Slashdot Mirror
Olympic Opening Ceremony Fireworks Were (Partly) Faked
A complete newb writes "London's Telegraph newspaper reports that some of the fireworks which appeared over Beijing during the television broadcast of the Olympic Opening Ceremony were actually computer generated. But — hold on — it's not necessarily as bad as you think. The faked fireworks were actually set-off at the stadium, but because of potential dangers in filming the display live from a helicopter, viewers at home were shown a pre-recorded, computer-generated shot." To me, the reasoning behind the faked display is no consolation or excuse — it seems hard to swallow that NBC was unaware of this televised deception. I'm glad that it was good-naturedly "revealed" this weekend (according to that Telegraph article), but it's disheartening that such a large crowd can watch (in person, and around the world) such a display and have no reason to realize they've been duped. What about when weightier events are at issue? There's also a slightly more detailed story at sky.com.
I watched the opening ceremony on NBC here in the U.S. There was a part of the ceremony called something like 'A walk through Beijing'. It showed a fly-through video of Beijing with "footsteps" made of fireworks popping up along the street/path. Those footstep fireworks looked pretty obviously computer-simulated. All other fireworks shown did not have that simulated appearance.
It sounds to me like these footsteps part were all that was simulated.
Does anyone know if the footage we saw on NBC (of the whole ceremony) was from an International common video feed or did NBC have their own cameras there? I ask because at large International events like this, there is often a common video feed and the commentators simple talk about what they see on their screen (which is the same thing we see, minus the fancy NBC info graphics and overlays.)
(I wrote this looking at the subscriber early-post version. A link to a sky.com article was later added to the summary which answers my question.)
... just switch to a live video feed from South Ossetia?
Have gnu, will travel.
...my wife fakes her fireworks all the time and it doesn't bother me.
Error reading device 'Signature'. (A)bort, (R)etry, (F)ail?
Hey captain obvious, I vividly remember the NBC announcer stating they were computer generated as it was happening.
Off your high horse please.
Unaware? obviously weren't listening during th broadcast. The NBC announcers were talking about how some of the effects were computer enhanced. They specifically said there were "digital pyrotechnics" used during the camera shot that zoomed across the city showing fireworks exploding all around.
What's the problem? You want a series of impressive images on your screen. What's the issue with having them in CGI instead of real-life fireworks? The end result is the same. I could get your argument if we were talking about some olympic discipline being duped, with doping, corruption or otherwise, but fireworks are just eye candy. How it gets to your retina is quite irrelevant.
And by the way, doing it in CGI is also more environmentally friendly: compounds used in fireworks are not always of the most benign sort.
Victims of 9/11: <3000. Traffic in the US: >30,000/y
In other news, last year's Super Bowl was actually two guys playing Madden '08.
When you're afraid to download music illegally in your own home, then the terrorists have won!
Ok? The idea is for the entire world to be entertained at which should be a truce among the nations of the world bringing its best athletes to the tables. Putting on a good show for the olympics is part of the drill.
I'm always looking for a good shot at China but I think this time around we should cut these people a break. They've done a good job with the Olympics so far.
This is my sig.
Slow day on Slashdot? I don't know where the conspiracy nuts get their information - were they actually watching the programme? The NBC commentator stated quite clearly that the 29 displays across Beijing that signified the 29 olympiads were simulated. They didn't got into detail about it but they certainly didn't hide it.
I watched the opening ceremonies twice and the commentators did state something to the effect of "They want this ceremony to be cinema in real time, but what you're watching right now is actually cinematic, it's all animation of these footsteps leading to the National Stadium." They did not outright say "hey this is prerendered CG" but they DID state that this was "true cinematics" and that it was animation.
They were well aware of it and did a poor job of communicating it to viewers. I can tell how most people would have missed it.
Back in 1992, the Olympic torch in Barcelona was supposed to be lit by an archer shooting a flaming arrow. Yeah... no. He shot it towards the cauldron, but it was set to be lit on its own via pyros. The flaming arrow passed way over the cauldron, safe from setting any of the audience on fire or perforating them, and the torch lit anyway.
OR MAYBE IT WAS AN OLYMPIC MIRACLE AND HE HIT IT
Link: The Source of All Knowledge
Kurt Vonnegut: "If you can do a half-assed job of anything, you're a one-eyed man in the kingdom of the blind."
...and eventually, this kind of deficit spending will bankrupt the media.
I do wonder why they keep pushing the edge of the envelope like this, though. The urge to alter reality doesn't really resonate with me. Just show it how it really happened. People are tuning in to experience a real event, not some imagined account of what the fireworks might have looked like.
If things continue to trend this way, the media will eventually find it far easier to simply fabricate all the news. They'd never have to leave the studio, and could script out events over and over until they got just the right shot. I mean seriously, if they're not going to have 100% journalistic integrity, why have any at all?
