But the problem is that the version she used was converted from the full HD version at 24 frames per second down to 640 x 480 at 29.997 frames per second (essentially 30 fps). Now when you change frame rates like that, the video compressor program has to add or remove frames to get it to play at the normal rate. So it will blend frames and extrapolate frames as needed. Which causes the resultant video to look blurrier. This was not doctored at all, just resized at a different frame rate. Any amateur video tech should know this. The guy in the video is playing games with the video to sell his story. But even if you take him at his word, the result during the action shown is just one missing frame which you can't even notice when it is playing at normal speed.

I like the way he sums it up in the video:

So, we know the video has been edited in some way. There is a very slight pause just three frames out of the 25 that make up one second. Who made that edit though and for what reason, that is what we don’t know.

And of course there is no reason to find it a little interesting that the difference is exactly at the point where they want to make us think something bad is happening. Of course not.

[Sparko]

Your integrity/our integrity does not depend on their integrity.

Jim

My integrity has not changed. I said that there was no assault when Lewandowski grabbed Fields, and I said there was no assault when Acosta touched the intern. But Acosta was one of the reporters who went after Lewandowski for something that was very similar to his own situation. As well as all of the other reporters. Why don't they have integrity?

[Sparko]

I like the way he sums it up in the video:

So, we know the video has been edited in some way. There is a very slight pause just three frames out of the 25 that make up one second. Who made that edit though and for what reason, that is what we don’t know.

And of course there is no reason to find it a little interesting that the difference is exactly at the point where they want to make us think something bad is happening. Of course not.

1. There was only one frame difference that he showed in his video, not 3.
2. Huckabee's video was 29.997 frames per second (the normal US based NTSC frame rate), not 25. The original was 24 frames per second not 25.
3. It was not an edit but probably an artifact of the video conversion going from one frame rate to another.

[Charles]

In my version, they lined up perfectly as far as I could tell. I didn't notice any missing frame but I wasn't looking that close - I was looking for signs of tampering with the actual video like in special effects. I will open it back up and check again on Monday when I get back to my computer system.

But if there is a missing frame it is because of the frame rate difference in the two videos as I mention above. Not because of "doctoring"

So at first you made an error and did not see the difference and wrongly claimed there was none. And then even before giving it a second try you conclude that it was not doctored. Sorry if I am not completely convinced that you are applying the right method.

[Sparko]

So at first you made an error and did not see the difference and wrongly claimed there was none. And then even before giving it a second try you conclude that it was not doctored. Sorry if I am not completely convinced that you are applying the right method.

If you look at the two videos even in the one he was showing, you will see a blurry double image with a ghosted outline in Huckabee's video. Which makes it very hard to judge when comparing to the clear original video. And I really don't care if you are convinced. You are someone who knows nothing about the subject. This is like a scientist trying to convince an antivaxxer that he is an idiot who knows nothing about viruses. Your ignorance is expected and laughable.

[Charles]

1. There was only one frame difference that he showed in his video, not 3.

Look at the video again from 2:45.

[oxmixmudd]

1. There was only one frame difference that he showed in his video, not 3.
2. Huckabee's video was 29.997 frames per second (the normal US based NTSC frame rate), not 25. The original was 24 frames per second not 25.
3. It was not an edit but probably an artifact of the video conversion going from one frame rate to another.

Too precise an effect to be just a conversion error. The frames missing are when Acosta moved his arm towards the interns arm, making the movement appear 3 times faster than it was. The frames doubled are before that time to make the total number of frames the same.

I'm not sure if this explanation has been posted, but it was a good one:

https://apnews.com/c575bd1cc3b1456cb3057ef670c7fe2a

There is no excuse for this sort of thing. And no-one here should be defending it.

To do this, they have to know their explanation is no good.

If one watches the original, Acosta's actions seem normal, not at all aggressive. If one watches the doctored video, Acosta's actions appear far more aggressive, far less normal.




