Absence of contrails in old films

c.eileen

Member
As you all know, the absence of contrails in old films is sited as evidence of chemtrails. The reason for this absence is an artistic one. A film (or a photograph) is someone's work of art, and they have a specific vision for what that piece of art work should look like. In years past, films aimed to create some ideal world, one that was unmarred by everyday reality, so the clutter of everyday life was carefully controlled. If a plane cruised into the frame (or the unwanted sound of a train could be heard in the background), shooting stopped, and was resumed after it passed. If a contrail was left behind, shooting resumed in a different direction or another place until the sky was clear again. Errant visual or auditory clutter that was not caught on set would either require a reshoot of the scene or a painful edit (this back before there were computers to clean up such messes). Can you imagine a western with planes flying by in the background? You know that, no matter how remote the location, planes intruded into the frame. So why don't we see or hear them? Because the film makers were careful to avoid getting them into the shot.
These days, films are more reality based*, so such visual clutter as contrails are considered "added production value" rather than a problem. If the contrails weren't already there, the film makers might be tempted to add them with CGI if the presence of such artifacts was important to the film.
There's also the plain fact that there are hundreds of times more planes in the air today than there were decades ago, so it would be much more difficult for a film maker to avoid getting planes and contrails in the frame. At some point, as long as these intrusions do not hurt the film maker's vision, he or she would have to accept them as part of their film.
*Obviously, I'm not referring to sci-fi and fantasy films or pre-aviation historical films.
 

WeedWhacker

Senior Member
As you all know, the absence of contrails in old films is sited as evidence of chemtrails.

Actually, there are numerous examples of contrails that appear in older films....and often in films that are set as "period pieces" (Westerns, Middle Ages, etc) where the director and cinematographer (and editor) either didn't notice or, on low-budget films didn't care that contrails happened to be in the shots.

Let me hunt, there are a raft of resources that cite these examples....someone on MetaBunk likely has a full file folder on his/her computer already...

(Because, just ran into this issue a few months ago, saw clips from a Western circa the 1960s, used as an example....of course, now the film's title has slipped my memory....)
 

c.eileen

Member
Actually, there are numerous examples of contrails that appear in older films....and often in films that are set as "period pieces" (Westerns, Middle Ages, etc) where the director and cinematographer (and editor) either didn't notice or, on low-budget films didn't care that contrails happened to be in the shots.

Let me hunt, there are a raft of resources that cite these examples....someone on MetaBunk likely has a full file folder on his/her computer already...

(Because, just ran into this issue a few months ago, saw clips from a Western circa the 1960s, used as an example....of course, now the film's title has slipped my memory....)


Oh, I know! Years and years ago, I saw a blooper show in TV that showed anomalous artifacts in films, such as passing planes, trucks on the distant highway, some crew member's thermos, unlikely signage, and other weird things. What's really interesting though is that, no matter how many times you watch the same film, you never see that kind of thing until someone points it out, then suddenly, that's all you see! The failings of human perception...a fascinating thing! And one of the reasons why there is a need for this website!
 

c.eileen

Member
Y'know, I keep expecting to see the hero come over the rise in Top Gun togs. I will definitely check out your archive.

Generally speaking, though, film makers really did try to avoid such things.
 

c.eileen

Member
Actually, there are numerous examples of contrails that appear in older films....and often in films that are set as "period pieces" (Westerns, Middle Ages, etc) where the director and cinematographer (and editor) either didn't notice or, on low-budget films didn't care that contrails happened to be in the shots.

Let me hunt, there are a raft of resources that cite these examples....someone on MetaBunk likely has a full file folder on his/her computer already...

(Because, just ran into this issue a few months ago, saw clips from a Western circa the 1960s, used as an example....of course, now the film's title has slipped my memory....)


