Rivière-Rouge, Quebec alien video

tinkertailor

Senior Member.
This video claims to show an alien body. It contains images of an alleged lifeless alien body found in snowy Quebec in 1992. It consists of still images on a TV screen which are filmed by a camcorder, no live-action footage.



As far as I can tell, this shows 10 photographs. Time stamps for each shot:
0:03 - alien lying on ground face up, people inspecting it
0:09 - alien hanging with branch under arms, rear view, angle 1
0:10 - alien hanging with branch under arms, rear view, angle 2
0:20 - alien hanging with branch under arms, rear(?) view
0:23 - alien hanging with branch under arms, front view, angle 1
0:28 - alien hanging with branch under arms, front view, angle 2
0:32 - alien hanging with branch under arms, front view, angle 3
0:41 - close up of alien face, angle 1
0:43-0:56 - alien on front face up, camera panning across photograph
0:58-1:06 - people looking at something on ground
1:07-1:15, same shot as 0:03, but shows person on ground looking at alien

The background information of this video is below. Section ⅓ is translate from French by Google Translate. This is long, so I have bolded the important points and cut irrelevant information, placing descriptions of deleted text in brackets.

(1/3) Text updated by progress of the investigation on March 20, 2020
In the winter of 1992, while I was living in Montreal (Quebec/Canada), a friend of my ex-roommate came to our apartment for us show strange photos. The latter showed that a creature of unknown origin - extraterrestrial biological entity (EBE) type - and apparently lifeless, had been found by a snowmobiler (or maybe two) in a field or a wooded area not far from the road. We immediately asked this friend where he got these photos. He then told us that they belonged to his cousin from the Rivière-Rouge region, at L'Annonciation, in Quebec. Then, if I remember correctly, he told us that when the body was discovered in the snow, the snowmobiler (or one of the snowmobilers) went to get his camera (possibly a 35 mm). Note here that if there were two snowmobilers, by the absence of one of them in the photos, we have no proof of his presence; unless he remained the sole photographer. That said, other witnesses, obviously the two men (the two smokers) who can be seen in the photos, also went to the place of discovery with an automobile. By showing us one of the photos in particular, the friend in question had explained to us that the witnesses had to pass a cable or a rope under the arms of the biological entity, for so, with the help of a branch , be able to lift it without touching it. It was possibly as a precaution not to leave their footprints or for fear of illness. One could assume here that it might have given off some smell, considering that it doesn't look totally frozen. From the photos, the cable or rope had obviously been tied to trees. Intrigued, we immediately asked him what did they do with the body? And he explained to us that "being late, at the end of the evening - and probably unaware of the importance of the thing - the witnesses did not dare to bring the body back with them and, on their return the next day, the latter had gone. Witnesses therefore assumed that a coyote or other wild animal had probably found the body and brought it with it to feast on it.” At first glance, this is questionable behavior, but above all and above all irresponsible. Considering that this kind of monumental error is often observed among non-scientists, this was not going to surprise us too much. Afterwards, we asked him what he was going to do with these photos? And he told us that he was going to try to meet someone in the field of ufology, in order to try to elucidate this mystery. Anyway, before he left, I quickly grabbed my video camera and filmed the photos in question one by one.
A story in suspense A few weeks later, this friend called us back and told us that he had gone to show the photos to someone in the field of ufology – if my memory serves me correctly, it was a certain Claude Mac Duff (1946-2001), author of the book “The trial of the flying saucers” (Quebec/America editions, 1975). The latter would have simply told him that it was not the first time that he had seen photos of this kind of entity, and that he therefore advised him not to try to make money with this story, or waste time broadcasting to the public; for he would certainly be discredited and ridiculed. It must be said here, in parentheses, that during the investigation [speculation on Mac Duff’s motives removed]. Not wanting to be taken for “wacky people” or “cranks”, we simply decided to keep it to ourselves, as a kind of secret. We have shown this video privately to open-minded relatives and friends, but not publicly. Indeed, because as is the case for the majority of witnesses of unexplained phenomena, I also had the fear that if I presented this video to the public, that people would end up laughing at us.
(2/3) Publication of the video
In October 2008, about 17 years after the photos first appeared in my life, I finally decided to take a chance and find the answer to this mystery. Not being equipped with video transfer devices to convert the VHS of the E.B.E. photos into a digital file, I had to shoot this video with my digital camera/video, capturing the VHS version from my tube TV screen.
I then put it online, on the Internet, thanks to the video broadcasting site "YouTube". [description of YouTube’s anonymity, description of the original title of video, and description of virality of video removed]
The disinterest of the investigators
To help witnesses come forward or investigators can also express interest, I have left the email address etrangesvideos@yahoo.ca at the bottom of the YouTube video description.
[description of various investigators’ requests for information removed]
(3/3) An enduring mystery
[description of view count removed]
On January 15, 2016, on YouTube, a person with the username "newbeat2012" posted an investigative and analytical video entitled "Authentic Alien Grey EBE Footage Analyzed Quebec - 1992". The user in question also translated my descriptive text into English. The video surprisingly showed physiognomic details of the body of the E.B.E. found in Red River, revealing various observations that cast doubt on the hypothesis that it was a simple dummy.
The anatomical details of the E.B.E. were revealed to be very similar to those of a human being. We can see, among other things, the impressive details of the eyes, the neck and especially the sternocleidomastoid muscle. The deltoid muscles (shoulders) and the coraco-brachial muscle are defined with amazing details. The leg muscles and other such details leave no doubt as to the biological quality of the E.B.E. Moreover, the analysis shows that the texture and color of the skin show evidence of exposure to cold, as well as the possibility that there was some kind of mummification by bandaging the body, which explains another visible feature of the body texture.
In all this, one could be led to believe that it is a human corpse. However, the fact that the E.B.E. does not seem to have any apparent sexual or genital organs - not demonstrating, at the same time, that it is a male or a female - leads us to doubt that it is a human being. Other important details, such as the length of the arms and fingers, reinforce the doubt in this sense. It thus remains only the "down to earth" hypothesis of a kind of mutant coming straight out of a genetic experiment in laboratory. In short, it was an excellent work of investigation.

