This is on the MPSIMS side of things. AT 0:40 and 4:33 the reporter is clearly in front of a green screen, but they keep emphasizing she is “in Times Square”. It is weird.
“Everything you read in the newspapers is absolutely true—except for the rare story of which you happen to have firsthand knowledge.”
—Knoll’s Law of Media Accuracy (Erwin Knoll, editor, “The Progressive”)
“…You read with exasperation or amusement the multiple errors in a story, and then turn the page to national or international affairs, and read as if the rest of the newspaper was somehow more accurate on those subjects than the baloney you just read. You turn the page, and forget what you know.”
—Gell-Mann Amnesia Effect (Michael Crichton)
Can you tell me what is so ‘obvious’ about her standing in front of a green screen? I don’t get that sense at all. To me its clear she is standing on a street that isn’t in daylight yet, and lighting system used to illuminate her is …well…illuminating her more than the background.
[quote=“Jim_Peebles, post:1, topic:851100”]
This is on the MPSIMS side of things. AT 0:40 and 4:33 the reporter is clearly in front of a green screen, but they keep emphasizing she is “in Times Square”. It is weird.
[/QUOTE]“Clearly?”
No, she’s clearly live, in Times Square.
Yes, they’re just using foreground lighting on her, which professional crews usually do.
I went to watch the video expecting some obvious green screen glitches but I have no idea what you mean – she’s pretty clearly actually there.
The only green screen is an electronic billboard in Times Square, which is where she is. I can see the lighting seems to make her pop out of the image a little, but there’s no reason for them to pretend here. I believe the GMA studio is on Times Square, they could just prop her in front of a window if they wanted to play some kind of game.
[quote=“Jim_Peebles, post:1, topic:851100”]
This is on the MPSIMS side of things. AT 0:40 and 4:33 the reporter is clearly in front of a green screen, but they keep emphasizing she is “in Times Square”. It is weird.
[/QUOTE]Conspiranoia will destroy ya.
I learned this when, some years ago, I attended a trial in which the defendant was a good friend. Reading the articles in the paper, on how the trial was proceeding, I wondered if the reporter was attending the same trial.
I also learned that trials can be boring, even if they are for a serious issue. The repetitive nature of questions made me grind my teeth.
I guess it sort of looks strange because everything in the shot is clear and in focus - modern digital technology.
I can’t describe in words the outline giveaways. I can describe this in words:
Notice her instant jump in pose when the multiperson split screen jumps to just her in the first section.
Notice her bad acting looking around her in the second section.
Maybe it just looks like green screen because she vapes.
I totally agree that there is a change from her standing there in the split screen to where they talk to her…she goes from neutral face and no microphone to sudden smile and microphone…clearly a cut in editing somewhere. BUT there are other explanations and having her in front of a green screen would NOT account for her image suddenly being different.
For the second part…I can’t judge a person’s ‘acting’ ability who is not an actor, and who probably can’t see if anyone is on the street because of the blasted glare of the lights in their eyes.
Not green screen.
It is a bit strange how in the first appearance of the reporter in the triple box she has her mic down yet when they cut to her solo shot she has the mic up. This looks to be a live shot so it’s an odd jump-cut. Of course that has nothing to do with whether it’s green-screened or not.
Chroma keyed shots look so much better than they used to with all our fancy new-fangled digital shizzle. And that new tech along with careful, professional lighting can make a shot like this look “too perfect”. Almost like an advanced animation.
I can’t totally blame Mister Peebs if he was fooled and had suspicions of a green screen here, but perhaps a bit less certainty was called for in his OP. Maybe something like: “Is this live shot actually a chroma-key instead of live-action?” would have made more sense than: “THIS IS A CHROMA-KEY FOR SURE, FOR SURE.”
‘Alls I see is 5G CGI! WAKE UP SHEEPLE!!1!’
CMC fnord!
Still photos can achieve the same thing. I’ve seen one from an MLB shoot which made the subject player look like an action figure.
Live shots also look so much better than they used to. Imaging sensors are larger and far more sensitive than they used to be, which means outdoor night footage like this can look almost too good to be real.