Actually, IMdB will have notes about artifacts in the "Goofs" sections of their pages.
 

c.eileen

Member
I found this site while looking for photos of contrails pre-1960 in an effort to debunk my sister's growing belief in the chemtrail conspiracy. I found the page with the WWII bomber (B17s?) squadron, copied it, and sent it to my sister along with some other anti-chem stuff I found. Later I looked more into this site and that is when I decided to join. I referred her to it. She hasn't looked at it, or at least she hasn't let up in her chemtrail beliefs. I'm up against people who claim that old photos and old movies which show chemtrails are digital fakes of some kind, and she is inclined to believe them. Is there an example of two photos which have been analyzed for such fakery—one genuine, one fake—that will demonstrate how a fake can be discovered with a simple home computer. Something that I can forward to her to show her that she can analyze photos herself and see the fraud...or lack of one. I have some minor PhotoShop experience and I can sometimes see where a photo has been faked, but I don't have the skills to catch a really good fake, nor show someone else how to discover them. I need to be able to show her that these old photos of persistent contrails are not fake. Seriously, she's scaring herself with this malarky and I'm afraid she's going to end up hiding in her closet, armed and wearing a tinfoil hat.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
I found this site while looking for photos of contrails pre-1960 in an effort to debunk my sister's growing belief in the chemtrail conspiracy. I found the page with the WWII bomber (B17s?) squadron, copied it, and sent it to my sister along with some other anti-chem stuff I found. Later I looked more into this site and that is when I decided to join. I referred her to it. She hasn't looked at it, or at least she hasn't let up in her chemtrail beliefs. I'm up against people who claim that old photos and old movies which show chemtrails are digital fakes of some kind, and she is inclined to believe them. Is there an example of two photos which have been analyzed for such fakery—one genuine, one fake—that will demonstrate how a fake can be discovered with a simple home computer. Something that I can forward to her to show her that she can analyze photos herself and see the fraud...or lack of one. I have some minor PhotoShop experience and I can sometimes see where a photo has been faked, but I don't have the skills to catch a really good fake, nor show someone else how to discover them. I need to be able to show her that these old photos of persistent contrails are not fake. Seriously, she's scaring herself with this malarky and I'm afraid she's going to end up hiding in her closet, armed and wearing a tinfoil hat.

There are ways of detecting fake photos, but then there are ways of getting around those detectors. The best way of proving they are genuine is to get original copies of books that have the photos in. I have several such books, which can be found quite cheap online. I recommend this one:

https://plus.google.com/photos/107393796095434664991/albums/5363662113705530081?banne

$15 on Amazon for a used copy:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/offer-list...2&keywords=clouds+of+the+world&condition=used
 

WeedWhacker

Senior Member
I found the page with the WWII bomber (B17s?) squadron, copied it, and sent it to my sister along with some other anti-chem stuff I found.

If you refer to these images:

https://www.google.com/search?q=b-17 contrails&newwindow=1&rlz=1C1CHFX_enUS499US499&es_sm=122&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=n7B-U82LIMveoASC2YGQBQ&ved=0CCgQsAQ&biw=1589&bih=735

Well, interspersed in there there are some B-17s, surely....and many others. There are YouTube links as well. Simply search IN YouTube, you will find those videos (if you can watch videos).

Here's one:

Later I looked more into this site and that is when I decided to join. I referred her to it. She hasn't looked at it, or at least she hasn't let up in her chemtrail beliefs.

Well, as a pilot for over 40 years, who knows for a fact that "chem"trails are just a modern 'Urban Myth', I wish you all the best in helping your sister to understand the science of contrails, and the facts as well.
 

Pete Tar

Senior Member.
Later I looked more into this site and that is when I decided to join. I referred her to it. She hasn't looked at it, or at least she hasn't let up in her chemtrail beliefs.
If she is travelling in chemtrail circles then she's already heard that metabunk and contrailscience are at the forefront of some vague 'disinformation' campaign. The appeal to reason would be to check what is being referenced and go to the sources - all these sites do is gather information that is out there and can be looked into, none of it is 'invented' here.
 

Leifer

Senior Member.
If she is travelling in chemtrail circles then she's already heard that metabunk and contrailscience are at the forefront of some vague 'disinformation' campaign.
Perhaps ask her if she is willing to examine all sides of the issue, before making a decision.
Unfortunately, there is a popular movement to judge what we say here....as "disinfo".
A common problem with this thinking is, people rarely attempt to factually describe or debunk our supposed "disinfo".