This is the analysis video that the original poster linked and summarized in the above passage. It’s a slideshow, it looks at the people in the photos and draws comparisons between muscles of human anatomy and muscles seen in the alleged alien. The video’s claim is that the muscles are too accurate to be a dummy. It’s helpful as a reference to the different aspects of the original, but it doesn’t necessarily add anything.


This is very firmly in the LIZ, or “low information zone,” as it has multiple generations of data loss: it’s a YouTube video → filmed on a shaky handheld 2000’s camera → aimed at a tube TV → that is playing a (presumably) ‘90s VHS tape → that is handheld filming 30mm film prints. As such, any details of the people, environment, or alleged alien are difficult to see accurately.

I feel like there is something not right about the photos and the story, though: For instance, I don’t know if snowmobilers would be wearing these patches. I’m wondering if these could be personnel of some sort: medical, first responder, film crew, etc. The patch looks a bit like a rod of caduceus, commonly used for medical personnel, but I haven’t found a perfect match yet.

johnealienemt1.png



One option for this is that we may be looking at a prop on the set of a show or movie. Canada is a popular filming destination, and aliens were certainly popular in the ‘90s. I’ve scanned through dozens of TV shows and movies filmed in Canada that came out between 1985 and 1999, no luck yet. I’ve also looked through prop sales online, the closest thing I found was this alien prop from “The X-Files,” but the head is off.

There are definitely possible explanations to explore here.
 
it looks at the people in the photos and draws comparisons between muscles of human anatomy and muscles seen in the alleged alien.
If indeed we ever encounter alien beings, there is no reason to suppose that they, having gone through an entirely different process of evolution, would have had similar muscles in similar places, or even HAD similar places on their bodies.
I don’t know if snowmobilers would be wearing these patches.
The patch looks to me like a figure on skis. I tried to look up possible insignia, but clothing designed for cold weather sports comes in hundreds of different styles, all of which seem to have miscellaneous patches, and membership in a local sports group would provide more possibilities.
One option for this is that we may be looking at a prop on the set of a show or movie. Canada is a popular filming destination, and aliens were certainly popular in the ‘90s.
I'm going to cast my vote for this being the most likely interpretation. I have no idea whether the people involved were perpetrating a scam, doing it for laughs, or truly baffled, but the fact that they just left it there suggests one of the first two options.
 
I don't have time to go through the whole thing right now, but just of the top of my head the alien looks a lot like the alien from Colse Encounters of the 3rd Kind



1682735847830.png

1682735998109.png




Which one can buy on Ebay today:

1682736416049.png
1682736465751.png

Besides all the 2nd and 3rd hand reports and multi generation images.
 
.maybe a student movie.

That's not a bad hypothesis. It could be an attempt at a "found footage" motif or is compiled from bits of a student film/video. I took a number of collage production classes in the mid '80s using both Super 8mm film and video as did a lot of other people.
 
Any story that begins with "the cousin of....a friend of my ex-roommate" reeks of the sort of 'friend of a friend told me xyz' that is a clear warning sign of people trying to distance themselves from any traceable source for the material.
 
Any story that begins with "the cousin of....a friend of my ex-roommate" reeks of the sort of 'friend of a friend told me xyz' that is a clear warning sign of people trying to distance themselves from any traceable source for the material.
especially because the OP link does include the map. allegedly, based on multiple articles, the "deep web" file said "eiger". which is a climbing mountain in switzerland. in the area they tend to speak french. l'annonciation could be literal vs a town. A pretty cool name for a film, imo.

the map coloring looks more like eiger (or at least some mountain top) with its whites and greens, and the canadian town doesnt have mountain tops.

1682790391709.png


my opinion, the canadian kid stole the film short and changed the story.
 
Last edited:
oh and could be just coincidence but the deep web file name also alleged said EBE (which is weird as that would not be french) but the xfiles first year had an episode called EBE which featured the same kind of map screengrab
4-29-2023 12-01-00 PM.jpg
Article:
The next comment is: “It did not contain any references other EBE 1992, Eiger.” The significance of this is either a coincidence or a hoax indicator. “EBE” is short for “extraterrestrial biological entity” and is also the name of the 17th episode of the first season of “The X-Files,” probably one of the most remembered because it introduced The Lone Gunmen. “Eiger” most likely refers to the Eiger mountain in the Burmese Alps. Its north face is one of the most photographed sights of the Swiss Alps and one of the most challenging for climbers.
 
The patch looks to me like a figure on skis.
This makes much more sense. Maybe something like this (a reproduction, not an actual vintage patch):

If indeed we ever encounter alien beings, there is no reason to suppose that they, having gone through an entirely different process of evolution, would have had similar muscles in similar places, or even HAD similar places on their bodies.
Very true. Interestingly, every alien dummy I have looked up has the same physical characteristics as the one in the Quebec video: defined human muscles/bones and no visible genitalia. A selection from a Google search for "alien dummy prop":
aliendummysearch.png
It could be an attempt at a "found footage" motif or is compiled from bits of a student film/video. I took a number of collage production classes in the mid '80s using both Super 8mm film and video as did a lot of other people.
There are quite a few film schools in nearby Montreal: Concordia, Trebas Institute, and Université du Québec à Montréal (UQAM), among others. This feels like a real possibility. It could also be something where a small shoot was happening at night and someone on the crew decided to take photos, then turn it into a found-footage thing afterwards. Given the popularity of both "Alien Autopsy: Fact or Faked?" and "The Blair Witch Project" in the '90s and the fact that the video was posted in the mid-aughts, it could be an option.
 
