The Craziest Christmas lights.. holy sh**!! - Page 2

On November 02 2006 19:19 nonpuz wrote:
This is actually cut together with editting, the took pictures of each lights on and off etc..its all just editting nothing to do with choreagraphy etc....still pretty impressive.

On November 02 2006 20:49 BlackJack wrote:


You shouldn't say things so matter of factly when you have no idea what you are talking about.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carson_Williams

On November 02 2006 20:08 nonpuz wrote:
God i cant believe im still wasting my time but here you go:

First of all, read the previous thread that this was posted in (link near the top of this). Second of all, explain to me why the ENTIRE picture is moving around the whole time? grass etc.. watch the lines on the cement and what not. This was PROVEN a long time ago (on another forum I frequent, this is all over the internet) to be a fake, so please shut the fuck up you have no idea what you're talking about.

On November 02 2006 21:48 Wangsta wrote:
not to jump on the wrong boat but let's be fair, his argument did make more sense to me (before seeing those wiki/etc. links) from the viewpoint of a guy who hasn't heard about this before

the photography idea would've been MUCH easier because you can reuse frames. many sequences in the show were repeated so until I read the wikipedia article I thought this was editted too

On November 02 2006 21:04 Hot_Bid wrote:
yah but that wikipedia entry is not real, it was actually put together with editing, creator took pictures of each letter and spliced it together, nothing to do with typing etc... still pretty impressive

On November 02 2006 21:04 Hot_Bid wrote:
yah but that wikipedia entry is not real, it was actually put together with editing, creator took pictures of each letter and spliced it together, nothing to do with typing etc... still pretty impressive

On November 02 2006 21:48 Wangsta wrote:
not to jump on the wrong boat but let's be fair, his argument did make more sense to me (before seeing those wiki/etc. links) from the viewpoint of a guy who hasn't heard about this before

the photography idea would've been MUCH easier because you can reuse frames. many sequences in the show were repeated so until I read the wikipedia article I thought this was editted too

On November 02 2006 21:48 Wangsta wrote:
not to jump on the wrong boat but let's be fair, his argument did make more sense to me (before seeing those wiki/etc. links) from the viewpoint of a guy who hasn't heard about this before

the photography idea would've been MUCH easier because you can reuse frames. many sequences in the show were repeated so until I read the wikipedia article I thought this was editted too