The Pale Blue Dot? Chapter Eleven: Green Screens, Blue Screens, Astronauts on Wires and Stanley Kubrick

Written By Thomas Perez. October 20, 2018 at 6:22PM. Copyright 2018. Updated 2020.

When one looks at the evidence given in this chapter, it then becomes extremely plausible that NASA is using what is called green screen effects, blue screen effects and CGI imaging to make credible the claim of landing men on the Moon in the late 1960’s, early 70’s and sending astronauts into space today to board the ISS (the ‘International Space Station’). However, many today claim that “this cannot be true; things like blue and green screen effects, along with Photoshop, did not exist during the 1960’s and 70’s.” But this is far from the truth. They did exist. However, in reference to Photoshop, the technology was created in 1987 and released to the public in 1990. But there were early forms of it before 1987, a picture in picture, so to speak – it was called “superimposition” – created in 1891. That is 168 years before the Apollo missions.

Here is a picture demonstrating the green screen visual effect…

History of the Green and Blue Screens: Keying Technologies

The first wave of these optical illusions found its way into the green screen technique. Originally called ‘Chroma Key Composites’ or ‘Chroma Keying; green screening was an established visual effect first rendered in 1898 by George Albert Smith. In 1903, green screen was utilized by Edwin S. Porters; ‘The Great Train Robbery.’ The technique was used again with patented traveling mattes created by Frank Williams. This was used in many films such as ‘The Invisible Man’ and ‘Alice Comedies’ – a Walt Disney film using cartoon characters and backgrounds with live actors. (1) (2).

1. Kathryn Ramey. Experimental Filmmaking: Break the Machine. p. 70.

2. Foster Jeff (2010). The Green Screen Handbook: Real-World Production Techniques. John Wiley & Sons.

The blue screen method was developed in the 1930s at RKO Radio Pictures. At RKO, Linwood Dunn used an early version of the travelling matte to create “wipes” – where there were transitions like a windshield wiper in films. In 1950, Warner Brothers employee and ex-Kodak researcher Arthur Widmer began working on an ultraviolet travelling matte process. He also began developing blue screen techniques. (3).

3. Illusions Take Home First Oscars. CRI English. 14 February 2005. Archived from the original on 15 March 2005.

Petro Vlahos was awarded an Academy Award for his refinement of these techniques in 1964. His technique exploits the fact that most objects in real-world scenes have a color whose blue-color component is similar in intensity to their green-color component. Among some of his many achievements, Petro Vlahos (1916-2013) shared an Oscar (Academy Scientific and Technical Award) in 1995 with his son, Paul, for blue screen advances made by Ultimatte Corporation.

Ultimatte Corporation is an “All new Ultimatte 12 is more than the world’s best keyer, it’s an advanced real time compositing processor designed for the next generation of broadcast graphics. Ultimatte 12 features entirely new algorithms and color science that deliver true photorealistic composites. You get incredible edge handling, greater color separation, amazing color fidelity and better spill suppression than ever before, even in dark shadow areas or through transparent objects such as windows! The high performance 12G-SDI design gives you the power to work in Ultra HD and HD with sub pixel processing for amazing image quality. Imagine presenting the weather, sports, news and entertainment in a cinematic quality environment, all composited in real time.” (4).

4. https://www.blackmagicdesign.com/products/ultimatte

Another contributor to the green and blue screen effect is Zbigniew Rybczynski (1949), a Polish filmmaker, director, cinematographer, screenwriter, creator of experimental animated films and multimedia artist who has won numerous prestigious industry awards has worked as a researcher of blue and green screen compositing technology at Ultimatte Corporation. He Incorporated an optical printer with two projectors, a film camera and a ‘beam splitter’ was used to combine the actor in front of a blue screen together with the background footage, one frame at a time. He is renowned for his innovative audiovisual techniques and for his pioneering experimentation in the field of new image technology.

