UK anon lays it out why the NSA_Trafcam/CH pics are actually from a hand-held camera

(Gonna have to do this in 4 or so drops coz quite a few graphics and vidcaps to prove camera angle and elevation. And btw, there was no camera in position on the camera pole when the pictures were taken. Nobody has ever found a December 2013 pic of a trafcam up on that traf cam pole. SV shows it disappearing months before DEC 2013, then reappearing a few months after DEC’13. Then it disappears for good. Btw, do we have to explain why all the LONDON pics, except the black box, are around Christmas 2013? Let us know, but we have been posting that stuff so anons should know. Okay, so first re-post from current bread UK42:

Camera position for the London Pics has been useful in dating some of the scenes captured. The EMB-CH pics have varying vantage points. So there is a range of camera 'movement' within the set.

First draft of a pair of infographics for figuring the location of the camera for the EMB and CH PICs. The following is a walk through, which over-explains because of the weaknesses in the graphics so far. Will adjust with feedback.

SV MAY 2012 provides best open source view of lamp posts, sign posts, and other landmarks without traffic in the way. With these images can come fairly close to a Q match on the ground. Not so much on the bridge. That's ok because can line up the landmarks very close to how they line up in the Q pics. And can move about up and down the streets to doublecheck details. As I write this am thinking of a simple vid to illustrate. For now this pair of graphics shows the approximate location beneath the Q vantage point on the bridge. And, as a further reference, the second graphic shows the reverse view, looking back at that position.

The key marker on the ground is the differently colour pedestrian crosswalk across Northumberland on the hotel side of Victoria Embankment. Perhaps ironically, on the ground at that corner are the words Look Right with an arrow pointing in the direction that one would need to move the SV vantage point so as to more closely match the Q vantage points. Kek.

Another marker is the stop line on that side of Northumberland at the junction. It can be 'extended' toward the ground entrance to the bridge's elevator and thus extrapolated upward to the footbridge level. In this way it becomes evident that the traffic camera is too far away to be the Q vanatage point, or range as per the way this was figured and illustrated.

The set of pics of the junction and of CH show movement in the camera position. Some slight and some quite a lot. Obviously, LISAMI6 and CH3 show the greatest difference in positioning of the camera or cameras. Later will illustrate the CH pics and how the camera position for those actually extended the range within which that camera movement took place. For now, the red shaded areas show the estimated range for the set of pics.

Here is a guide to the pair of infographics on the bridge vantage point.

A. The roadside monument lines up with The Eye, almost. The camera position is off by a few steps. Given the close matches with other landmarks, this is a fair Q match.

The red arrows indicate the direction in which the vantage would need to change to even more closely match the London Pics. How much change remains an open question, natch, hence the range shown. The takeaway is that this range's boundary is several steps away from the post on which the traffic camera is perched.

B. Lamp posts line up almost 'on top of each other' with the foremost obscuring that behind, farther up the kerbside.

C. The gap between the post and the concrete edging or base under the fence at Whitehall Gardens is the marker. The positioning is very close to a match.

D. The white sign on the fence is rectangular, long side on the horizontal. The lampost intersects at about the middle of the length of that sign, in the Q pics, but is off a step or two in the best matching SV image. Again, the red arrow points in the direction for the needed correction in vantage.

The RED bracket shows the range of camera movement; and the white bendy arrow shows where the camera position would have been, just off frame in this SV image; the position would have been overhead on the footbridge. A vid would illustrate this notion more clearly than text description. The stop line on the road is highlighted in yellow.

These markers can be compared with the second infographic. Throwing in a third image that shows the camera position on the ground level. Later will do same for the CH pics.

MOAR ON WHY EMB/CH PICS ARE HAND-HELD AND NOT A TRAFCAM

(Re-poast from UK42)

Camera position for CH3.

Here are two screencaps from a video that shows a walk across the Jubilee footbridge toward The Corinthia Hotel and down to the street level.

The first cap shows a fairly close Q match for a small portion of the open source video's image. I think this comparison reaffirms previous attempts at positioning the Q camera relative to another small portion of CH3.

Note items A, B, C that show posts relative to the features of the corner of the hotel. Compare with the screencap. Fairly close, yes?

The second screencap of this video was captured several feet behind the first screencap and shows the position of the camera when the first screencap image was captured. I estimate the position is very near the man encircled in red. The x marks the spot.

That would place the Q camera on the street level in front of the green Cabbie Shelter at the foot of the Jubilee Bridge.

The focal length is different but the basic geometry seems to match well. Will prepare a short clip of the bridge crossing from that video.(end post)

I like this one because the match is quite guud with the vidcap.

=MOAR PEOOF FROM UK42 THAT EMB/CH PICS ARE HAND-HELD AND NOT TRAFCAM==

(RE-POAST FROM UK42)

Camera elevation for CH2.

This infographic compares a few lamp posts as seen in CH2 and in a vidcap of a recording made while descending the footbridge stairway. This cap would situate the Q camera about halfway down to the streetlevel.

>>12026

(RE-POST of a response to anon’s post on UK42)

This graphic was a response to the anon’s poast. The green line shows the second landing from which the CH2 pic was likely taken.

>>12027

MOAR PROOF FROM UK42 BREAD THAT CORINTHIA HOTEL PICS/EMB ARE HAND-HELD, NOT TRAFCAM

(RE-POST FROM UK42:)

Here's an SV MAY 2012 image marked up with the approximate camera positions for the London Pics that featured The Corinthia Hotel.

Also, here is a closeup cropped from a vidcap whch showed the view of the CH from about the 2nd step above the 2nd landing as figured from people walking up the steps beside the camera which was descending. Fairly close Q match of the posts at corner of CH.

And a vidcap from the point of view of camera climbing the same steps. The 2nd step of the 2nd landing is marked in yellow.

The vidcaps are from recordings made within last couple of years. Thot anons would find interesting now while waiting for the vid snippets. (End post)

This one has a great elevation graphic for where pics were taken from on Hungerford Bridge/Bridge steps/Hungerford Avenue.

>>12028

MOAR FROM UK42 TO PROVE EMB/CORINTHIA PICS ARE HAND-HELD, AND NOT A TRAFCAM

(Re-poast from UK42):

Reference vidcap for CH1 elevation.

This shows pretty gud elevation match with CH1 but the angle is wrong. The camera holder paused on about the 5th step above the 3rd landing while descending on the building side of the stairway, seemingly leaning against the glass railing.

Check the top of the lamp posts. Four are relative for gauging elevation with this vidcap, A, B, C, D.

Also compare the sign posts inside the white rectangle, labeled F.

Lamp posts E and G are not useful in this comparison but are useful in comparison with other vidcaps for other CH Q pics.

>>12032

I shouldn’t have to be answering those questions from a real anon. You are moar normie than you are anon.

How do you know WHO is in London when those pictures were taken? By knowing when the pictures were taken? Does knowing WHO (in what role/capacity) could be in London when those pictures were taken help to understand WHAT is happening in those pictures? Does expanding anons’ understanding that the London drops are more multifaceted than previously thought ADD or SUBSTRACT to anons’ understanding of the Q London drops. Why do you think someone proving you were wrong about your understanding of the Q London posts is some sort of DISPROVING of Q? It doesn’t disprove Q is you were wrong about Q.

Start thinking about the LONDON Christmas pics drops in terms of 3 different times, like ghosts of Christmas past, then-present and future-proves-past. DECEMBER 2013/2015/202?

I should NOT have had to explain.