Debunked: Sandy Hook: Anderson Cooper Green Screen Disappearing Nose with Pozner

[Mick]

In a video of Anderson Cooper interviewing Veronique Pozner, the mother of one of the Sandy Hook victims, there's a glitch where when Cooper moves his head, his nose seems to blur out for a frame or two.





The reason for this is motion compensation video compression. Video is compressed by a variety of methods so it can be either transmitted or played back at low bandwidths. I've not seen a higher resolution version of this video, so I assume the compression is in the transmission from the church back to the studio. Remote broadcasts now quite commonly use a technology called "bonded cellular", which transmits video over the cell phone network using (essentially) multiple digital cell-phone connections instead of a traditional satellite or microwave ENG transmission. This gives great ease of use, and the reliability of redundant channels. But in places that don't have the best cell phone coverage, the bandwidth can be reduced, which can lead to patchy video like this.

The motion compensation method of compressing video is to detect which parts of the frame have not changed, and which parts have simply moved, and then only transmit the changed parts, or the new positions of the unchanged parts. See:

http://www.axis.com/products/video/a...ompression.htm


The more video is compressed, the more blocks of the image are transmitted marked "unchanged". In this video Cooper leans forward, and his nose enters a block that's marked as "unchanged". It takes a few frames before the video compression detects this, and marks it as "changed", and then start to transmit the block. In the image above, it would be like the running man running into the house. Until the compression software detected this it would look like he went behind the house for a fraction of a second.

So this "disappearing nose" is entirely consistent with a motion compensation artifact. But the suggestion has been raised that it's a "green screen" or "blue screen" artifact. Green Screen is a technique where actors are filmed in front of a green (or sometimes blue) screen, and then the color green is replaced with some background. Performers have to be careful to not wear clothing that is the same color as the green screen, or it will appear invisible. This crops up with occasionally with local TV weather reports:



So could this be what is going on with Cooper? No. And for the simple reason that his nose is not bright green, nor is it bright blue. His nose is a very light pink, skin colored. Hence it is IMPOSSIBLE to get this kind of artifact on a green screen. If his nose were being keyed out, then it would keep being out, and large portions of his head, which are the same color would also have vanished.

Another clear difference between this and a green screen artifact is that the nose vanishes on a clear vertical boundary - a boundary which is also matched at his hairline. Green screen would be an irregular boundary that would conform to the outline of his face, and scintillate (shimmer/sparkle). You can see this vertical boundary if you zoom in and enhance the contrast.


Also note that, because of this compression artifact, he seems to leave a bit of his nose and his hair to the left of the line when he leans back. On top of everything else, this is simply impossible with green screen.

And here's another nose example from a Hurricane Sandy compilation, at 1:26. This is obviously not a green screen, as the scuba diver just got out of the water in the distance.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bUX0yliXOR8


The people who promote this hoax also seem convinced that CNN is of a habit of faking news broadcast. As "evidence" of this they point to a 1991 broadcast (22 years ago, you'd think they could find something newer) that they claim was shot in a studio. This is despite the fact that the background matches exactly the hotel that they were staying at, in Saudi Arabi.






See the full debunking of the "faked" Jaco CNN reports here:
http://metabunk.org/threads/1140-Deb...lf-War-Reports


This particular myth is also seems to be why conspiracy theorists are so fond of saying "blue screen", despite green screen being by far the most common type of chroma-keying used in studios. It's just because the hotel has a blue exterior.

[jvnk08]

Thanks for writing this. I had a strong hunch it was a video encoding/compression issue but had no idea where to start researching how to prove it. It's funny that these folks don't pick up on other video encoding glitches out there and scream "FAKE!", only when Anderson Cooper is supposedly perpetrating a hoax do they notice part of his nose is missing for a frame or two.

I found this research paper on Motion Compensation which has some good examples of the errors it produces:

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science...23596511001378


Fig. 5. Foreman sequence. Frames 62 (A) and 63 (B): the man suddenly opens his mouth. Predictions of frame 63 using BM (C), and using TD (D). Only TD correctly handles the movement: the mouth and the bottom of the hat are very noisy with BM.