There are quite a few film schools in nearby Montreal: Concordia, Trebas Institute, and Université du Québec à Montréal (UQAM), among others. This feels like a real possibility. It could also be something where a small shoot was happening at night and someone on the crew decided to take photos, then turn it into a found-footage thing afterwards. Given the popularity of both "Alien Autopsy: Fact or Faked?" and "The Blair Witch Project" in the '90s and the fact that the video was posted in the mid-aughts, it could be an option.

As I thought more on the "student film" idea, I had some observations.

First, all we see are still photos on the screen. If I understand the supposed origin story, the OP was shown the photos by a friend of an ex-roommate, who got the photos from his cousin who may or may not have been the actual photographer that was at the scene maybe using a 35mm film camera.

So, in 1992 a friend of ex-roommate shows up at OP's house and shows him photos he got from his cousin. Friend of ex-roommate does not say when he got the photos, nor does he say when the photos were taken. The photos were supposedly taken in the Riviere Rouge area near L'Annonciation in Quebec.

At that meeting OP records the photos with a VHS camcorder. In 2008, OP plays the VHS video of the photos and records the screen with his digital camera, then sets up a YouTube channel solely to upload the recordings. Then 5 years later, he uploads a slightly longer version of it:

1682972472502.png

The only difference I can see is the opening shot of the drawings is maybe held a little longer and there is a few frames at the end with this:



The guys in it look like they're wearing gasmasks or something:

gasmaskguy.png

I didn't have any luck yet trying an image search to find out where it came from. It reminds me, not in style but in theme, of the hieroglyphs on board the wrecked ship in Alien. It's there to add a bit of mystery.

The other interesting thing is the map and the drawings are all captured the same as the photos from a monitor screen. It would seem even if one had a VHS recording of an old map, one would have used a modern 2008 version to more accurately show the location.

Also note, we never see the photos as a group laid out on a table. In fact we never see the edge of any of the photos, they always fill the screen.

Then there is this scene where the camera is panning around on the photo showing different sections of it, again without ever showing the edges of the photo. As it moves we can see the reflection of the guy recording the screen as we do in a few other shots. But he doesn't appear to be moving. He's not moving his camera around to capture different parts of the photo on the screen, he's just films the screen:


1682975937705.png

This would seem to mean the movement is on the screen and was a result of the VHS camcorder moving around, back in 1992, and trying to capture the various elements of the photo. But to do that without ever showing the edge of the photo seems highly unlikely. If it's a standard 4"x5" photo and a standard VHS camcorder, it would be nearly impossible. Even if it were a larger 8"x10" photo, it would still be very challenging. If these photos were closer to poster size, I think that would have been mentioned.

Aside from the story, there is nothing to indicate what we see is from 1992 or earlier. The snowmobiles are never seen, so we can't date them. Same with the supposed car. The only real clothing we see is blue coveralls and woven hat that are consistant with 2008 or 1992. This guy seems to have a small LED style head lamp on. Like the flashlights that show up, it's not turned on:

1682976769860.png

The whole scene is fully illuminated, so even though one of the guys has a flashlight, he never uses it.

I had a go at the patch as well:

1682970857555.png

1682971200430.png

This logo is close, but it's modern. It's from a recreational area near Riviere Rouge. Maybe in 2008 it looked a little different? Now imagine it on some coveralls:

1682977255421.png
https://www.6cantons.ca/

I'm leaning towards this. Whatever we're seeing was created to show on the monitor screen. It's not a VHS recording of some photos on a table. Something was created, possible in 2008, possibly with live action, that stills were then made from in a computer. Those stills were then given the Burns effect, which is the panning and zooming across the photos we see.

I don't see how a handheld VHS camcorder could have panned and zoomed on photos sitting on a table without ever showing the edge of the photo.

The original scene may have been much wider shots. That way the stills could have been made from zooming in on screen grabs. That would allow for the panning and zooming and would degrade the quality. The photos with the movement, the map, the drawings all of it was then edited together to create a ~1:20 video which was then played on a monitor while being recorded, further degrading the quality and adding to the "found footage" look.
 

Attachments

  • 1682972172450.png
    1682972172450.png
    570.4 KB · Views: 201
didnt verify is this info is true regarding location, from a scince source etc or museum...it's late. will look more tomorrow if you dont find it. (not that location info would explain why its part of the movie.

Article:
About forty kilometers south of the Uzbek city of Fergana, a rock image of a luminous man was also discovered, as well as eighteen kilometers west of the city of Navoi in the same Uzbekistan. At the same time, a shining figure from under Navoi sits on a throne, and the figures standing near him have something like protective masks on their faces. The kneeling person at the bottom of the picture does not have a mask - he is far enough away from the luminous figure and, obviously, does not need respiratory protection.


These drawings from Navoi (Uzbekistan) are of particular interest. All figures in the vicinity of the figure emitting rays have masks on their faces. The figure at the bottom left does not have a mask.
 
Also note, we never see the photos as a group laid out on a table. In fact we never see the edge of any of the photos, they always fill the screen.
0:33 has what looks like an edge on the lower right.

It appears that the digital camera is zoomed in on the CRT, and that the shots selected from the digital footage in the digital editing ptocess were chosen to not include edges that might've been visible in the VHS footage.

---

Screenshot_20230502-054726_Samsung Internet.jpg

I'm still a bit incredulous about the claimed toolchain and would welcome other opinions. The digital camera is zoomed in so much on the CRT in places that the scan lines appear quite wide, yet we never see the color mask of the CRT, not any chromatic aberration. Do the scan lines show barrel distortion from the CRT curvature?

