Bush's 'One Fingered Victory Salute'

I never have. Seriously. I also almost never swear. It's how I was raised. Plus I've never felt the need to be cool like all the other kids. Funny, I can type swear words but not say them, even typing them feels weird to me.

 

It is an altered image!

First: The unatural length of the middle finger in relation to the rest of the hand.

Second: Who has two nail beds on the same finger...look closely at the tip of the finger.

Third: the blur and color cast between the wrist and hand against his suit. Notice that the same camera and lighting clearly defined the edges and color cast between the suit, and the curtain behind that are the same color. If there was going to be a blur or rough edges that is where it would be.

I'm not saying he wouldn't flip someone off. but I believe this photo and clip are altered.

 

If you actually watched the clip, which I doubt you did, it would be obvious to you that this type of edit would be VERY difficult to pull off.


http://static.vidvote.com/movies/bushuncensored.mov

Especially him giggling about it after he gives the camera the finger...
Pause it, zoom on it, play it again and again. LOL

 

LOLOLOL...it would take about 20 seconds in any cheap ass photo editing program...there is a thing known as freeze frame, or frame capture which ever you prefer. Have you seen any type of movie with "Special Effects"?
Now hard do you think it would really be to turn a fist in to a finger.

And how do you explain the two finger tips

 

There are not two finger tips. You are seeing his last knuckle and assuming it's a fingernail. I have worked with image and video editing software since it first became available and worked for a digital design and modeling team in Denver for three years. If you examine this footage carefully you will see no cut edges, no blur marks, and no color differentiation (even as his hand blurs past his suit). If you can make this type of film you nned to be head animator at Pixar.

 

I know alittle about imaging myself...look at your finger...is your first knuckle arched and the same color as the tip of your finger?

 

Yes, the pic they posted appears to have a white glare near where the last knuckle should be. All I can say is 'studio lighting.' Yes, I can hold my finger in such a way that a glare appears on my top knuckle.


Watch the video frame by frame and watch the movement of his shoulder, the creases in his suit, the moving of his lapel. Now explain why he smirks and then gigles like a school boy for ten seconds after his 'prank'.

 

In fact you can watch the glare (which you see as a fingernail) appear and disappear and appear again as he moves the figer across his face.

 

Here' a little sig stuffer for you guys

 

notice the lighting is prominent over his right shoulder, there is no evidence of "direct" light from the front that would cause that kind of glare on the finger, also if you look closely at the video, there is no movement what so ever with the actual hand, it is in the exact same position from the time it comes itno camera veiw throughout. There is no variation in the distances between fingers, none in the positioning of the actual hand, and no deviation in angles, from the hand and the rest of the arm.
When you flip someone off do you make the hand gesture in your lap and then raise your arm, without any movement what so ever from your wrist up?

As far as the shoulder and suit creases...I am not saying he didn't raise his arm...I just don't believe that is his finger

 

DF, I took the video apart frame by frame to make the animation in the sig. If you look at the frames, his fingers move quite a bit, as he raises his hand you can see the finger unfolding, and the thumb is moving around in every frame.

That, along with the comment about the one fingered victory salute make it pretty clear that the video is real.

 

Oh yeah monkey.... you rule. I wanted ot do that, but laziness prevented it!

 

If you took the video apart frame by frame to make the sig than did you place the exact same hand position in each layer? The raising finger and thumb would be more noticable, because you would be taking away from the standard 32 frame/sec, which would make the raising of the finger be more jerky instead of a solid image.

Actually I could care less but, but it still looks like a fake to me....lol
c ya

 

I'm sure it was faked :rollseyes: the hand was fake, the shadow was fake, the comments about the one fingered salute and the childish laugh were fake too. :rollseyes:

I have no Idea what you're talking about. I used the same framerate as the original video, which is far less than 32 frames/second, it is actually 10. And for chrissake what the hell is a solid image and how does it prove anything?

 

easy killer don't need to be getting an attitude.

Have you ever seen a survalience clip, like from a store robbery or anything?
The majority of those are recorded at 8 frames/sec that is why it looks like they are here....than here....than here.
the more frames per second the smoother the motion.
If you take a piece frame by frame, then each frame will have a different part of the movement. much like layer still images for motion(animation)
At 32 frames per second motion is fluid and sublties are unnoticed until examined frame by frame(or at a much slower speed)

I just think it's insane for everyone to see that and automatically say it is real no question about it.
in todays techno imaging craze...it is very possible to create that clip, with any sounds you want. AND YOU DON"T HAVE TO BE THE PRES OF PIXAR TO DO IT. lol

 

good lord...ok, we get the idea. You think it is fake...sheesh...

 

LOL...sorry was just in an honery mood yesterday...
Like I said I could care less if it was or not...
Does anyone remember the slip up that Kerry had while on air, something about calling someone a name or something?

I actually love it when politicians slip up like that...lets people know that they are regular people just like the rest of us.