In March 2009 Rybczyński set up the Center for Audiovisual Technologies in Poland. The center, which officially opened in January 2013, includes a state-of-the-art studio designed by Rybczyński for the production of multi-layer film images, and an institute for research into images and visual technologies. It is extremely interesting that NASA started sending live real time video streams from the ISS (International Space Station) on March 14, 2014, after ‘The Center for Audiovisual Technologies’ opened in 2013 and CORE (Central Operation of Resources for Educators) closed on June 30, 2013, which incidentally worked with one of NASA’s many branches: STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math). Naturally, STEM students and employees for NASA alike are receiving state of the art technology from ‘The Center for Audiovisual Technologies.’

According to a PDF document from NASA Educator Resource Center Network and CORE. CORE directly supports (supported CORE until it’s closure in 2013 – T. Perez) the NASA Education Strategivc Coordination Framework, specifically NASA Education.” They were to “Attract and retain students in STEM disciplines through a progression of educational opportunities for students, teachers, and faculty.”

“CORE, which is operated through a cooperative agreement with Lorain County Joint Vocational School, serves as the worldwide distribution center for NASA-produced multimedia educational materials. CORE also supports the state-based NASA ERCN’s with materials and training to assist the Educator Resource Center staff in better serving educators within their region.” Moreover, CORE supports specific goals, one of their goals are to; “Reproduce and distribute NASA’s aerospace audiovisual and multimedia educational materials.” (5). For a full readout of this document; Google the following…

5. “NASA CENTRAL OPERATION OF RESOURCES FOR EDUCATORS (CORE) Administered by Lorain County Joint Vocational School. NASA Cooperative Agreement NCC5-554 Jeff Ehmen NASA Marshall Space Flight Center.”

What possible connection can NASA, The Center for Audiovisual Technologies and CORE have in common? The answer to that question is STEM, as discovered above.

NASA also actually admits to using green screen effects for its educational videos. They also admit using STEM careers at one time in conjunction with CORE productions as mentioned. However, NASA today operates independently with reference to its distribution of video productions, apparent real time video streaming and articles. Hence, its STEM innovations and careers of today. (6) (7).

6. https://blogs.nasa.gov/diyPodcastBlog/2013/04/19/post_1366337220017/

7. https://www.nasa.gov/education/materials/

What you see are enhanced CGI (Computer Generated imagery) effects from modern day technologies mentioned above, and as revealed in chapter six. For I.e., some films make heavy use of chroma key to add backgrounds that are constructed entirely using CGI. “Keying” is an important component to visual effects. Put the wrong screen behind an actor or object, for I.e., a spaceship; then parts of the actors clothing or ship model vanishes into thin air. You will be able to see right through certain parts of the actor’s body or spaceship as if they were invisible.

“The Chroma Effect” – Chroma Key Tutorial. Boris FX. Archived from the original on 15 March 2005. Retrieved 11 January 2010If the foreground is a person, then blue or green backing color is recommended as these colors are not present in human flesh pigments. In fact, human skin color is 70% red for all people regardless of race.

8. The Keys To Chromakey: How To Use A Green Screen”. Videomaker. Retrieved23 October 2017.

Although there are many such; quote, unquote “NASA video fails;” I have decided to list six NASA video fails. In Addition to that, I have decided to also list three educational videos: two one on green/blue screen effects and one on matte techniques. There are also two videos concerning Stanley Kubrick, whom we will be discussing later in this chapter, and one informative video on T.V. signal technologies as it was capable of doing back in the 1960’s. You can also research and find further information about these particular topics for yourself on YouTube, Google, or in any good book on the topic of video, film making, NASA, or astronomy. The videos I choose are convincing since they are from NASA themselves. But without further ado, let us take a look at them.

This first video is an edited footage version of a NASA video stream. However. I wanted to find the original, since a blogger complained that the video was tampered with by someone who intentionally inserted another NASA video into the following NASA video in order to show a hoax (fail). The blogger actually provided the original video in the YouTube comment box to prove his point. But first; let us look at the edited version where a “WIPE” can obviously be seen as created by Linwood Dunn, mentioned above.

