Yeah and it gets to the ground far too quickly I figure.

Well, it was probably heavier than an average camera.

Grazie

could it be this guy went the whole hog with a fast lens?

Yeah, a real swine to control.

Grazie

And what's with the rolling frames like it was an analog TV. Plus it kind of looks like it went from a regular lens in the plane, to some sort of bizarre fish-eye lens during the fall (ground distortion and what not), then back to a regular lens after it hits the ground and when the pig walks up.

I dunno. When my cameras suffer a severe jolt they tend to show that frame tearing and rolling too, though usually only for a very brief moment. Possibly it has to do with the SD card contacts momentarily becoming disconnected? Seems like that would abort the recording, but maybe it's the error correction doing the best job it can.

I do not believe, however, that the camera would have suddenly gotten perfect stability and then remained pointing in one direction. I'm also doubtful it would have survived the impact at landing.

Besides, it landed lens up! Who's law is it that states "a slice of bread, when dropped, always lands jelly side down" ?

I could see the errors. I could see it landing lens up. I could see it landing in some slop and being stable.

I don't see how it could survive the fall. No info on what type of camera it was though or how it was recorded.

Interesting copyright on the youtube page though: they say contact them for licensing. Since it's not their camera & not their footage, they don't own the footage and the person who owns the camera would. Unless, of course, they took it. It would be like a copy of Avengers landing in my yard before it's released in theaters. No court is going to say "Yes, you own the movie now".

So I say stunt.

I think it was a GoPro - unless it hit cement, it could survive.
That also explains the fisheye look.

I think it was a Skydiver camera attached to helmet - would mean he clipped it on exit - which can totally happen. On my first jump the camera guy caught his and jarred if out of frame and I have no video of my first jump :(

They may have edited out 30 minutes of waiting for a pig to come up to it...

or maybe it was all faked (I never believe anything anymore online) but seems kinda pointless, not THAT cool to be viral or sell something

rewatching it... I suspect he was holding it fliming... . then reached out to film the plane ahead or backwards.... with winds a minimum 80 to 150mph, it caught him off guard and he dropped it

Could be real. I think a careful frame-by-frame analysis at certain key points would be necessary to prove it was a continuous take.

A GoPro could survive an imact in mud at terminal velocity. The "frame tearing" could be from rapid spinning--see numerous instances of propellers turning and the really weird resulting artifacts due to the rolling shutter.

Still, it's a rare coincidence, with the pig and all. Could have been edited. Frame-by-frame would tell.

I don't see the pig & muck as a coincidence, just because where else would they skydive? Can't do urbal/suburban areas for the most part.

If Spot could comment he could say if it was legit or not. I'd imagine this is something that one skydiver would talk about to another.

I see nothing it that says "fake", there's videos on YT from ages ago of cameras falling from planes and surviving and there's videos from cameras on rockets that look much the same as the rocket descends. The weird video of the fall itself is easily explained by the combination f the camera tumbling as it falls and the rolling shutter. The GoPro is pretty light so even though it'll be falling quickly there's not much momentum so the impact will be low.

To me the most obvious issue here is why would anyone bother to fake such a video. It'd take a considerable amount of work to fake this that'd cost more in time than it would to hire a plane and throw a camera out of it.

Bob.

First thought I had was that the skydiver used a GoPro. Second thought was that spinning rate and rolling shutter gave the funky stabilized image on the way down. Final thought was a GoPro in its cage landing in a soggy pig sty is far from the worst fate these little cameras suffer.

Turns out that all my hunches were correct, according to the landowner, plane passenger, as revealed by an interview of both: http://news.cnet.com/8301-17938_105-57618789-1/gopro-falls-from-plane-lands-in-pigpen-gets-snuffled/.

Ironic, that the real thing thing looks like a cheap effect that prob no one here would think to use if trying to fabricate in post.
I'm sure I read somewhere years ago of a skydiver surviving an un-opening chute due to landing in a muddy slop.... Will google.....

The camera surviving isnt that much of a stretch after reading this. Simply amazing stories-

http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showthread.php?173042-Amazing-Parachute-Survival-Falls-of-WWII

In World War II there were several reports of military aircrew surviving long falls: Nick Alkemade (UK), Alan Magee (USA), and Ivan Chisov (USSR) all fell at least 18,000 feet (5,500 metres) and survived.


STEPHEN ALKEMADE
Flight Sergeant Nicholas Stephen Alkemade (1923 – 1987) was a tail gunner for a Royal Air Force Avro Lancaster bomber during World War II who survived a fall of 18,000 feet (5500 m) without a parachute after his plane was shot down over Germany.

On 24 March 1944, 21 year old Alkemade was a member of No. 115 Squadron RAF and his Lancaster II "S for Sugar" was flying to the east of Schmallenberg, Germany on its return from a 300 bomber raid on Berlin, when it was attacked by a Luftwaffe Junkers Ju-88 night-fighter, caught fire and began to spiral out of control. Because his parachute was destroyed by the fire, Alkemade opted to jump from the aircraft without one, preferring his death to be quick, rather than being burnt to death. He fell 18,000 ft (5500 m) to the ground below. His fall was broken by pine trees and a soft snow cover on the ground. He was able to move his arms and legs and suffered only a sprained leg. The Lancaster crashed in flames and the pilot Jack Newman and three other members of the seven man crew did not survive and are buried in Hanover War Cemetery.

