Did Obama Shoot His Weekly Address in Front of a Green Screen?
If he did, it only matters because he claims that he’s on site in Detroit. Since he said that, if he’s not, then the president lies in the opening sentence or two of what should be an apolitical address. It’s not a campaign speech, but a president addressing the people.
That said, here’s the video, followed by my opinion of whether it’s fake or not.
I’ve been doing green screen video effects for about 15 years, starting at NASA and then for Hot Air. So I’ve done hundreds of productions using green screen technology, in a variety of settings and using a variety of gear. And in my opinion, the president’s video was shot using a green screen.
There are a couple of giveaways. One is the lack of real depth of field in the shot. The background looks flat and unreal, kind of lifeless — like a photograph. No light flickers, no movement at all. If he was really in the factory, a competent lighting director would probably light him and it to show some separation and depth, by having the factory be noticeably darker than the foreground subject. There are also digital artifacts around his shoulders and head, the kind of artifacts one tends to see in even the best green screens. You can see them in the close-ups, mainly around the left side of his head. It looks like they used virtual set tech to get the long shots and close-ups to look believable, but it’s pretty much a fail.
This wouldn’t be a big deal, except that he says “I’m here in Detroit visiting workers at a GM plant.” There are no workers in the shot, and he’s not at a factory. So like his jobs bill that he’s selling in the video, the video itself is a fraud.
How fitting, that a friend of a Weatherman would resort to the schtick of weather men.
You don’t have to be a weatherman to know how much Obama blows.
+100! And right out of the gate!
Does this mean that he’s Mr. Green Screens and Captain Kangaroo Court all rolled into one?
It certainly IS odd that there is no workers, no flying sparks, no background sounds whatsoever, the kind of optics politicians usually love when actually visiting a factory. And while I’m no expert on videography or filming in front of a green screen there is something off about the deptch between Obama and the half assembled car behind him.
If your silly conspiracy theory is to be believed, then all the Detroit network affiliate television stations are in on the plot. They all showed video of President Obama visiting that General Motors plant.
Maybe you people should consider not drinking so much of the Koch brothers’ tea, it is making y’all a bit delusional.
Well, to be fair, Obama’s background seems flat and unreal, and he doesn’t have much depth — of field or anything else.
By the way, Charlie, I wonder where our favorite Dr. Troll, the Expert in Everythingology is to tell us how this can’t possibly be a green-screen because Eisenhower did everything better?
If he did, it’s just par for the course for this gang of clowns.
Assuming that lights were focused on President Obama, I would have expected to see at least some shadows on the cars and other things in the background. I saw none.
What seems odd is the closeup – why would the background be out of focus, unless it was simply the resolution limit of the still photo? Maybe a photography expert can comment on that.
I agree – I say “green screen.” Isn’t there a weird little edge effect around his white shirt and the background, in the close-up part. Also, during the close-up part, aren’t the objects in the left rear background not of the correct focus given where he is sitting relative to them? It looks like a complete still image in the back. Wow!
– is on the road campaigning again; does he ever do any work?
Remember when Bush was excoriated over a fake turkey that turned out to be real? Why would a fake factory be any less newsworthy?
This is completely different. Here, the turkey’s apparently alive and talking.
It’s green screen. I have new moviemaker software with green screen that I have to learn. I’m going to put him back in Bill Ayres’ living room where he started his political career and never really left.
I have a good eye and a fair amount of photo and video experience, yet I cannot claim I could detect any difference between a live shot of a union shop, and a still image.
Just sayin’.
Somewhat OT but has anyone else noticed a striking resemblance between Big-O and the African actor N!xau, star of “The Gods Must Be Crazy”? I think the likeness is pretty uncanny.
Readers and writer’s of pajamasmedia will not like this, but there is no story here. Here is proof, but keep up your silly obssessions:
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article/39304_Big_Government_on_a_Roll-_Obama_Faked_His_Auto_Factory_Address
Let us now cite the most trustworthy of all sources.
I had a look at your link Tom.
The article had a link to Reuters.
And yes, Obama was at the General Motors Orion assembly plant in Detroit.
“U.S. President Barack Obama and South Korea’s President Lee Myung-bak meet workers as they tour the General Motors Orion assembly plant in Detroit, Michigan.”
On October 14, 2011.
The video of the address is dated October 15, 2011.
Was it shot on the 14th and released on the 15th or…
Was it shot on the 15th when he wan’t in Detroit?