NOTE: As of February 12, 2021, the edited video must be seen either by knowing the channel’s name and/or actual title of the video, and by signing into your YouTube or Google account in order to access permission to view the video. But it is there.

And now the original version. After watching the original you will note that it is the SAME. Now, remember when the blogger had commented in the edited footage and said, “There are two separate videos, and that the male astronaut was already in the picture. Therefore, someone tampered with it to show a “wipe.” Well, this is simply NOT true. The “wipe” is STILL there, from NASA themselves.

But in all honesty, a “wipe” is something that we see in movies all the time. And such as it is, a wipe NEVER looks like what we have just seen in both videos. It can be called a wipe, but it is not a wipe in the conventional sense. “In a wipe, image A replaces image B at a boundary edge moving across the frame. Think of scene transitions in Star Wars, which are patterned after old wipe styles that were once popular in Hollywood. There are hundreds of wipe patterns. In some wipes, image A pushes image B off the screen vertically, horizontally, or in a particular pattern (stars, cross, etc). The edge of the wipe can be soft or hard or have a colored line.” (9).

9. The Flmmakers Handbook: A Comprehensive Guide for the Digital Age. 2008 Edition; pg. 544-45. By Steven Ascher and Edward Pincus. Published by Plume and Penguin Books.

However, the two videos above does show an astronaut magically appearing in the frame. How is this accomplished, and why? The following video is a tutorial on how to make an image appear and disappear. This will answer the question of “How.” It is called a “Track Matte.” A track matte is placed OVER an object. In the videos above, an astronaut; and in the tutorial below, a red camera. You will note that in the video, a green background (like the green screen) is provided…

It is now obvious that the astronaut was there, saved as an image, as our red camera was. The astronaut was then inserted into the frame depicting the interior of the ISS by overlapping the track matte – which then becomes the green background, or as in the case of the NASA video, the background of the ISS. In the meantime, the tracking matte remains invisible, only to be known that it is still there when a linear wipe is performed. So, the complaining commenter was correct in a sense that there were two separate videos, or images. But he was incorrect in proclaiming that there was not a wipe at all. The only question that remains is, “Why?”

Why would NASA perform a wipe, so to speak? Where was the astronaut when his image was recorded on video originally, that he would magically appear in the ISS? The answer to these two questions is clearly obvious. There were two separate videos. One was the main video pertaining to the female astronaut and the other was placed there by means of a tracking matte which utilizes a tiny wipe surrounded by the original large footage. The wipe (tracking matte) in this case was the size of a rectangular box standing vertically, as it was holding within it an astronaut from the same location, or other location. If from the same location, what time did such a recording take place? And if recorded, how was he able to interact with the questions asked him during live time streaming when he appeared out of no where?

The answer to that question is that there was no actual recording done at the same area of the ISS. Because if it was, they would not have to utilize a wiping technique. The recorded video in all likelihood took place from another location, hence the real time audio accomplishment and two video scenarios. In reference to the female astronaut, it is obvious that she is there from the “get go” floating around the same area. But since we are questioning these things, perhaps she is on a harness. There are many articles and videos out there demonstrating this. Harnesses can easily be mapped out, frame by frame. Here is one video (a humorous video at that) depicting a failed matte out of a harnesses and failed 3D CGI’s…

In the following video we see another “failed NASA” effect. The video clearly shows what turned out to be either a glitch or failed “Compression Codecs.”

So, what happened in the video? Was it a glitch or a well-known artefact due to video compression? A glitch is a short-lived fault in a system, such as a transient fault that corrects itself, making it difficult to troubleshoot. The term is particularly common in computing and electronic industries, in circuit bending, as well as among players of video games. “In broadcasting, a corrupted signal may glitch in the form of jagged lines on the screen, misplaced squares, static looking effects, freezing problems, or inverted colors. The glitches may affect the video and/or audio (usually audio dropout) or the transmission. These glitches may be caused by a variety of issues, interference from portable electronics or microwaves, damaged cables at the broadcasting center, or weather.” (10).

10. “Signal Strength Variables”. Retrieved 2015-03-17.

