It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

UFO - Saginaw, MI - 5:06 pm est

page: 3
21
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 20 2014 @ 04:37 PM
link   
a reply to: CirqueDeTruth

One thing about birds of prey also, is that when they are diving at 150+mph they have their wings and everything tucked pretty tight for speed, and can be pretty hard to see. I have seen a few red tail hawks dive and they are just a dot and move very quickly.
It would be easy to miss if you wren't focusing on the exact area in the sky where it started from. But, yeah, it still could be a craft. But too many variables against it being a craft.
No doubt there are craft up there, just keep that camera goin'




posted on Apr, 20 2014 @ 05:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: CirqueDeTruth
Here's the story...



OP, you are using a Sony Cybershot 16.2megapixel

CMOS sensor.


You captured an a bird and I'd like you to take that camera out and get 50 more flying bird pictures - prove this to yourself.

CMOS sensors cause a phenomenon called "blurds", "blurry birds".

Then, go get a consumer grade digital camera with a CCD sensor (if you can find one) and do the experiment again, 50 flying bird pictures.

Sorry, not a UFO.

Sources:

SENSOR ARTIFACTS AND CMOS ROLLING SHUTTER
by Barry Green dvxuser.com...

White Paper by Sony itself describing the differences of CMOS to CCD,
www.vodtech.eng.br...

In pertinent part,

In CCD image capture, all the pixels are synchronized. They all start accumulating charge at the same time, and they all trannsfer their charges simultaneously. As we've seen, SMOS sensors operate according to a different principle. CMOS sensors accumulate charges and read them out one line at a time. This can create geometric distortion when there is a relative motion between the camera and the subject."



posted on Apr, 20 2014 @ 07:49 PM
link   
a reply to: SayonaraJupiter

It is an interesting experiment and I will take my camera out tomorrow and try and recreate the image taking pictures of what my naked eye identifies as birds.

I did take some photos and my camera does have a defect, as SonoftheSon suggested. I've had this camera for over 5 years. But I don't have the money to even consider spending money on a new camera, no matter how much I would like to. I'm not very poor, but I'm still living month to month. I live in a tight budget. There are always needs that surpass my wants.


Anyhow, when I focus my camera at a certain focal strength - two spots will show up in the frames. But they are perfectly circular and only show up as darker spots. It cannot account for the object in my picture.

Thanks for your post. Perhaps, I'll convince myself it was just a big big bird.
It will make people feel all is right with the world, I'm sure. Just as soon as I fall in line.


CdT



posted on Apr, 20 2014 @ 08:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: CirqueDeTruth
Perhaps, I'll convince myself it was just a big big bird.
It will make people feel all is right with the world, I'm sure. Just as soon as I fall in line.


CdT


I'm interested in why you think it was a big bird? There is no way of knowing the distance, and therefore the size, but if I had to guess I'd say it was quite a small garden bird.

Looking at the ratio of length to height, that implies quite a lot of motion blur, so the angular speed across the frame was quite high to get that kind of blur at 1/250sec. So while we cannot know the distance, it does mean it was likely quite close to the camera and therefore not very big.

edit on 20-4-2014 by Rob48 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 20 2014 @ 09:03 PM
link   
a reply to: Rob48

Because I was the one who took the picture. I know how high the houses are, how far out the trees in the shot are, and I'm quite certain, there was no bird that came into range of that camera when I took that shot. If it is as close as you are suggesting, I know I would have seen it and said, aw crap. And have already discarded the photo, the entire experience.

Judging by where the object appears in the sky, in relation to the houses and trees that reside in my area - it's hundreds of feet in the air, quite a ways back. When my very conservative Uncle, who came to visit for Easter today, had a look at it (he's a skeptic) even he said it's too big to be a bird. He walked outside, stood where I stood, looked out in relation to where the photograph was showing the object and it's too big to be a bird - unless it was an albatross or dragon! Which I'd have noticed. He believes it has to be a plane that I didn't see.
My daughter is wondering if it's a bug that zipped by the lens just as I was taking a shot, that I didn't see. My husband still maintains it's a UFO. Meaning unidentifiable. Not meaning aliens! LOL.

I'm just mystified. It was an interesting experience, I put down in my journal for remembrance and shared with you all. As suggested, I'll have to do some picture taking and see if I can't convince myself it's a bird by recreating a similar image with the local birds in the area. I tried to take some at dusk, but the orbs were terrible. I'll have to wait for daylight. Today was just busy, it's Easter. Family day. Visitors. So I'll let you know, if I can reconcile it being a bird, after taking some pics tomorrow. We shall see.


CdT



posted on Apr, 20 2014 @ 10:27 PM
link   
Since you don't seem very receptive to the responses of the question you asked. What do you think it is?
I'm going with bird
edit on 20-4-2014 by mtnshredder because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 20 2014 @ 10:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: CirqueDeTruth
a reply to: Rob48
I tried to take some at dusk, but the orbs were terrible. I'll have to wait for daylight.