To me, the reasoning behind the faked display is no consolation or excuse
Then next time, Timothy, we'll let you fly the helicopter while fireworks are being shot at it.
I want a new quote. One that won't spill. One that don't cost too much. Or come in a pill.
Wait. Are we seriously going to complain about this? If this doesn't count as much ado about nothing, I don't know what does. This isn't manipulation of the media - this is simply enhancing the televised broadcast of a ceremony for the opening of the Olympic games. Good gawd, get some perspective.
DoD producing propaganda for foreign (wink) audiences. Good evidence just came out that the White House forged a war-justification document. Stovepiped intelligence. Hush money to truth-tellers. Known-false public WMD claims. "This isn't about intelligence, it's about regime change." "Fuck Saddam, we're taking him out." Facts fixed around the policy. Leaks to "billboard" media to punish truth-tellers' families. Embedded reporters, sent home for publishing actual war photographs. Talking points piped from the White House to the top news corporations, often repeated as directives to the "journalists" who frame each day's news. Seven years of lapdog media pundits laughing along with the right-wingers who call for their assassination while they seriously discuss whether the 60% of Americans who still somehow hold political beliefs at odds with the ruling administration are traitors.
But the fireworks show China is deceptive.
The announcers for NBC said there were digital fireworks during the broadcast a couple times.
Just as long as the ATHLETES are NOT on steroids, and the COMPETITION ITSELF is real... that's all I care about.
The problem with socialism is that they always run out of other people's money. - Margaret Thatcher
...the coziness between China and Iran. China shares advanced missile technology with Iran who reciprocates with advanced computer-generated rocket-launch capability.
Wah, wah, OMG OMG the fireworks are fake. Cry me a river.
ironic Pronunciation: \-rä-nik also i-rä-\ Function: adjective Date: 1576 1: relating to, containing, or constituting irony 2: given to irony 3: China, the inventor of fireworks, faking fireworks at the opening ceremony of the Olympics
The link to the telegraph article is incorrect. Here's the real link
Here's to losing my Karma Bonus again....
The first Olympic fake-out was back at Olympics 776 BC. In 720 BC it was discovered that olympian Ephorus Pausanias was actually wearing "artistically enhanced" tights.
--- What?
I definitely saw legs, but I also saw some sort of supports. I imagine that the blocks had some kind of contraption to make it easier for the people to lift them up and down with such fluidity. Not to mention that they would all have to be constrained to move up and down; I didn't see them wobble at all.
When she was filming the 1936 Olympics (Olympia) she took aerial photographs by attaching cameras to balloons. The lesson for filmmakers today? If you can't risk flying people, use a drone. (Caveat: a number of the balloons crashed. But I like to think nowadays we could achieve better results.)
Prisencolinensinainciusol. Ol Rait!
I hope all you "left-wing liberal freedom fighters" who are infuriated and want "something done" about this dastardly deception and corruption of our human rights recognize the similarities you share with those "right-wing religious zealots" who have the _exact_ same reaction to harmless nudity, language, or sexual situations on television.
And, as it usually the case, the "facts" are completely wrong here as well: the CG simulation WAS disclosed and nobody was "duped". This is just more of the up-in-arms reactionary BS coming from people desperately in need of something to get worked up about.
Maybe if the two sides would see how similar they really are, this kind of idiocy will stop.
But thanks, Slashdot - this is like the third story today that was either deliberately misleading or completely fabricated. Seems like the only people getting "duped" are those who believe Slashdot story summaries.
But... it was disclosed, quite obviously, by the NBC reporters and therein lies the rub. Much ado about nothing, in my opinion. This is the short and long of it.
This author takes full ownership and responsibility for the unpopular opinions outlined above.
I went back and looked at what NBC showed on television in the United States of America.
The following is exactly what the commentators, Today Show host Matt Lauer and NBC Sports broadcaster Bob Costas, said:
At the time, I fully understood that I was watching a movie. It's not "news" to me.
I shall summon the difference between revisions for the 1992 Summer Olympics article, which shows the text as it looked when I referenced it compared to the text as it was edited roughly an hour later.
The citation for the Wikipedia article is (was) from the BBC: "Ceremonial hall of shame."
Barcelona restored dignity four years later with an archer dramatically lighting the Olympic flame with a burning arrow flying through the night sky.
Billions of people around the globe gasped in admiration as the archer bravely found his target with unerring accuracy.
Or so it seemed.
In reality, he had not actually landed the arrow in the middle of the cauldron - he had fired it way outside the stadium as instructed.
Organisers dared not risk his aim failling short and landing into the grandstand and instead told him to fire it directly over the target area... some pyrotechnics-helpful camera angles would take care of the visual effect.
There you have it.
Kurt Vonnegut: "If you can do a half-assed job of anything, you're a one-eyed man in the kingdom of the blind."