Quite often, any individual offering an explanation that's anything close to a gov't explanation....are liars, because gov't can't be trusted. There are a lot of pre-judgments in these areas.
.....and, a pre-judgment is technically defined as "prejudice".
 

Hevach

Senior Member.
Some filmmakers used to go to crazy lengths to make sure there were no contrails in their shots for the sake of authenticity. As the Spartacus shot shows, some didn't bother or gave up. But there were some that would redesign entire scenes, change locales, or take days on a scene waiting for clear enough skies.

You don't always see as many contrails in modern films as real life, either. Take The Avengers or Transformers 3 and their big city battles, what should have been busy airspace shooting in New York and Chicago. There are several graphics companies that do this sort of touch up work. The same company that CGI'd out Superman's tights bulge in Superman Returns also removes a lot of other flying objects like contrails and airplanes.
 

Trailspotter

Senior Member.
Funny enough, I've just been browsing our TV channels and spotted contrails in the El Cid movie (1961), shown on BBC 2. They are in the beginning of one of the key scenes, Battle for Calahorra:
or at 40:55 in the full movie:
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Funny enough, I've just been browsing our TV channels and spotted contrails in the El Cid movie (1961), shown on BBC 2. They are in the beginning of one of the key scenes, Battle for Calahorra:
or at 40:55 in the full movie:
Can you take some screenshots? Those videos can't be viewed in the US
 

Balance

Senior Member.
Coincidentally, I caught the film "633 Squadron" on TV earlier (which was made in 1964). Appx 25mins into the film as some german fighters were strafing the RAF squadron's airfield I noticed high in the sky, two long persistent contrails.

ETA: It's barely visible in this captured video but if someone has access to an original copy it's much clearer. The contrails are in frame from 25:51-25:54 as the 'schimtt's bug out. Centre of screen between the clouds one trail goes horizontal and a second trail almost vertically intersects.

 
Last edited:

wotgorilla

Member
I found this site while looking for photos of contrails pre-1960 in an effort to debunk my sister's growing belief in the chemtrail conspiracy. I found the page with the WWII bomber (B17s?) squadron, copied it, and sent it to my sister along with some other anti-chem stuff I found. Later I looked more into this site and that is when I decided to join. I referred her to it. She hasn't looked at it, or at least she hasn't let up in her chemtrail beliefs. I'm up against people who claim that old photos and old movies which show chemtrails are digital fakes of some kind, and she is inclined to believe them. Is there an example of two photos which have been analyzed for such fakery—one genuine, one fake—that will demonstrate how a fake can be discovered with a simple home computer. Something that I can forward to her to show her that she can analyze photos herself and see the fraud...or lack of one. I have some minor PhotoShop experience and I can sometimes see where a photo has been faked, but I don't have the skills to catch a really good fake, nor show someone else how to discover them. I need to be able to show her that these old photos of persistent contrails are not fake. Seriously, she's scaring herself with this malarky and I'm afraid she's going to end up hiding in her closet, armed and wearing a tinfoil hat.
Just throwing this out there, but for many that I've met, the appeal to logic and rationale doesn't work. It just makes people dig their heels in more. Often, it's an emotional issue, and that's the best way to approach it if you have a relationship with the believer. The conspiracy beliefs are just the symptoms of the underlying cause.
 

Hama Neggs

Senior Member.
Just throwing this out there, but for many that I've met, the appeal to logic and rationale doesn't work. It just makes people dig their heels in more. Often, it's an emotional issue, and that's the best way to approach it if you have a relationship with the believer. The conspiracy beliefs are just the symptoms of the underlying cause.

Yes. Somehow they just dodge the logic and facts and brush it and you off as being merely "annoying" as if it was meaningless drivel you were offering. I would have thought it impossible if I had not seen it. It seems to be some sort of universal Human reaction. I saw the same thing with the "Planet X" believers. They just get defensive when you show them where they are wrong and simply shut down their intellectual capacity to even grasp what you are talking about. That's when they call you a "shill".
 

Latest posts

Top