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.

 

Photographer captures something she can't explain in skies over Greenville County

page: 4
36
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 19 2015 @ 02:55 PM
link   
a reply to: Arbitrageur

Yes, but the video is talking about actual objects which are back-lit and out of focus. That's not the same as lens flare.




posted on Feb, 19 2015 @ 02:56 PM
link   
It's a dirty sensor. :\

Depending on the aperture of the pictures taken, these dots usually don't show up until you stop down to f/8 ~ f/11.

The easiest way to test this is to take another picture of another bright light source (light bulb, headlight.. etc.) with the same exposure/aperture settings.



posted on Feb, 19 2015 @ 03:01 PM
link   
Kewl Pics ....



posted on Feb, 19 2015 @ 03:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: EnigmaAgent
My theory on the lights on the lens flare are just dust particles inside the camera or on the camera lens. But thats my take on it.


Here's a dirty camera, plus white light saturating onto the darker colours, there's also a couple of lens flares. not much like our rather tidy subject at all...but just to give some idea, and not to say that you could ultimately be correct.





Better detail here, files.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Feb, 19 2015 @ 03:31 PM
link   
a reply to: smurfy

Pretty sure that's just the windows pane that the focus was on. Sensor dust or lens dust don't show up at such a shallow DOF. (Notice how blurry the houses in the background are?) If I had to guess, this was taken at f/2.8 or wider.



posted on Feb, 19 2015 @ 04:55 PM
link   
They are lens flares. 100%

The dots could be lens dirt. In the 3d profession, we try hard to ad these kind of flaws into our compositions.



posted on Feb, 19 2015 @ 05:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: ipofaon
a reply to: smurfy

Pretty sure that's just the windows pane that the focus was on. Sensor dust or lens dust don't show up at such a shallow DOF. (Notice how blurry the houses in the background are?) If I had to guess, this was taken at f/2.8 or wider.


I would guess the blurriness is partly due to some visible upward motion when taken, and while it is a very bright picture, there doesn't seem to be much in the way of interior reflection if it is a window, but there also seems to be some white spots on dark that are static, but nothing remotely like the subject picture here. The author is Vibhu Sridhar. What I am saying is that if another known and mundane picture and why, the same as the thread picture turns up, I would be completely happy to say that it is what most here think it is, a type of lens flare, otherwise there are few options left, other than some tampering going on, or something unknown.



posted on Feb, 19 2015 @ 05:53 PM
link   
a reply to: elevenaugust

I learned a lot about lens flares today, and I would say these look like them except for the dots in the center... those are weird.
edit on 19pmThu, 19 Feb 2015 18:03:52 -0600kbpmkAmerica/Chicago by darkbake because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 19 2015 @ 05:53 PM
link   
Not any lens flare I've seen, the dots that is. Odd that someone else saw it from a car too.
edit on 19-2-2015 by alienscot1 because: spelling



posted on Feb, 19 2015 @ 07:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: network dude

Am I the only one seeing that sphere is cut at the top, like a lens flare of the Sun that has the lower part covered?



posted on Feb, 19 2015 @ 07:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: alienscot1
Not any lens flare I've seen, the dots that is. Odd that someone else saw it from a car too.


Okay, let's look at this another way, as you understand taking pictures. Remember this from Jaxa,

I got that capture from Google Earth a good while ago, called it the Flying Gibson and saw that it only appeared in a close resolution, and that there were many other examples elsewhere on the Google Moon. and then later there was a bit of hoopla on the 'net about 'Alien Moon' and It ended up that the pictures by Google were tiled, and that the LRO showed even better pictures of the target, and that it was just rocks, the explanation here,

“The answer is that Google stores multiple resolution image tiles, and uses a different set of tiles depend on how much you are zoomed in,” West explained. “The higher-resolution tiles have some filters applied to them, to make them seem sharper. Unfortunately it seems these sharpening filters have created some noise along the boundaries between light and dark regions, and that is what has created these dots.”
In the case of the mysterious V-shaped object, the crater’s adjacent bright rim is also V-shaped, which the dots dutifully follow."
So, if you look at the 'Flying V' and elsewhere on Google Moon, that is mostly the case, not always but mostly.

So it's down to sharpening filters there, were those fliters applied Physically or automatic? I'm not sure, nobody is saying definitively.
It's reasonable then to say this is a possible reason for the pictures shown here could have those pretty well ordered dots appear, or that dots can show up in digital pictures, without a very near proximity 'bleed'
On the other hand, I could be talking Chalk and Cheese in comparing the Google pictures to the subject in this thread.



posted on Feb, 19 2015 @ 08:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: ArMaP

originally posted by: network dude

Am I the only one seeing that sphere is cut at the top, like a lens flare of the Sun that has the lower part covered?