A compression codecs, or video codec is an electronic circuit or software that compresses or decompresses digital video. It converts an uncompressed video to a compressed format or vice versa. In the context of video compression, “codec” is a concatenation of “encoder” and “decoder” – a device that only compresses is typically called an encoder, and one that only decompresses is a decoder. Moreover, codecs (compression-decompression) are used to encode images, video, and audio to a specific format such AVI or MOV…A codec of the same name might work on a certain machine and fail on another.

Now to the sixth video. This video demonstrates an astronaut in front of a blue screen – a gridded blue screen.

However, the following two videos debunk the prior video claiming that there is no such thing as a “gridded blue or green screen,” only a plain blue or green screen…

But BOTH debunkers are INCORRECT. The process of a blue and green gridded screen IS used, when necessary, as the following educational video demonstrates…

Moreover, the following picture, taken from my Blu-ray copy of Star Wars: Revenge of Sith (2005) demonstrates an earlier version of the gridded blue screen effect.

The circles (or illuminated circled lights) are used for tracking purposes. The gridded version provides an even greater tracking image for CGI composites – down to the smallest CGI detail when actors are overlayed in the scene. A better technique for frame-by-frame visual effects, tracking and continuity; especially when brought to the editing department and for final cut.

Now whether you want to believe NASA is using digital CGI FX, or not, is up to you. However, I feel it is my duty to let those who are reading this article know that in 2017 NASA won two awards (3D) from ‘Unity Awards.’ NASA was also nominated for a category called; ‘A Night in the Woods’ – the runner-up was ‘Mission ISS’ By ‘Magnopus.’ The awards that NASA did win is called; ‘On Sight JPL W/ Microsoft’ and ‘ProtoSpace.’ ‘Unity Awards’ cites the following: “Winners have been announced for the 2017 Unity Awards! Congratulations to the winners and all of the nominees and a heartfelt thank you to everyone in the Unity Community who continue to amaze, inspire, teach and entertain us year over year!” (11). This fact can be found in the following link.

11. https://awards.unity.com/2017

What is ‘Magnopus?’ Answer: “Magnopus is a Visual Development and Experience company founded by Academy Award winners to tell stories without borders.” (12).

12. https://www.magnopus.com/#about

But again, it is totally up to you what you want to believe about NASA. The next obvious question that may come into mind is “How long have they (NASA) been doing this?” The answer to that question can go possibility as far back into the 1960’s in reference to their Apollo Missions to the Moon and film director and innovator Stanley Kubrick.

Stanley Kubrick and His 2001: A Space Odyssey 1968

Many innovations went into Kubrick’s 2001 Space Odyssey, such as an elaborated green screen effect and other techniques. “2001” was a hotbed of cinematic creativity, with 205 separate special effects shots. Aside from slit-screen, one of the film’s other biggest innovations was its use of a technique called front-projection during the opening “The Dawn of Man” sequence. Shooting the footage in Africa would’ve been costly and time-consuming, so instead Kubrick opted for a soundstage shoot with a new front-projection technology that gave a crisper image than traditional rear-projection methods, allowing him to use a 70mm format. A large projector projected an image of the African plains, which was then reflected via a semi-transparent one-way mirror onto a screen made of millions of glass beads. Since the beads only reflected light from one direction (same 3M technology used in highway signs), the projected images didn’t show up on the actors and objects but only as background. The camera, then, filmed the composite image, with the projected scenery appearing realistically behind the actors. Location shoots averted.” This effect was also used in reference to the Earth and Moon as seen from space. (13) (14).