Fig. 12. Tennis sequence. Top: Frames 97 and 98 (the point of view of the camera changes). Bottom: Predictions of frame 98 using Theora codecs with BM based motion compensation (left) and with TD based motion compensation (right)..


What do they think chromakeying would mean here anyways? What does it prove in regards to the supposed hoax...? To me all this proves is that they'll latch on to the slightest thing for evidence. Even if it were chromakeyed, it is fallacious logic to think that since chromakeying implies faked scene elements then chromakeying in a post-incident interview is evidence that the entire incident was faked...

[Mick]

The types of artifact are also commonly used to "prove" that some people are shapeshifting lizards. Really

[Cairenn]

I play one of the on line MMP games and we use Skype rooms a lot. One member was telling us that he gets to watch porn all day. He is watching for compression and other issues. So no enjoyment from it

[Mick]

Alex Jones is promoting this hoax/misunderstanding:

http://www.disclose.tv/action/viewvi.../?aid=Rdiaz978

Content from external source:

Alex Jones:

"He's supposedly there in Sandy Hook in front of the Memorial, and his whole forehead and nose blurs out. I've been working with blue screen, again, for 17 years, I know what it looks like. It's clearly blue screen. CLEARLY. And I though, that's got to be somebodies doctored youtube, there's no way... We went to CNN, found a link where the whole interview had been posted, It's been removed. [... found it in "hi-def" on archive.org]"

If he did have 17 years of experience of blue screen (chroma keying), then he would be able to tell this is not that. So either way he's lying.

[Unregistered]

Was reading this and thinking you were making a pretty legit case, until I saw the cnn saudi picture you posted was a pic AFTER the background image was added . At that point i realized [you were wrong]. I seem to remember CNN fessing up about that fake feed.

passing that anomaly off as being due to video compression is [incorrect]. It was produced for CNN broadcast not by some kid to upload on youtube. That sort of failure in image quality NEVER happens, If it did, there would be thousands of hours of it from which to select and present examples, but predictably you opted to post crappy little diagrams that describe the THEORY of compression anomalies. [...]

[Mick]

[QUOTE=Unregistered;26713]Was reading this and thinking you were making a pretty legit case, until I saw the cnn saudi picture you posted was a pic AFTER the background image was added . At that point i realized [you were wrong]. I seem to remember CNN fessing up about that fake feed. [quote]

I'm afraid that has bee FULLY debunked, with lots of photos, video, and testimony, see:

http://metabunk.org/threads/1140-Deb...lf-War-Reports

passing that anomaly off as being due to video compression is [incorrect]. It was produced for CNN broadcast not by some kid to upload on youtube. That sort of failure in image quality NEVER happens, If it did, there would be thousands of hours of it from which to select and present examples, but predictably you opted to post crappy little diagrams that describe the THEORY of compression anomalies. [...]

As I explained, it's most probably due to the new transmission technology they use, which uses the cell phone network, and hence the compression level varies to adapt to available bandwidth. But you are correct it would be helpful to have some more examples. There are quite a few in post #3 above, but those seem mostly related to the video being compressed later for upload, not transmission.

These glitches are most likely going to come from live field broadcasts, and not taped reports or studio broadcasts (as the tape does not suffer from bandwidth issues), it would also be less likely to happen if they are using satellite or microwave links for the studio connection, although it certainly could - depending on weather.

Here's one example:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n5IuHxz3kd4

At 1:09, Cuomo moves his hand to the left of the screen, the tip of his thumb vanishes behind a vertical line in much the same way that Cooper's nose did.



later at 1:15, which a much lower quality connection, the live reporter seems to leave a trail of red behind him as he moves to the right, there also seems to be large chunks missing from his arm on the left (his right arm).



And here's a nose example from a Hurricane Sandy compilation, at 1:26
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bUX0yliXOR8

[angryjock]

http://www.youtube.com/user/lovekahuna?feature=watch

This guy's videos are so outlandish that I think he actually may be a plant. So crazy that he might be part of a counter conspiracy. I'm kidding, of course. I think this nut actually believes the crap in his videos. They claim that EVERY live tv interview at Sandy Hook has been faked using projections or something. What would the point be? My personal favs are the crazy 'breath' video and the one about Victoria Soto's staff ID (which looks exactly like staff ID's I've seen in schools for years). The best part of the videos is there's no explanation in them at all. Just the title and the comment section to help you figure them out. ALso, each one is chopped up to pieces has slow motion, jump cuts and repeated shots making them impossible to analyze.