Orbs?



posted on Apr, 20 2014 @ 10:53 PM
link   
a reply to: mtnshredder

I don't know what it is. I certainly don't think it's mind control as has been suggested, or a bird. It's unidentifiable. I'll likely never know what it was. But I was excited about the photo capture and how I came about to take the photo. So I thought I'd share. It was interesting, a personal experience. I should have put it in the Gray Area, I think.

As to orbs - yeah - they happen. Dust, bugs, or whatever you believe they could be.

CdT



posted on Apr, 21 2014 @ 02:43 AM
link   

originally posted by: CirqueDeTruth
a reply to: Rob48

Because I was the one who took the picture. I know how high the houses are, how far out the trees in the shot are, and I'm quite certain, there was no bird that came into range of that camera when I took that shot. If it is as close as you are suggesting, I know I would have seen it and said, aw crap. And have already discarded the photo, the entire experience.

But that's the point. From a 2-D image, You simply cannot tell where the bird/object was in relation to the houses and trees. It could have flown from just behind the house at the left and be at a similar horizontal distance from the camera as the chimney at the bottom right. That would make it a rather small bird.

And I've taken photos without noticing birds flying across the frame. It's easily done. If it was flying out from behind the house, it would be across your field of view in a flash.
edit on 21-4-2014 by Rob48 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 21 2014 @ 04:16 AM
link   
It'a George Jetson suitcase transporter..




posted on Apr, 21 2014 @ 04:23 AM
link   
I would be the first to jump to your defense if it was even unidentifiable Cdt , but I can see the same shape that I have seen before when it is known to be birds,

And I accept you took the photo, but like me and everyone else your awareness and perception isn't flawless so I think you could have very easily missed a bird flying silently and swiftly.

Keep trying though, they are definitely up there somewhere.



posted on Apr, 21 2014 @ 06:42 AM
link   





posted on Apr, 21 2014 @ 06:47 AM
link   
I've learned to listen to those inner voices.
And no .... I'm not 'hearing voices'.
I'm talking about the subconscious nudges that people get.
A quiet life helps you to listen better ...



posted on Apr, 21 2014 @ 06:50 AM
link   
a reply to: PheonixReborn
This clip should be required viewing for anyone who describes the size of an unknown object at an unknown distance.



posted on Apr, 21 2014 @ 09:10 AM
link   

originally posted by: Soapusmaximus
I would be the first to jump to your defense if it was even unidentifiable Cdt , but I can see the same shape that I have seen before when it is known to be birds,

And I accept you took the photo, but like me and everyone else your awareness and perception isn't flawless so I think you could have very easily missed a bird flying silently and swiftly.
.


Oh, Great! Now UFO's are appearing as birds, so nobody will recognize them!

I wonder how many alien creatures were piloting that 'bird'?


After careful scrutiny of the photograph, I have to go with: bird/plane/lens flare/ dust/bug/glare/atmospheric moisture/interdimensional hallucination/sleep-walking UFO.

I see them all the time.
( But only AFTER the film is developed.)




posted on Apr, 21 2014 @ 11:05 AM
link   
Oh Look! A bird.



Look Again, another bird....



Ohhhh, another bird...



NOT a bird.






CdT



posted on Apr, 23 2014 @ 01:49 AM
link   

originally posted by: CirqueDeTruth
Oh Look! A bird.

CdT


Wow. I'm glad you did the camera experiment! So I wonder what the camera experts have to say about it now?

I was prepared to say that your original picture was CMOS "blurd" but now you have clear bird pictures, now I don't know what it is.



posted on Apr, 23 2014 @ 05:16 AM
link   
a reply to: SayonaraJupiter

I'm only seeing blank squares for the other three bird pics.

But just because not all birds look like X, doesn't mean that X is not a bird. That would be a pretty basic logical fail.



posted on Apr, 25 2014 @ 01:18 AM
link   

originally posted by: Rob48
a reply to: SayonaraJupiter

I'm only seeing blank squares for the other three bird pics.

But just because not all birds look like X, doesn't mean that X is not a bird. That would be a pretty basic logical fail.


Honestly Rob, I would not trust a CMOS camera for UFO pictures even if it had a Zeiss lens like the model the OP says he used to take these pictures. CMOS is cheaper to produce and thus a large majority of consumer devices are CMOS.

I own a slightly older Sony cybershot with a CCD (also Zeiss lens) and it's far, far superior to CMOS.



posted on Apr, 26 2014 @ 02:13 PM
link   
a reply to: SayonaraJupiter

It was a good suggestion, Saonara, so I did do the experiment. I only got up to only 20 photos though, not 50, before I realized every one was going to look like a bird, or if it was very far away, I could identify it as a bird, since I took the shot of it. Those looked like little black squares in the photo though - not like what I caught that I premised the OP on.

I don't know what I caught on camera. But I found it interesting enough to share on ATS and I found your suggestions easy enough to accomplish, that I didn't mind doing the experiment.

Thanks!
CdT




top topics



 
21
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join