Nah, i don't think it looks deliberate.
I would like you to explain why.
The effect of the delay (due to stalling, maybe stalling stream?) doesn't even make it look worse.
I think it does.
Why would you doctor a video,
Passion
Expecting to use deceit as a shield.
and then not even add the effect of speeding up the arm movement?
Time constraints/impatience.
I mean, i assume we have watched the same analysis, right?
Just look at the bit where both versions play simultaneously on normal speed please.
Do you see a difference at all?
Yes I do.
And what looks more dramatic?
The first one shows more of the lady's facial features, that in my mind I am judging her for. In the second one, it is more blurred and the call to attention is definitely focused on the microphone.
The arm pausing (like hesitation) or the arm continuously moving (without hesitation).
It depends who you would like to portray as the villain. In my opinion, Jim Acosta was being served an injustice by Pres. Trump, and I support him in this case for insisting that he should be permitted to ask his question.
Because the guy in the video says so?
No, it is because the picture has been altered - that is distortion. It does appear deliberate to me.
What's a short stall like that even add to the effect?
In terms of judging personal interaction through physical action, the character that is conveyed of the lady taking the microphone appears to have been more personally opposed by Jim than brushed aside. He more forcefully opposes her while she more insistently holds the microphone, rather than it happening instantly that she let go of it.
Okay, assuming it WAS doctored, do you think Sanders knew this?
Can you provide her words about it, that I may exercise discernment?
I think she, just like me, can't even tell the difference between both videos on normal speed.
Everyone is uniquely gifted! I have done some studies in Media Arts.
So what if it was a stall in the stream that ended up in the edit?
It would probably be classified as an "Act of God", and yet, still a distortion for the purpose of the word. But it would remove the deliberate aspect so that it could not be called "doctored" or altered "by The White House".
What if it has to do with the conversion from many to less frames per second?
The English guy says very little about that possibility.
You are right, and he is also hiding something as he is speaking about that - which appears either to be that he doesn't recognise the reason for the difference in FPS of 25/30 is due to the difference in base resonance of the US and European power systems (60hz/50hz AC).. or, it could be that he does know that but he doesn't want to distract the viewer by explaining it and his conscience is telling him that he is not telling them the fullness of the truth. Either way, his conscience is weak and it is convicting him and I saw that.
The problem with the keyframe adjustment theory is that we should expect the videos to remain in sync after the adjustment has been made (ie: the video does contain 5fps more pictures, but the events in the sequence should be happening at the same time throughout, and both videos ending at exactly the same time). Instead, we see that the videos continue to run out of sync, so that the extra frames look like they are additional frames to the sequence rather than a substitute for the framerate.
________________________
My conclusion:
Doctored? I highly doubt it.
No need for it, it would be a stupid risk to take, both clips show the same.
Acosta pushed away the arm of the intern because he didn't want to give back the microphone after he was told clearly and repeatedly it was the next journalist's turn.
Yes, he was resisting an injustice. Pres. Trump was unfair toward him, cutting him off and getting distracted by frivolous details, not permitting him to form his question. I have already assessed those events in another thread.