13. The Special Effects of 2001: A Space Odyssey

14. https://www.popsci.com/technology/article/2012-11/8-stanley-kubricks-greatest-technological-innovations

There is a theory, a theory that has been circulating since the 1990’s: the theory that Stanley Kubrick helped NASA fake the Moon landings in an effort to win the space race against the former Soviet Union. When the Soviets launched Sputnik into orbit, it was a shock that took the U.S. by surprise. The superiority of the U.S. over the Soviets was shaken. Hence, the desire to “send a man to the Moon before this decade (the 1960’s) expires” – John F. Kennedy. The following video demonstrates this shock…

There was even what many call a “Mockcumentary” called ‘The Dark Side of the Moon’ directed by William Karel, it was originally aired on the Arte channel in 2002 with the title Opération Lune. It parodies conspiracy theories with faked interviews, stories of assassinations of Stanley Kubrick’s assistants by the CIA, and a variety of conspicuous mistakes, puns, and references to old movie characters, inserted through the film as clues for the viewer. Nevertheless, Opération Lune is still taken at face value by some conspiracy believers.” (15).

15. Wiki.

Moreover, adding fuel to the fire, a video surfaced in “July 2009, Weidner posted on his webpage “Secrets of the Shining,” where he states that Kubrick’s ‘The Shining’ (1980) is a veiled confession of his role in the scam project. This thesis was subject of refutation in an article published on Seeker nearly half a year later.” (16) (17).

Another movie, “The 2015 movie, ‘Moonwalkers’ is a fictional account of a CIA agent’s claim of Kubrick’s involvement.” (18).

“In December 2015, a video surfaced which allegedly shows Kubrick being interviewed shortly before his 1999 death; the video purportedly shows the director confessing to T. Patrick Murray that the Apollo Moon landings had been faked. Research quickly found, however, that the video was a hoax.” (19).

16. Weidner, Jay (July 20, 2009). “Secrets of the Shining”. Bibliotecapleyades.net. Retrieved June 24, 2017.

17. Faked Moon Landing Hidden Subliminal Messages in Stanley Kubrick’s Movie ‘The Shining’ on YouTube. Retrieved June 24, 2017.

18. Lamb, Robert (January 21, 2010).“Faked Moon Landings and Kubrick’s ‘The ShiningSeeker. Retrieved June 24, 2017.

19. AustinJon (December 11, 2015).“Moon Landings ‘Fake’: Shock video shows ‘Stanley Kubrick’ admit historic event was ‘HOAXDaily Express. Retrieved December 11, 2015.

Here is the video pertaining to Kubrick’s personal confession and involvement in allegedly faking the Moon landings…

In the following video, it is clearly obvious that the prior video was a hoax. We can hear the interviewer, in this unedited version, coaching the actor (whose name happens to be Tommy) impersonating Kubrick, on what to say…

The only oddity I can find is this; why didn’t the hoaxer delete the obvious expose in his video? If I was perpetrating a hoax, I would want to permanently remove, and delete, all evidence of an expose. Perhaps it was a PSYOP? What is a PSYOP, you may ask? “Psychological operations (PSYOP) are operations to convey selected information and indicators to audiences to influence their emotions, motives, and objective reasoning, and ultimately the behavior of governments, organizations, groups, and individuals.”

“The purpose of United States psychological operations is to induce or reinforce behavior favorable to U.S. objectives. They are an important part of the range of diplomatic, informational, military and economic activities available to the U.S. They can be utilized during both peacetime and conflict. There are three main types: strategic, operational and tactical. Strategic PSYOP include informational activities conducted by the U.S. government agencies outside of the military arena, though many utilize Department of Defense (DOD) assets. Operational PSYOP are conducted across the range of military operations, including during peacetime, in a defined operational area to promote the effectiveness of the joint force commander’s (JFC) campaigns and strategies. Tactical PSYOP are conducted in the area assigned to a tactical commander across the range of military operations to support the tactical mission against opposing forces.” (20).

20. Wiki.

If the Moon landings, or the ISS for that matter, were and are part of a PSYOP, then it falls under the “Strategic” excerise as performed by agencies outside of the military, in this case NASA. Although, like mentioned above, it may also utilize the DOD. Which brings me to my next two observational questions. The 1st is, was NASA once a military operation, then handed over to the Federal Government to operate independently? The 2nd: Did, and/or does, NASA work in conjunction with the DOD? In short, the answer to the 1st question is “No.” “NASA is not a part of the Department of Defense, nor of any other Cabinet-level department. NASA’s administrator reports directly to the White House.” (21).