The blinking in and out of the scan lines is another thing I can't really explain. If the camera is not synchronized with the CRT, then I'd expect a brightness "beat" to the picture that isn't there, as the digital camera would catch the CRT in varying phases of the scan process. If the camera is synced to the CRT, we are looking at a professional studio setup. (And the footage is begging the question why the final producer didn't simply select some digital stills without the annoying lines--they were clearly intending for this footage to look unprofessional.)

If the black lined are not CRT scan lines, but rather a moire pattern, they shouldn't look so uniform across the whole picture.

In short, I'm a bit incredulous about how the digital version of the video was allegedly produced. This is important because if the evidence supports my idea that the CRT-to-digital conversion didn't happen as claimed, the whole provenance of the video is called into question.
 
This is even less convincing than the Santilli "alien autopsy"
(Described here, Wikipedia, Alien autopsy, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alien_autopsy).

The background information of this video is below.
We can see, among other things, the impressive details of the eyes, the neck and especially the sternocleidomastoid muscle.
Content from External Source

The anatomical landmark comparisons are abysmal. The authors of this material don't appear to have consulted a decent doctor, pathologist, appropriately trained nurse or anatomist.

et trap.JPG
Content from External Source
Remember, the OP of this "report" (not tinkertailor) chose to draw attention to this as evidence of authenticity.
That is not an SCM (sternocleidomastoid muscle) or trapezius. If it's meant to be a muscle, it couldn't perform the role of an SCM or trapezius.

The trapezius and sternocleidomastoid muscles do not merge into the neck as they descend;
the trapezius flares out substantially to anchor on the scapula, clavicle and spine, describing a large trapezium (duh).
220px-Trapezius_animation_small2.gif
From Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trapezius, originally BodyParts3D/Anatomography, Life Science Integrated Database Center (Japan).

The sternocleidomastoid muscle doesn't disappear into the neck either.
SCM, trap.JPGCapture.JPG
(L. image from https://learnmuscles.com/glossary/sternocleidomastoid-2/, "Learn Muscles". Dr Joe Muscolino).

et throat structures.JPG
Content from External Source
Again, the OP chooses to use this as evidence of authenticity.
It is profoundly unscientific and irrational; supposedly similar structures in the neck are "evidence" this is a real creature, but the obviously dissimilar head, and other non-human anatomical features, are not evidence against.
Quite how such a spindly neck supports that head (especially in the absence of decent musculature, see above) is not mentioned; if there's a big brain in there one might expect proportionately more developed vasculature.
And a cervical collar.

The laryngeal prominence- the "Adam's apple", is generally more evident in many men than it is in most women, to the degree that it's often considered a secondary sexual characteristic.
It's shown here in an alien that lacks primary sexual characteristics.
Maybe the alien culture, or genetic engineers (or whatever) place great value on baritone/ bass voices.

Whatever the improbability of the "creature's" combination of an ineffectual neck with human (male) throat structures, does the presence of those structures make it more likely to be a real creature? Of course not, we've been modelling the human throat and neck beautifully for over 500 years
R.jpg
(Incidentally, note the trapezius and SCM muscles).

Now, the eyes:
et  contact lenses.JPG

Humans are unusual- we display more "white of the eye" (sclera) than most other animals.
There are several reasons: the visible area/ apparent shape of the eye; we have white sclera (not all animals have); and our iris is relatively small (compared, say, to most primates).
It's theorised that this might be so that we can see where others are looking- useful in social (including romantic) situations, and during activities where you don't want to make noise- e.g. on the hunt or in standoffs
(we've all seen films where hero number 1, held at gunpoint by the baddies, makes eye-to-eye contact with hero number 2 then pointedly looks at the light switch/ overlooked weapon/ teleport button, you get the idea).

Useful- but I think it unlikely that alien evolution would be so similar to our own that their eye structures and socio-biological selection would lead to eyes just like ours (and unlike most other creatures that we know of). And that those same aliens would be our first documented visitors.
As for contact lenses, and as a lens-wearer, it seems a bit remiss to remember to put them in but then forget your clothes before stepping out into the Canadian winter.

And for a fictitious alien, it's not even original:
et UFO contact lenses.JPG
-A screengrab from the opening titles of "UFO", a 1970 British TV series by Gerry and Sylvia Anderson and Reg Hill,, Century 21 Television Productions. In one episode, a captured alien is found to have contact lenses; this is used in the opening sequence.

Intrigued, we immediately asked him what did they do with the body? And he explained to us that "being late, at the end of the evening - and probably unaware of the importance of the thing - the witnesses did not dare to bring the body back with them and, on their return the next day, the latter had gone...
...At first glance, this is questionable behavior... Considering that this kind of monumental error is often observed among non-scientists, this was not going to surprise us too much.
Content from External Source
(Original emphasis removed, my emphasis added).

I mean, what the actual...? You find what you think is a body, clearly human-like, and you leave it because it's getting late?
It's not a sod*ing raccoon, is it?
You don't check for a pulse, call a doctor or the police? No, obviously you just take a few photos.
(Hypothermia is one of the possible causes of reversible cardiac arrest- in fairness, many people might not know this).

Are we to believe that the finder has no knowledge whatsoever of Close Encounters, The X-Files etc. and that they might not think that this could be a significant find? And even if totally lacking in common pop-culture references, they didn't think it was worth telling anyone else at the time? But it was worth returning the next day?

...And the reporter of these events thinks this behaviour is understandable, because the finders were "non-scientists"?

If the "finders" of the "body" are ever identified and they stick to their story, maybe they should be prosecuted for failure to report a death/ prevention of the lawful burial of a dead body or whatever the equivalent Canadian laws are. :D
(It'd make me laugh anyway!)

the E.B.E. does not seem to have any apparent sexual or genital organs - ... It thus remains only the "down to earth" hypothesis of a kind of mutant coming straight out of a genetic experiment in laboratory
Content from External Source
Actually, I don't agree that the only terrestrial explanation is that it's the result of a genetic experiment (i) because my (limited) knowledge of genetic engineering isn't solely based on Sci-Fi "B"-movies, and (ii) as other posters have pointed out, we've got plenty of examples of this type of "alien" available on E-bay, and shown in films and TV shows, and used in known hoaxes.