Jim

[Charles]

If you look at the two videos even in the one he was showing, you will see a blurry double image with a ghosted outline in Huckabee's video. Which makes it very hard to judge when comparing to the clear original video. And I really don't care if you are convinced. You are someone who knows nothing about the subject. This is like a scientist trying to convince an antivaxxer that he is an idiot who knows nothing about viruses. Your ignorance is expected and laughable.

Would you trust a scientist who contradicted himself a very short time after making his initial statement? Would you trust a scientist who when shown wrong wanted to go back and have a second look but made his conclusion known before doing so? Would you trust a scientist more or less if he felt the need to go for the ad hominem?

[Littlejoe]

Too precise an effect to be just a conversion error. The frames missing are when Acosta moved his arm towards the interns arm, making the movement appear 3 times faster than it was. The frames doubled are before that time to make the total number of frames the same.

I'm not sure if this explanation has been posted, but it was a good one:

https://apnews.com/c575bd1cc3b1456cb3057ef670c7fe2a

There is no excuse for this sort of thing. And no-one here should be defending it.

To do this, they have to know their explanation is no good.

If one watches the original, Acosta's actions seem normal, not at all aggressive. If one watches the doctored video, Acosta's actions appear far more aggressive, far less normal.




Jim

It doesn't look like much to me either but...IDK about Washington D.C. laws, but in Texas, what Accosta did would qualify for Class C misdemeanor assault according to 2 of my LEO buddies.

ETA: As would Lewandowski's (sp?)

[oxmixmudd]

If you look at the two videos even in the one he was showing, you will see a blurry double image with a ghosted outline in Huckabee's video. Which makes it very hard to judge when comparing to the clear original video. And I really don't care if you are convinced. You are someone who knows nothing about the subject. This is like a scientist trying to convince an antivaxxer that he is an idiot who knows nothing about viruses. Your ignorance is expected and laughable.

The explanation I posted shows that frames are first duplicated to slow the video a bit and then 3 frames are removed as his hand comes down against the girls arm as compared to the original, speeding up that specific motion.

Charles in not being anything like an antivaxxer in this case. But you are ignoring the hard evidence. Why?

Jim

[oxmixmudd]

It doesn't look like much to me either but...IDK about Washington D.C. laws, but in Texas, what Accosta did would qualify for Class C misdemeanor assault according to 2 of my LEO buddies.

ETA: As would Lewandowski's (sp?)

That's nuts. And I guess we all should be in jail then, shouldn't we. All I can say is if you are willing to allow that to be some sort of crime, heaven help you if you ever find yourself in the same position with some litigious grump.


Jim

[Sparko]

Too precise an effect to be just a conversion error. The frames missing are when Acosta moved his arm towards the interns arm, making the movement appear 3 times faster than it was. The frames doubled are before that time to make the total number of frames the same.

I'm not sure if this explanation has been posted, but it was a good one:

https://apnews.com/c575bd1cc3b1456cb3057ef670c7fe2a

There is no excuse for this sort of thing. And no-one here should be defending it.

To do this, they have to know their explanation is no good.

If one watches the original, Acosta's actions seem normal, not at all aggressive. If one watches the doctored video, Acosta's actions appear far more aggressive, far less normal.




Jim

I completely disagree, but I will take another look with fresh eyes on Monday. I have no dog in this fight since I already said I don't think Acosta assaulted the intern. I just think they are making a mountain out of a molehill here to make Trump look bad.

Also why would they think Sarah Huckabee would even be aware that it was doctored if it actually was? She just copied the video from someplace and inserted it in twitter. And me watching it, at full speed, I don't see any difference in how violent the action appears.

[Cow Poke]

I don't see any manner of "assault" -- Acosta was being his usual pompous self, and trying to keep the spotlight on himself. He was so focused on doing battle with Trump that he didn't really pay any attention to the intern - he just wanted to keep the mic.