Further, perhaps it is standard practice to produce these sorts of promotional “talking head” videos at a dedicated media center at GM. It is entirely possible (and I think probable) that Obama did, in fact, make his address “at a GM plant…in Detroit”. Yes, the background looks like a still shot. Yes, there may be slight rendition artifacts in the picture. Still, I suspect that what was done here is standard fare for all videos produced for internal and external consumption; the official doing the talking does so in front of a studio-supplied backdrop relevant to the matter being discussed. A bit of “shop noise” is being layered in the audio background to add to the backdrop effect. It looks authentic enough for, uh, government work.
Now, can we get back to discussing the CONTENT of the President’s remarks?
Was there any?
Like that obsessive, psychotic, demented Charles Johnson?
Birds-of-a-feather, tom? Certainly you sound like that’s the case.
Oh, lord God. One of Chucky’s little cheeses.
You don’t have to be an expert on green screens to know whether he was there.
He says he is there.
That gives you the answer, even if you don’t watch the video
Charles Johnson is a certifiable clinically-insane psychotic. Anything he says or writes on his formerly influential blog can be assumed to be false unless absolute proof to the contrary can be produced. In this case, it cannot and the phony liar-in-chief is once again deceiving and attempting to manipulate the American people with the help of willing enablers such as little green footballs. [BTW, at the U. of Michigan when I was a student, LGF was a nickname for a combination of a potent amphetamine and an opiate which resembled the sort of combo that sent John Belushi to an early grave.
Bryan – In the bigger scheme of things this is small potatoes (very small potatoes). Far more important are O’s increasingly close connection to the Occupy movement, Fast and Furious, Solyandra, the use of regulations as a substitute for legistlation, etc., etc.
At the factory without, head protection, eye protection & ear plugs for the noise. OSHA police are on their way …
Well, guys, I have going on thirty years experience in TV and feature films, including having worked with green screens up to 40 feet high and 450 feet long, and believe me, not a one of you has a clue what you are talking about, including Mr. NASA there, who claims to be a green screen expert, but doesn’t seem to know a thing about depth of field in video.
People like you will believe any lie as long as it reflects negatively on Obama. We know he was at that plant on the day in question- what possible reason could he have to fabricate a false shot of somewhere he actually was at?
Isn’t it about time you all grew up and tried living in the real world?
A total sham. He should be given a “Nobel”
for prevarication.
I’m sorry, I couldn’t get past the creepiness of “Your Weekly Address”.
What else is new………..everything about him is a fraud.
I say let’s hire World Net Daily to get to the bottom of this. They need something to keep busy since the birth certificate story just is not generating the mug and t-shirt sales it was. And I love this:
I’ve been doing green screen video effects for about 15 years, starting at NASA and then for Hot Air.
Hot air just about sums it up. Oh, I was a major league pitcher for 15 years, starting with the NY Mets and now I make a living in slow pitch softball at the city park.
I am sorry, but the shot is probably accurate, Mr Preston. A US manufacturing plant void of workers and action? Sounds pretty believable to me. /sarcasm
And unless Mr Obama has a halo (you’ll see it, left side in the video), I’d say the video is green screened. Plus, I would think the halo shines out of his…
Assuming your statement about video effects for NASA is accurate, did you continue the on the moon-landing project team, and which sound-stage was that filmed at?
Tongue in cheek, thanks for this entertaining highlight. Wouldn’t expect anything more than just the half-truth from any politician.
Leaving aside the impossible utter stillness in light, shadow and stuff…
In the initial long shot, it appears that the dear leader is positioned “sitting” on a chair or stool on top of a rubberized, recessed conveyor belt, which appears to be several inches below the actual floor level. Not only would this be a terrible, unstable place to film a person (not sure any plant would allow anyone to sit on a belt like that), but the geometry of the shot just doesn’t line up…the perspective and horizon lines don’t work. Even if you posit he is sitting at ground level on the other side of the belt…things don’t look right. Based on what we can see of the width of the belt, it would have to be only several inches wide for the dear leader to fit on the other side of it…but this is a car plant, and belts will be carrying large parts and are likely to be several feet wide, in which case, the shot’s angles, perspective just don’t work.
There simply appear to have been two cameras shooting from different “spots” and at different angles in the scene. The back ground appears to have been shot on a tripod down within the conveyor belt, where as the camera on the dear leader is further back and higher up.
Composite.