A former journalist's view of the Berg footage

[scottcsmith]

If anyone else has experience in video editing I'd be curious to know what you think.

I've read quite a few conspiracy theories regarding the cowardly murder of Nick Berg. Two issues come up: 1)the time stamp change and 2)the lack of blood.

Indeed, there is a change in the time stamp. On screen is displayed 2:44:41 and then the time stamp jumps to 13:45:48.

Back in my Navy days, I edited many videos. I think the change in time stamp is a switch to a second camera.

Some have suggested that Mr. Berg was not killed on video, that the video was shot, stopped at 2:44:41, and a number of hours later, after he had already been killed, filming resumed (that's the explanation for a lack of blood: Berg's heart was not beating, so blood was not being pumped through his body).

Here's the thing: in the world of movies a director has to deal with continuity issues. Continuity is the smooth flow of time. Events have to occur in what seems to be a linear fashion. And there are many films and instances with continuity goofs: a scene at a restaurant, for instance, with a character drinking a glass of wine, and with each edit of the shot, the amount of liquid in the glass changes. That's a continuity problem.

Now, if the terrorists stop filming at 2:44:41, and moved Mr. Berg to a different location, they would have to put everyone that was in the first half of the video back into their exact positions. Otherwise, when you edit together the two shots, the jump in continuity is glaringly obvious. There is very clearly an edit at the 2:44:41 mark. But when the time stamp switches to 13:45:48, everyone is in the exact same positions. Even if a very glaring jump-cut was edited out of the footage to preserve the illusion of continuity, if any of the people in the footage had changed position, even a little bit, it would be quite obvious.

As far as the lack of blood goes, it's really hard to tell in the poor-quality footage how much blood has been spilled.

So what does this all mean? Well, I suspect the terrorists used two cameras, and perhaps the view was obscured with the first camera and they switched to the second camera.

People like to see conspiracies around every corner, but in life, I think, the most simple explanation is sometimes the right one. And whatever you might think about the Berg video, it doesn't change the fact that cowardly terrorist killed this young man.

[DenverDem]

1. Agreed. But which cowardly terrorist?

sweating the details of the action and the video production are just red herrings.

[Must_B_Free]

2. why would you even say this?

"and moved Mr. Berg to a different location, "

who ever suggested that?

[bossfish]

3. So you've logically explained the "time stamp" issue

But to make the leap that he was killed by "cowardly terrorist(s)" leaves out all of the other weirdnesses of Berg's death.

This story has some puzzling details. So, the video wasn't altered, that's one weird detail explained.

[KYDEM]

4. question about editing

of the film could 2 films have been spliced together to make this video?

[bossfish]

5. EZ - just dub them together on another machine.

[SemperEadem]

6. No. Apples and orangutans.

Film is film and videotape is videotape. They are not the same medium.

Film is spliced--it requires developing like a roll out of your instamatic or xlr camera. You can only expose it once for a clear image.

Videotape is edited--it's magnetic, reusable (to a degree). You can tape over and over again because you're just rearranging the magnetic data on the tape when you record.

you can dub film over to videotape in order to more easily manipulate it. then you can print the video to a film negative and develop the negative into film.

Was that a trick question?

[bossfish]

9. My bad...

I thought the stuff was taped, not filmed.

[stickdog]

7. Watch it again, Columbo.

Please notice the head covering of the guy doing the cutting. It starts out dark, and ends up white.

If that's not a jarring discontinuity to you, then you're Ed Wood.

[Q]

8. I'm still challenging one of these 'video experts'...

...to look at the video signal of the entire tape. The signal will plainly show if the video came from one camera or two. Different cameras will produce different signals.

- And yes...the author of this thread missed a glaring inconsistency: the man who starts the beheading has a black mask. The one who finishes and holds up the head has a white mask.

[T Bone]

12. We need some non-gory stills posted in THIS thread on LBN

here:

look at photo research in this thread:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x553455#553840

add some stills to that thread from the beheading BUT NOT GORY PICS,
look at that thread and add stills that show the WALL _ HALLWAY_ CHAIR that Berg was in_ and the baseboard runner at the bottom of the wall.

Please look through and study the photos in this thread

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x553455#553840

[AP]

10. Directors also have to worry about not being able to repeat

unrecreatable scenes.

If you're killing a guy and a camera fails, you're going to have to go out and get a new guy to kill and start from the top.

They probably had two cameras in case one failed and then put together the most explicit pictures from each camera?

[jean]

13. Your idea makes the most sense

[Media_Lies_Daily]

11. Have you figured out the nationalities of the "terrorists", because...

...most of us don't have clue.

Are you really sure they're "terrorists"?