[Mick]

The green screen theory seems to be getting a small measure of popularity. It's totally nonsensical, of course. Take the breath one you mentioned. There's the suggestion that a mailbox vanishes.



They seem to be sat across the road for the fire station, on the lawn of 15 Riverside Road. There's the mailbox:



It's in one shot but not the other, because the shots are from very different angle. It hidden behind the male presenter in the shot where it is not visible.






The rest are not worth debunking. He's either trolling, or there's something a little unusual about his brain.

[Unregistered]

Don't you have any examples of a disappearing nose compression glitch that aren't from CNN?

I'm really not interested in the disappearing mailbox, just the nose or other bodily appendage.

It must happen day in and day out, right? I've not seen it before. Wouldn't live sports or awards events be full of this kind of stuff?

[Mick]

Don't you have any examples of a disappearing nose compression glitch that aren't from CNN?

I'm really not interested in the disappearing mailbox, just the nose or other bodily appendage.

It must happen day in and day out, right? I've not seen it before. Wouldn't live sports or awards events be full of this kind of stuff?

No, because those types of event have multiple high bandwidth connections back to the broadcast studio.

These kind of glitches happen with individual field crews who have a less-than-perfect digital connection back to the studio, and in particular now they are going to happen when crews use bonded cellular. Quite possibly my examples are from CNN, because CNN makes more use of bonded cellular than other stations. But I imagine it could be found on other stations as well, just look at live broadcasts, especially from the poorer local stations.

[jvnk08]

Unregistered, there's also the fact that these things aren't readily apparent unless you're looking for them. The nose stands out because, well, you're looking at his face.

[Unregistered]

Thanks so much for your answers!

Now, are you sure that CNN uses bonded cellular? Or, is that what your best guess is? I thought CNN used the best technology available? Especially with a big story like Sandy Hook, and, in this case, where Anderson Cooper made the trip to to report from Newtown, it doesn't make sense that they would then skimp by using low bandwith. Why would they do that? Their sponsors pay good money and CNN prides itself on the best possible coverage.

Does it make sense to you that CNN would ever use bonded cellular? It seems to me that they would keep it consistent with high bandwith. You seriously think they would cut corners for AC 360?

[Unregistered]

Was giving this link by someone who with me trying to debunk these claims. Saw that the first poster says he can't find a higher video quality of this interview, another one person in our group had linked us to the original CNN video which seems to be higher quality. In this CNN video his noise is still clearly visible. http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/2012/12/2...re/?hpt=ac_mid
Thanks for debunking these claims.

[Mick]

Thanks so much for your answers!

Now, are you sure that CNN uses bonded cellular? Or, is that what your best guess is? I thought CNN used the best technology available? Especially with a big story like Sandy Hook, and, in this case, where Anderson Cooper made the trip to to report from Newtown, it doesn't make sense that they would then skimp by using low bandwith. Why would they do that? Their sponsors pay good money and CNN prides itself on the best possible coverage.

Does it make sense to you that CNN would ever use bonded cellular? It seems to me that they would keep it consistent with high bandwith. You seriously think they would cut corners for AC 360?

Yes, see:

http://www.tvtechnology.com/prntarti...ticleid=216452

Content from external source:

NEW YORK—Backpack mounted cellular live shot systems have become one of the workhorses of television news, with the buildout of 4G smartphone data service in major population centers allowing journalists to go live without the bulk, set-up time, need for line-of-sight and other limitations of microwave and satellite gear. Bonded cellular backpacks gang multiple cellular data connections into a bandwidth path sufficient to carry high-quality television video back to the news studio.Hurricane Sandy proved to be a major test of the bonded cellular technology, and according to a group of electronic journalists covering the storm, the gear got a more than passing grade.
“I would say it worked like I expected it to, like it should, and I was very happy about that,” said CNN New York bureau chief Darius Walker. “What really helped with the backpacks is redundancy, to have the cards of different mobile carriers… ‘varietal redundancy’ is what I call it, a good variety of possible signals… power may be down for this company, a tower may be up for another company, so that helped out a lot.”