He was subsequently captured and interviewed by the Gestapo who were initially suspicious of his claim to have fallen without a parachute until the wreckage of the aircraft was examined. He was then a celebrated POW before being repatriated in May 1945. (Reportedly the orderly Germans were so impressed that Alkemade had bailed out without a parachute and lived that they gave him a certificate testifying to the fact.)


ALAN MAGEE
Alan Eugene Magee (1919 – 2003) was an American airman during World War II who survived a 22,000 ft (6700 m) fall from his damaged B-17 Flying Fortress. He was featured in Smithsonian Magazine as one of the 10 most amazing survival stories of World War II.

On 3 January 1943, Magee's B-17 was on a daylight bombing run over Saint-Nazaire, France when German fighters shot off a section of the right wing causing the aircraft to enter a deadly spin. This was Magee's seventh mission.

Magee was wounded in the attack but managed to escape from the ball turret. Unfortunately, his parachute had been damaged and rendered useless by the attack, so having no choice, he leapt from the plane without a parachute, rapidly losing consciousness due to the altitude.

Magee fell over four miles before crashing through the glass roof of the St. Nazaire railroad station. Somehow the glass roof mitigated Magee's impact and rescuers found him still alive on the floor of the station.

Magee was taken as a prisoner of war and given medical treatment by his captors. He had 28 shrapnel wounds in addition to the damage from the fall. He had several broken bones, severe damage to his nose and eye, and lung and kidney damage, and his right arm was nearly severed.

Magee was liberated in May 1945 and received the Air Medal for meritorious conduct and the Purple Heart. After the war Magee earned his pilot's license and enjoyed flying. He worked in the airline industry in a variety of roles. He retired in 1979 and moved to northern New Mexico.

On 3 January 1993 the people of St. Nazaire honored Magee and the crew of his bomber by erecting a 6-foot (1.8 m) tall memorial to them.


IVAN CHISOV
Ivan Mikhailovich Chisov was a Soviet Airforce Lieutenant who is notable for surviving a fall of nearly 22,000 ft (6700 m).

Lieutenant Chisov was a Soviet Airforce Lieutenant on an Ilyushin Il-4 bomber. In January 1942, German fighters attacked his bomber, forcing him to bail out at an altitude of approximately 22,000 feet (6700 meters). With the battle still raging around him, Lt. Chisov intentionally did not open his parachute, since he feared that he would just be an easy target for an angry German while he was dangling from his parachute harness. He planned on dropping below the level of the battle, and then, once he was out of sight of the German fighters, he would open his chute and land safely. However, he lost consciousness on the way down, and was unable to pull the rip cord.

Miraculously, he was not killed. He hit the edge of a snowy ravine at an estimated speed of somewhere between 120 miles per hour (193 kilometers) and 150 mph (241 km), then slid, rolled, and plowed his way down to the bottom. He suffered spinal injuries and a broken pelvis, but was able to fly again three months later.

Just as an aside, it matters little how high the person started from. Once they reach terminal velocity (where the drag equals the downward pull of gravity) then they will stay at that speed until hitting the ground.

From what I see on some websites, terminal velocity is about 120mph and you need to be about 2,000' up to reach that speed. So from 2,000' to 18,000' to 125,000' (that recent balloon record) it makes little difference to the unfortunate soul when the ground is eventually reached.

The terminal velocity is the airspeed. Which is why skydivers at 15,000 ft can routinely hit 200MPH (relative to the ground) in a free-fall, or the Red Bull guy can break the sound barrier from 150,000 ft.

Simply put, if you leave an airplane at 10,000 ft with no working parachute, the thin atmosphere will let you go well past the "terminal velocity" of 120MPH, and because of inertia, you will still be going faster than 120MPH when you splat.

I went back a looked at that video of the guy who broke the sound barrier from 120,000 feet. It appears he would still splat at 120mph.

He rapidly decelerated as the air got thicker to where he was going 127mph just before he pulled his chute.

I would imagine though that a person can greatly increase terminal velocity by tucking in arms or by assuming a fetal position.

I would imagine though that a person can greatly increase terminal velocity by tucking in arms or by assuming a fetal position.

The easiest way, assuming you are awake and in control, is to assume a vertical position (feet down and head up, or head down and feet up)

In other words ... make your cross section against the wind the smallest it can be.

Back to the original post ... Please!... a cameraman would hold on to his camera, even when it falls. That’s a given.

You are assuming that he was holding it in the first place. A small, GoPro type, camera is often mounted (on a helmet, on an armband), not held in the hand.

Yes, it got knocked off his helmet when he jumped from the plane. And GoPro terminal velocity is probably less than human terminal velocity. What I think is scary is that one wavy bit of sky and a close up of a pig snout from raw footage from a $400 at the most camera gets approaching ten million views on YouTube. Need to know what film school the author went to so I can enroll. Thinking of trading in my gear except the GoPro, buying a cat or a pig and investing the balance. It's a new world out there.

I read somewhere that GoPro was going to go public. Wonder if the company is going to be the Next Big Thing?

"It's a new world out there."

yes.. yes it is. CRAPPY music and train wrecks (and boobies) will ALWAYS get millions more clicks then well written and shot shows.