In short, it was an excellent work of investigation.
Content from External Source
My considered opinion on this is that my honest opinion is too rude to post.

But maybe I'm being too sceptical.
Considering the lack of genitals- and thinking of an image I posted earlier- I suppose there is a small possibility that alien genetic engineers have deliberately designed such a creature for "first contact" so it won't frighten North Americans.....

m.JPG

The educator was asked to resign from the Tallahassee Classical School in Florida last month after less than a year on the job.
Local media reported that Ms Carrasquilla did not know the reason she was asked to leave, but believed it was related to the complaints over the lesson....
One parent complained the Renaissance era material was pornographic and others said they wanted to know about the lesson before it was taught.
Content from External Source
From BBC News, World, US & Canada, Max Matza 29/04/23, https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-65433304
;)
 
Last edited:
0:33 has what looks like an edge on the lower right.

It appears that the digital camera is zoomed in on the CRT, and that the shots selected from the digital footage in the digital editing ptocess were chosen to not include edges that might've been visible in the VHS footage.

Yes, that might be a bit of photo edge at the lower right.

As for the zoomed in on the CTR, I'm not so sure. In the shot I selected one can see the camera operator reflected in the screen. This happens in another scene as well. While it's hard to tell, it sure looks like he is hand holding the digital camera as it records the screen. Now if we look at the last 3 shots, starting at about 0:50, the amount of movement and zoom is quite a bit. That is, he would have to be zoomed pretty tight to pan around on the CTR screen as much as he does. My thoughts are this, and I know you know how an old TV works but for those that don't:

1. As mentioned, we can see the recorder on a few occasions reflected in the screen. In this shot he pans quite a bit, yet he appears to be fairly still when we do see him. I don't see him moving enough to create the panning we're seeing assuming he's zoomed in that tight. It seems to me he's still while the scene on the screen moves:



2. If he is that zoomed in, what size screen is he recording that allows that amount of panning we see? If it's a standard desktop CTR like this:



From an article about choosing vintage monitors:

Most CRT computer monitors have a display size between 13 and 21 inches. If you follow my advice and stick with newer monitors, though, you’ll be comparing monitors between 15 and 21 inches.

I don’t recommend going below 17 inches unless you’re trying to replicate the experience of a late-80s or early-90s computer or have very limited space. Smaller CRT monitors feel tiny by modern standards. They also tend to support lower resolutions that are only ideal for enjoying older content.
Content from External Source
That's not a lot of screen to zoom in on. I would think, if he's zoomed in on something like this, he has to zoom in really tight to get the amount of panning we see. In that case, I would expect much more jiggling with that much zoom and being handheld. There is definitely some movement in the video, but I would expect more, especially in the last 3 shots. It also assumes the monitor can accept the video output of a VHS player, which was usually a composite video or RF:

The vast majority of CRT computer monitors you’ll encounter have a VGA video input. This is likely the only input on the monitor.

CRT monitors from the 1980s might use a different video input. Commodore 1701 and 1702 monitors, for example, can use a composite input (just as you’d find on a CRT television).
Content from External Source
https://www.pcworld.com/article/547...itor-the-ultimate-guide-for-retro-gamers.html

Now one could argue he is using something like an old "giant screen" TV like this:



The larger image would allow for a smother pan across the screen while zoomed in, but that brings up another problem.

3. The resolution of VHS is such that, a tight zoom on a vintage TV or monitor displaying VHs content should show more scan lines. Not the lines that appear on and off in the video in the white areas, but the actual scan lines should appear on all of the screen.

A TV or CTR operates using a magnetically controlled electron beam that draws each line top to bottom to form a picture. Most standard definition TVs used an "interlace" system, where it would change every other line then go back to the top and change every other line and so on.

This happens 60 times a second, so each line gets changed 30 times a second creating 30 complete pictures or frames per second. Because it's changing every other line, the other 30 frames are combinations of two frames. Half the lines are from the old frame and half are for the new frame, hence "interlaced".

If the screen were to change from black to white for example, the beam would draw every other line black then go back to the top and draw every other line black and repeat that creating a black screen. Then, the beam would start at the top and draw every other line white, creating zebra like screen that is an interlaced combination. Once it reaches the bottom, the beam returns to the top and again draws every other previously black line white, thus creating an all-white screen. This all happens so fast our eyes never perceive the interlaced frames. We just see the screen go from black to white and we never perceive the frames being drawn and changed with other content, we just see a moving TV program.




A bit technical, but here are specs for VHS (bold by me):

VHS tapes have 3.4 MHz of video bandwidth and 629 kHz of chroma bandwidth, which is lower than the 6 MHz in NTSC broadcasts, and the 5 MHz in Type C videotape. The luminance (black and white) portion of the video is recorded as a frequency modulated, with a down-converted "color under" chroma (color) signal amplitude modulated directly at the baseband.[38] Each helical track contains a single field ('even' or 'odd' field, equivalent to half a frame, see interlaced video) encoded as an analog raster scan, similar to analog TV broadcasts. The horizontal resolution is 240 lines per picture height, or about 320 lines across a scan line, and the vertical resolution (the number of scan lines) is the same as the respective analog TV standard (576 for PAL or 486 for NTSC; usually, somewhat fewer scan lines are actually visible due to overscan). In modern-day digital terminology, NTSC VHS is roughly equivalent to 333×480 pixels luma and 40×480 chroma resolutions (see also chroma subsampling, 333×480 pixels=159,840 pixels or 0.16 MP (1/6 of a megapixel)),[50] while PAL VHS offers the equivalent of about 335×576 pixels luma and 40×576 chroma (the vertical chroma resolution of PAL is not limited by any mechanism; SECAM is limited in resolution by a delay line mechanism).