WHAT DIFFERENCE A DECADE MAKES

He noted that CNN deployed more than just the bonded cellular systems in its Sandy coverage. “It was interesting in this situation where we used almost all of the tools available. You name it: we were streaming material, we were FTP-ing material, we would bring it up on satellite, backpacks, flyaways, microwave; we used it all. It was tough, but [this panoply of technology] made it more possible than it would have if this had happened 10 years ago.”
Each live shot technology had its plusses and minuses, according to Walker. “We had some microwave issues because of the wind blowing down some microwave towers here in the city,” he said. The dishes for both satellite trucks and fly-away satellite transmission gear had to be protected from wind gusts during the height of the storm. And then “are we in position to see a certain satellite because generally, in a city, certain buildings will block it. That’s why you have all these different types of technology, so that if one doesn’t work the other does, when one comes up the other might go down.”

Now I do NOT know for sure that AC 360 was using bonded cellular for this particular shot, however CNN was a pioneer in the technology, and noted in the following story, which also notes that some stations are actull transitiong over to it as their sole field nesgatering tool (here it's referred to as IP Newsgathering - same thing)

http://broadcastengineering.com/eng/...stature-part-i

Content from external source:

Since IP newsgathering made its initial splash when CNN pioneered the technology for its coverage of the Israel-Hezbollah conflict in 2006, it has steadily gained momentum not just as a go-anywhere way to contribute live and edited pieces from war zones, but also as a reliable path for local stations to contribute stories from the field.
...
However, while not the dominant view, a few stations are beginning to make IP newsgathering their primary, and in at least one case, only means of field contribution. Morris Network, which owns stations in Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi, North Carolina and Tennessee, is completely phasing out both ENG and SNG live units in favor of IP newsgathering

All that said, it's also possible that a traditional ENG (Microwave) or SNG (Satellite) truck was used, and the compression artifact was just an ordinary glitch between van and studio. You see glitches even when just watching cable TV sometimes.

[Unregistered]

Thank you so much. I appreciate the speedy response and all the details.

[mark]

I believe there are way too many issues re SH to believe it is what we are told it is,
but this definitely has me leaning toward it not being green screen, after all, so I
posted it on social media where I had posted the screen screen allegations.

Thank you.

Thing is, I don't have enough tech understanding to be certain that it couldn't
be green screen, and I don't trust someone with such an anti-conspiracy bias
to be intellectually honest. (Sorry, I don't mean to offend)

From what I gleaned from your site, you have no questions about 911 being anything other
than what the media told us it was?

I don't know if you believe yourself or are fronting, but anyone with an open mind
who has evidently heard the conspiracy arguments, imo has to come out of it, at least
thinking that the jury is out... AT LEAST.

I'm guessing I could go down a list and you'd be equally unequivocal about the lack
of nefarious activity and conspiracy on any number of topics. I definitely haven't spent
much time on your site, so I could be wrong about you...

But let me ask you this. Do you believe there is nefarious activity and conspiracies in the medical business,
including the AMA and big pharma?

[Mick]

Mark, there is obviously illegal activity and conspiracies in the world. But each allegation needs to be judged on the evidence, not just on suspicion.

[Unregistered]

What's your opinion on the obvious use of a background screen at the fire department when some of the families were first learning of their children's death. It conveniently is of the two families were seeing the most. The Pozner woman showing the cell phone picture as if she'd have to really do that. Are they really going to inform them outside in front of the press? Really? Anyway the backgrounds fake or done before the shooting so let me hear this logical answer.

[jvnk08]

What's your opinion on the obvious use of a background screen at the fire department when some of the families were first learning of their children's death. It conveniently is of the two families were seeing the most. The Pozner woman showing the cell phone picture as if she'd have to really do that. Are they really going to inform them outside in front of the press? Really? Anyway the backgrounds fake or done before the shooting so let me hear this logical answer.

Care to show where you think background screens are being used?


I'm curious, why do you consider a telephoto shot to be "out in front of the press"?

[AluminumTheory]

A little late with this but...




And this is done using a freeware image editor