21. https://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/hqlibrary/ic/faqs.html

However, the answer to the 2nd question is “Yes.” Unfortunately for NASA fans, this historical article from NASA’s Government archives tells us so. Moreover, NASA and the DOD, though independent of each other, have been operating as a unit since 1959. (22).

22. https://history.nasa.gov/HHR-32/ch2.htm

In conclusion to this chapter, I leave you with the following links for further research. The first link is a very good informative video. The three remaining links actually verifies the information in the video. (23) (24) (25). You be the judge…

23. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_North_American_broadcast_station_classes

24. https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/ca…

25. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo_TV_camera

For a further look into ALL conspiracy theories concerning NASA Moon landings, look into the following link. (26).

26. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moon_landing_conspiracy_theories

However, based upon what we have learned thus far in chapters four through eight and in this chapter, the technology was, and is, there. It was present in 1898 by George Albert Smith, leading up to today’s technological advances in audiovisual effects – even to the point of winning awards from ‘Unity Awards.’ Moreover, various other technological advances in telecommunications and so-called orbiting satellites are in reality quite a different story when it comes to where they actually are located (underground, as revealed in chapter six). The Moon landings may, or may not, have been real. Again, I repeat, the technology was, and is there to fake it. The ISS may, or may not, be orbiting in space.

However, NASA claims that is it orbiting the Earth at 250 miles above. Many also claim to see it with a telescope – usually blurred due to its alleged speed. But it is CERTAINLY NOT orbiting past the Van Allen Radiation Belt, since NASA, and even the supposedly on-board crew of the ISS, have admitted this to be the case. NASA also admits to losing the “know how” (the telemetry) to get to the Moon. If they claim to have truly lost the telemetry techniques to get to the Moon, how can they successfully land a rover on Mars? The telemetry to land a rover on Mars takes precision. Moreover, Mars is supposedly much, much further away.

My take on all of this is as follows: The rocket launches were, and are, real. Yet, if you notice they never seem to maintain the direction of going straight up, they always curve until out of sight. Then we are suddenly shown pictures and videos feeds from various destinations, three to X number of days after said takeoff. We are then shown; the Moon, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, etc. These things can indeed be faked. There are more examples of fakeries, the debunking of those fakeries, and various rebuttals to such debunkers. But it is entirely too much to include in this chapter. However, let it be known that I am extremely suspicious of what we are shown and what we have been thought. And even if, say for the sake of argument, NASA really did go to Moon, and the ISS really does have a crew of astronauts in space; it would not disprove a flat Earth at all, since all that they are showing us is a curved circle.

When they did show us, the Earth seen from the Moon, one can clearly see that the image was superimposed in the picture. I also find it quite odd that we never see the Earth going away from us, getting smaller and smaller on live video. They can easily do it if these things were really happening. They could have done it during the Apollo hay-days, and they could have done it during the launches of various probes. But all we see are curves (courtesy of the ISS). And moreover, when I think about how NASA works as a unit with the DOD, as mentioned above, I become even more suspicious.

But remember, a flat Earth is still a circle; and circles have curves. In fact, a circle is a whole curved shape. It is a round plane figure whose boundary (the circumference) consists of points equidistant from a fixed point (the center). Objects like the ISS simply may just be circling the Earth, but not going underneath it. What we may be seeing in their “live stream” is the ISS going straight while the Earth seems to be spinning, when in reality it is only the ISS speeding through space. And just about when it’s coming to the edge of the circle, it cuts to another video camera. We never see a full 92-minute orbit uninterrupted. And while all this is happening; the Sun, Moon and stars are above it, circling the Earth too, as will be discussed in chapter thirteen and sixteen (geocentrism as opposed to heliocentrism – chapter one). What NASA may be doing is simply showing us it’s visual and audio capabilities – an illusion, like the movie ‘Gravity.’ Which brings me to my next chapter on illusion, the possible illusion of orbits, realism, philosophy of perception, and visual space.