JVC countered 1985's SuperBeta with VHS HQ, or High Quality.

The effect was to increase the apparent horizontal resolution of a VHS recording from 240 to 250 analog (equivalent to 333 pixels from left-to-right, in digital terminology).
Content from External Source
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VHS

The important number above is "486" scan lines for NTSC. The NTSC is the standard used in North America for broadcast TV and VHS systems.

All of that is to say, I would think a tight zoom on a screen displaying at 480 lines of resolution, those lines would be more visible.

The digital camera is zoomed in so much on the CRT in places that the scan lines appear quite wide, yet we never see the color mask of the CRT, not any chromatic aberration. Do the scan lines show barrel distortion from the CRT curvature?

The blinking in and out of the scan lines is another thing I can't really explain.

As I noted above, I would expect to see those scan lines all the time and over the entire image. Although, I did find this YouTube video and was able to get a screen grab of an old TV. The lines are visible and do seem to go with the curve of the screen:
1683051568881.png

From the same video, he puts on a VHS tape and plays it back. An old FedEx commercial:

1683051946230.png

One thing common on old VHS equipment is tracking errors like this:

1683052011244.png

Finally, I've screen grabbed just the TV playing the VHS tape. As can be seen in the grab above, the guy is standing several feet from the screen:

1683052145649.png

Definitely scan lines. Now imagine zooming in tight on this screen. Link below.

In short, I'm a bit incredulous about how the digital version of the video was allegedly produced. This is important because if the evidence supports my idea that the CRT-to-digital conversion didn't happen as claimed, the whole provenance of the video is called into question.

I'm with you. I'm not sure exactly what went on, but I think the panning and zooming is part of the content being played back, not a result of the handheld digital camera. If that's the case, then I think what is on the screen was created for that purpose. It was made to be filmed by the digital camera as if it were an old VHS playback. I don't know about 2008, but adding scan lines and tracking errors is easy to do now. If it was then, it could be that the digital camera is filming a modern for '08 screen that is playing back something that has had scan lines added to it. And of course, the silly title card is very suspect.

Unfortunately, I don't have an old VHS player or monitor to go experiment with.

try Yandex.com.. they arent the first images to pop up so you need to scroll down a bit. i dont know what to click on.

Thanks deirdre! I'll see what I can find.


Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fBdKoifGpKo
 
3. The resolution of VHS is such that, a tight zoom on a vintage TV or monitor displaying VHs content should show more scan lines. Not the lines that appear on and off in the video in the white areas, but the actual scan lines should appear on all of the screen.
What do you think causes these lines in the video, if they're not scanlines?

I can reproduce VHS tape -> PAL composite signal -> CRT -> tablet camera at home, maybe I'll try that tomorrow.
 
What do you think causes these lines in the video, if they're not scanlines?

I can reproduce VHS tape -> PAL composite signal -> CRT -> tablet camera at home, maybe I'll try that tomorrow.
Looking into it. The first thing I noticed is that as you mentioned in the previous post:

If the camera is not synchronized with the CRT, then I'd expect a brightness "beat" to the picture that isn't there, as the digital camera would catch the CRT in varying phases of the scan process.

There should be a blackish "crawl" that runs up the screen at set intervals as the digital camera is catching the CTR scan lines working down the screen. Here is a video of a guy filming some old CRT arcade games. In the screen grab one can see the "crawl" at the top of the left screen and at the bottom of the right screen:

1683076037265.png

It's a 9:00 video that could have been about 3:00. He uses a Canon digital camera with adjustable frame rate to minimize, but not eliminate the "crawl" or "beat" as you call it. I'll link it below.

But then I found this video with some guys fooling around with a never used "new old" TV from 1970 and they film the screen for at least a few minutes with no crawl/beat so I'm confused, but a bit more YouTubeing shows that if one has a camera with an adjustable frame rate it can be done.

1683078331681.png

As for the lines, here is description of how to create them from 2010:

1683078471285.png
https://code.tutsplus.com/tutorials...ortion-effect-using-rgb-shifting--active-3359

The whole tutorial on creating a VHS look from then involved a lot of coding. Nowadays it's just part of even free programs like DaVinci Resolve and is created with a few clicks:

How to Make VHS Effect in DaVinci Resolve Free Version?
Content from External Source


  • First change the aspect ratio of your footage or timeline to 4:3, for an old tv look.
  • Then under the “Color” page, implement the splitter-combiner node and change the node sizing value. (Don’t be bothered by the name, actually its a simple setting.)
  • Then under the “Edit” page, add vhs texture overlay, and
  • Finally add built-in digital glitch effect.
  • (Optional) Add VCR styled font text.
  • No need to worry, we’ll break this down step by step.
Content from External Source
https://beginnersapproach.com/davinci-resolve-vhs-effect/

I'm still getting the vibe that all the panning is happening ON the screen and not the result of the digital camera moving around. I would think that filming an old TV/CRT would produce the black crawl/beat line that moves up the screen and yet I can find a few examples where that does not happen. It's possible the scan lines were added to whatever the source material was to give it a VHS look, but VHS faking usually includes tracking lines and glitches.

We need a Metabunk lab set up with things like old film cameras, various vintage video recorders, computers and other things to recreate these "found" claims.