No, there is also a 'matching' band that cuts through one of the other pictures. So is this deception do you reckon given the number of parties involved?



posted on Feb, 19 2015 @ 08:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: smurfy
No, there is also a 'matching' band that cuts through one of the other pictures.

I didn't bother much with the other photos after seeing that on the first one.



So is this deception do you reckon given the number of parties involved?

Unfortunately, it's always a possibility.



posted on Feb, 19 2015 @ 08:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: Flatcoat
a reply to: Arbitrageur

Yes, but the video is talking about actual objects which are back-lit and out of focus. That's not the same as lens flare.
The lens flare is out of focus, and you can't see backlit objects in space, maybe just their shadow. There's no backlighting in the video from a photographic perspective. The announcer mentions that word but he doesn't say there's backlighting in the video, rather he only uses it to describe the configuration of the light source used, and guess what, the sun is also a light source. If you knew anything about backlit photography, you'd know that is not backlit photography in either the original video or the demo. It's talking about dust particles appearing to go behind a distant tether. If they weren't lit from the front or the side, you wouldn't see them. He is putting a light source in front of a distant front-lit simulation of the tether. Since the sun is also light source, it's a fair comparison to the photo you asked about.



edit on 19-2-2015 by Arbitrageur because: clarification



posted on Feb, 19 2015 @ 09:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: Mianeye

originally posted by: Annee
There are other reports from people seeing the same object.

Wonder if they're all using the same camera.


You got some links ?

I don't think it's nibiru
but interesting that someone else came up with a similar image.

edit on 19-2-2015 by Freezer because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 19 2015 @ 10:40 PM
link   
OK I Solved what this Orb Sphere Is

What is Seen Here


Its shown in the 1930s

In a Science Fiction Pulp Magazine... that is... Art become Life !







Formally called a Foo Fighter

Back in World War II ....

Then it Could of been Flares from the Cockpit!
but then again you have Gunners from Bombers in Both Side of the War
seeing the Same thing where there was no Plex glass Window ..

I would show a Pic of Foo Fighters around Bombers but seeing We are in the Photoshop World of Fakery

Nothing can be confirmed anymore not Even Video !!

that we you must Look at Newspapers the Real Old Photos to Film on Reels

In a time there was No CGI an Era when it was Difficult to Fake

Mysterious ‘Foo Fighters,’ Balls Of Fire, Trail U.S. Night Flyers
Thought at First to Be Explosive, but None as Yet Has Damaged a Plane
www.project1947.com...


Who knows i need more info..

The Photo with the Cross is strange with a Ring Cloud around the Foo Fighter, ORB, Sphere what have you...

if anyone looked...



edit on 42015ThursdayfAmerica/Chicago249 by Wolfenz because: (no reason given)

edit on 42015ThursdayfAmerica/Chicago249 by Wolfenz because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 20 2015 @ 01:27 AM
link   
I can't believe no one has mentioned this yet. Since there is no date of picture only info is Sunday. So i will assume it is this past Sunday. Mars and Venus set a couple hours after the Sun. Only thing i can think of that explains this. As for the dots. Beats me.



posted on Feb, 20 2015 @ 01:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: antoinemarionette
I think the lens flare crowd is behaving like brainwashed automatons who are terrified of being ridiculed for saying this is an anomalous object and it might even be an UNIDENTIFIED flying object.


Exactly. I find it funny looking at the bandwagoners parroting "Lens Flare" once its initially stated in the thread.

Someone could have replied with "Venus" "Ice Crystals" or "Swamp Gas" and same thing would have happened.



posted on Feb, 20 2015 @ 02:00 AM
link   

originally posted by: antoinemarionette
I think the lens flare crowd is behaving like brainwashed automatons who are terrified of being ridiculed for saying this is an anomalous object and it might even be an UNIDENTIFIED flying object.

Since when does a "lens flare" have symmetrically spaced glowing dots running along a very large and evenly circular orb? You guys need to check your programming because you've been duped into seeing only what you've been told to see by homogenizing every object into a "lens flare".

Ridiculous.



I don't know if this is a lens flare...but I so like your comment.



posted on Feb, 20 2015 @ 05:59 AM
link   
removed - wrong thread
Doh!
edit on 20-2-2015 by McGinty because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
36
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join