MH370 discussion from video/vfx hobbyist point of view

First and foremost: I have about 10 years of experience in terms of video editing on a professional level, which isn’t important in this case. But I have also dabbled in VFX for a couple of years, until around 2016-ish. Mainly compositing in 2D and 3D, which also requires motion tracking and camera solving. I’ve been following the MH370 discussion and it’s a fun one. Also good to see so many people coming together to either verify or debunk this.

What I haven’t really seen being discussed is the implications if real videos were used to add in the orbs and disappearance, only that it’s difficult to pull of. Here’s my two cents:

There’s currently the drone footage and the stereoscopic satellite footage, which brings the total to three videos you have to work on. There’s not a lot in the videos to use as a solver when it comes to tracking the footage. Maybe you can pull of 2D tracking, but a 3D camera solve would be insanely difficult to pull of. Remember, we’re talking about 2014 here. If the tracking is off by only a slight amount, only for a couple of frames, you would instantly pick up on that. Furthermore, it would definitely be noticed upon further scrutinizing. The guys over at Corridor Digital have top tier equipment, an insane amount of knowledge and even they regularly make (small) mistakes when it comes to motion tracking. Correctly illuminating clouds implies the need for volumetrics or a depth map at the very least. Using simple 2D effects would be noticed I guess. The motion tracking/camera solver needs to be a 100% spot on and identical for the three individual videos. That’s quite the challenge. Again, we’re talking 2014 here. Including slight realistic turbulence to the trails of the orbs is possible, but the key point is ‘realistic’. Possible but hard to nail.

Also, from a hobbyists point of view, with in theory enough time to create videos like the ones from 2014: I have the knowledge to recreate the whole thing from scratch using both 3D and 2D software. That in and of itself isn’t that difficult. Different resolutions, framerates, visual signs of compression, all not that difficult if you control every aspect of the videos, even in 2014. What baffles me though is all the insanely small intricate details I would never have even thought of, or stuff that I wouldn’t think of researching. On top of that you have stuff like GPS coordinates matching up, coordinates dynamically changing in sync with a cursor on screen, satellites matching up, types of drones used by the military, the timeframe appearing in sync with real world events, realistic illumination of clouds and all the other stuff. Also, I would probably not crop the footage in a weird way, I would include more of a HUD to make it look more authentic, I would put way more explanation in the description and I would for sure do my best to spread the video, especially if I’d put dozens of hours in the making of it.

Common sense would say that the videos are fake, because orbs making a Boeing 777 disappear mid flight is simply way too bonkers to be real. But I cannot for the life of me accept the fact that someone has the insane knowledge about so many aspects (vfx, aviation, military, satellite orbits, etc) to fake them. For days people have been pulling the videos apart and I haven’t yet seen anyone providing a smoking gun that proves the videos are fake.

Edit: I was trying to prove the clouds do actually move and I noticed something odd. Right after the flash the entire frame becomes sharper and it stays sharper until the end. The only thing I can think of that can cause this is compression. Right after the flash there’s no other motion meaning pixels can stay in place, creating a more clear image. Maybe someone with more knowledge about compression and how it works, or can work, can take a look into it?