Videos:


Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_6V3qgnxVrc
 
But then I found this video with some guys fooling around with a never used "new old" TV from 1970 and they film the screen for at least a few minutes with no crawl/beat so I'm confused
I think it depends on the phosphorus that the CRT is coated with. Computer monitors used for gaming have "short" phosphorus that gets dark quickly so that quick-moving objects on the screen leave no "ghost tracks", but TV sets would have longer-lasting phosphorus because of the interlacing, to minimize flickering. I remembered that after I watched the TV footage in your previous post. So my expectation, that there would need to be a beat, is mistaken if the digital video was filmed off a TV set.
 
didnt verify is this info is true regarding location, from a scince source etc or museum...it's late. will look more tomorrow if you dont find it. (not that location info would explain why its part of the movie.

Article:
About forty kilometers south of the Uzbek city of Fergana, a rock image of a luminous man was also discovered, as well as eighteen kilometers west of the city of Navoi in the same Uzbekistan. At the same time, a shining figure from under Navoi sits on a throne, and the figures standing near him have something like protective masks on their faces. The kneeling person at the bottom of the picture does not have a mask - he is far enough away from the luminous figure and, obviously, does not need respiratory protection.


These drawings from Navoi (Uzbekistan) are of particular interest. All figures in the vicinity of the figure emitting rays have masks on their faces. The figure at the bottom left does not have a mask.

This quote you found goes with the picture. It's from Celestial Teachers by, of course, Eric von Daniken, if not the Godfather of the Ancient Alien theory, certainly it's biggest promoter. It was a little hard to find, one had to scroll all the way to the top of the page out what one was reading.



I supposed the Ancient Alien connection was why it appears in one of the 2 videos. However, I can't seem to find the book Celestial Teachers anywhere. The quote and reference to the book is from a wiki Read page that is in Russian, which figures as Ynadex is a Russian app, that then gets translated back to English. So, either:

1. Celestial Teachers is a book by von Daniken that never got published in English but was published in Russian.
2. Celestial Teachers is a title that gets mixed up in translation. It was published with an English title, or more likely a German title, that was translated into something in Russian that when translated back to English ends up Celestial Teachers.

I'll keep looking into the drawing, it's interesting, but I can't find it outside of a few Esoteric type sites and von Daniken's mystery book. If it's from near Navoi in Uzbekistan, I should be able to find it. Another rabbit hole!

So my expectation, that there would need to be a beat, is mistaken if the digital video was filmed off a TV set.

Maybe so. I was thinking like you were, but I found numerous examples on YouTube of people obsessed with old TVs filming them with no black crawl or beat.
 
If it's from near Navoi in Uzbekistan, I should be able to find it.

Sarmishsay petroglyphs?

Sarmishsay (also known as Sarmish Gorge) is located in the Karatau Mountain Range in the Nurata District of Navoiy Region of Uzbekistan. The gorge contains archeological remains dating back as far as the Stone Age, including two petroglyph sites with a total of 10,000 ancient rock carvings. According to UNESCO, it is the largest and most important rock art monument in Uzbekistan
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarmishsay


Petroglyphs are often misinterpreted, ie. this one:

It comes from the Val Camonica petroglyphs (the largest rock art field in the world) and has been called "the astronauts", while it's thought to represent a ritual fight between two warriors with decorated helmets (called 'crested helmets' by archaeologists) and wielding a sword and a small shield (a kind of buckler, seen from the side).
 
I don't know if this helps at all, but it uses the largest "picture element", a Souvenir Press edition of "Chariots".
I read it (and other Von Danikens) as a kid; for the life of me I can't remember if these pictures were included in the photograph/ illustration sections of the book or not.
I guess the use of this image on the cover might be reason to think it was used within the book.

R.jpg
 
I'll keep looking into the drawing, it's interesting, but I can't find it outside of a few Esoteric type sites and von Daniken's mystery book. If it's from near Navoi in Uzbekistan, I should be able to find it.
i wasnt able to find it from real sources either. it was on one of Danikens early book covers for a while

1970 présence d'extraterrestres
1683151377866.png
1683152031181.png




However, I can't seem to find the book Celestial Teachers anywhere
heres the full book to read online, says 1993
https://biblioteka-online.info/book/nebesnye-uchitelya/?utm_referrer=https://www.google.com/

the full quote we see on those sites online is on page 10 .
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot 2023-05-02 000258.png
    Screenshot 2023-05-02 000258.png
    106.2 KB · Views: 66
  • Screenshot 2023-05-01 225102.png
    Screenshot 2023-05-01 225102.png
    332.1 KB · Views: 67
heres the full book to read online, says 1993

You're having better luck than I am, although this is again in Russian. The quote you had in post #13 was also from a full online version of the book, in Russian. I can't seem to find an English or German version of it as an actual book. As I mentioned earlier, maybe the title got hopelessly mangled from German to English to Russian and back to English. I put a list I found of von Daniken's books up to 1996 down below for anyone interested.

In the grand scheme of things, this is a laughably fake video. But exactly WHAT it is has become a bit intriguing. How exactly was it made? The way it was claimed? What was the point? Occam's razor says it's just a bad alien video, possible based on something like a student film, that was posted to YouTube 15 years ago. But then he posts the video again several years later with a second or so of the petroglyph, that was used a lot by von Daniken but seems impossible to find from any legit source.

It reminds me a bit of a book by Willam Gibson, Pattern Recognition. From 2003, the basic plot is about a series of short video clips that show up on the internet and go viral, in a time when going viral was a new thing. Everybody, including the protagonist, is trying to figure out what the videos "mean". What little clues are imbedded in the different videos? IIRC, in the end it's just a big advertising campaign, which is why the protagonist was hired by an Ad agency to investigate.



1996 - The Eyes of the Sphinx the Newest Evidence of Extraterrestial Contact in Ancient Egypt (Paperback)


1992 - Kosmiczne Miasta W Epoce Kamiennej Polish Edition (Paperback)

1991 - Beweise [According to the Evidence - German Edition] (Other)

1990 - Chariots of the Gods (Paperback)Paperback, Hardcover

1990 - Aussaat Und Kosmos Spuren Und Plane Ausserirdischer Intelligenzen [The Gold of the Gods - German Edition] (Paperback)Hardcover

1989 - Erich Von Daniken in Search of the Gods (Hardcover)

1987 - El Oro De Los Dioses [The Gold of the Gods - Spanish Edition] (Paperback)

1986 - Gods and Their Grand Design (Paperback)

1984 - The Gods and Their Grand Design the Eighth Wonder of the World (Hardcover)

1984 - Chariots of the Gods Unsolved Mysteries From the Past (Paperback)

1984 - Pathways to the Gods (Paperback)

1984 - The Gods and Their Grand Design Eighth Wonder of the World (Paperback)

1984 - Der Tag an Dem Die Gotter Kamen 11 August 3114 V Chr [German Edition] (Hardcover)

1983 - Chariot of the Gods (Paperback)Paperback, Hardcover

1983 - The Stones of Kiribati Pathways to the Gods (Paperback)Hardcover

1982 - Stones of Kiribati Pathways to the Gods (Hardcover)Paperback

1982 - Pathways to the Gods the Stones of Kiribati (Hardcover)

1980 - Revolt of the Titans [Magnet books] (Paperback)

1979 - Atlantis Men and Monsters (Paperback)

1979 - Gods From Outer Space the War of the Chariots [Magnet Books] (Paperback)

1978 - Descent in the Andes (Paperback)

1978 - Von Daniken's Proof Further Astonishing Evidence of Man's Extraterrestrial Origins (Paperback)

1978 - The Gods From Outer Space (Paperback)Paperback, Hardcover

1976 - Miracles of the Gods (Paperback)Paperback, Hardcover

1976 - Miracles of the Gods a New Look at the Supernatural (Hardcover)

1975 - Regreso a Las Estrellas (Hardcover)

1975 - Miracles of the Gods a Hard Look at the Supernatural (Hardcover)Paperback

1974 - The Gold of the Gods (Paperback)Paperback, Hardcover

1974 - In Search of Ancient Gods My Pictorial Evidence of the Impossible (Other)

1974 - The Gold of the Gods (Paperback)Paperback, Hardcover

1973 - Gods From Outer Space (Paperback)Paperback, Hardcover

1973 - Tulimmeko Tahtien Takaa [The Gold of the Gods - Finnish Edition] (Hardcover)

1972 - Return to the Stars (Paperback)Hardcover
 
Maybe so. I was thinking like you were, but I found numerous examples on YouTube of people obsessed with old TVs filming them with no black crawl or beat.
The question remains, what are the black lines, and why do they have a beat?
Are we seeing a beat on the interlacing?
 
The question remains, what are the black lines, and why do they have a beat?
Are we seeing a beat on the interlacing?
If the darker areas move, or beat, then that means the capture frequency is different from the display frequency. Frequency of beating = difference between those two frequencies.
If the darker areas are static, then that means the capture frequency is the same as the display frequency, but there's no genlock to synchronise frames.

The striping in the above image does look like the camera's resolving the interlacing of the source, but just from one still I can't be sure.
 
The striping in the above image does look like the camera's resolving the interlacing of the source, but just from one still I can't be sure.
Yes, you really need to watch the video because there's a temporal aspect to it.

If that's the interlacing, then we do see individual scan lines, and that raises the question of the color mask.

Technical notes:
To get a 60 Hz flicker-free image from a 30Hz frame rate, analog TV transmits half a picture at a time, by first sending all odd-numbered lines, and then sending the even numbered lines that sit between them: basically, these are 2 striped pictures, and the second pictures sits in the empty spaces of the first. This means the TV set scans the CRT twice for each picture. (See Dave's post above on how that scan works.) Now if the camera sees both half-pictures when they're relatively "fresh", the picture looks whole; but if it catches one of the half-pictures as it is "expired" and about to be re-scanned, that might show up as dark stripes. (In digital video, 1080i is interlaced and 1080p is not.)

A black-and-white CRT just shoots an electron beam at the front of the tube, where the phosphorus makes it emit light (and x-rays). A color TV needs different color phosphorus (red, green, blue) to create a color picture, so these 3 different types of phosphorus are dotted about the front of the tube. For analog circuitry to find these dots, 3 electron guns are employed, aiming at a metal sheet with holes (the mask) such that each gun can only hit the phosphorus of its own color. This dot pattern is visible on every closeup of a color CRT, and its size is similar in size to the scanlines. (Some CRTs use thin vertical stripes instead of dots.)
 
Found something interesting. The channel banner for the uploader of the video is one of the alien photos but at a much higher resolution. I've overlayed it on a screengrab of the video. It looks like a still from a CRT television, perhaps taken from the VHS video. Screenshot 2023-06-13 at 8.05.47 PM.pngLayer 2.jpg

I'm drawing similarities to a video in the users "favorite Videos" playlist taken in 1993 by an Italian. That video was uploaded in 2006 and may have inspired a copycat photoshoot. I live here in Quebec and the winters can get very boring haha.
 
I asked my partner if he had any recollection of this event in media and he led me to a Québécois TV show from the early 1980s to late 1990s called Alter Ego. It's incredibly hard to find portions of it online considering it was fringe French media. Found a snapshot from one of the episodes that's a close match to the Rivière Rouge video. Screenshot 2023-06-14 at 7.42.39 AM.pngMy current hypothesis is that one of the guest speakers had brought the Rivière Rouge photos on the show and they played them slideshow style along with the other photos we saw.

According to the show's host (who uploaded 3 of the episodes), they taped over 500 episodes with many different guest speakers. This is most likely an excerpt from a tv show, not a student film.

I'm specifically looking for the interview with Claude MacDuff who was mentioned in the original Rivière Rouge video description. He was apparently on the show according to IMDB.
 
Back
Top