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.

 

Bob Lazar UFO footage Analysis

page: 3
10
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 1 2015 @ 12:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: A51Watcher
And I think someone with 22 years experience using PTM software is quite familiar with how 'it is meant to be used'.

I went looking for confirmation before answering this, and I got the confirmation from the man that created PTM, 15 years ago, so, whoever did the video cannot have been using PTM for 22 years.




posted on Mar, 1 2015 @ 12:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: ArMaP
Only if you have a light on a specific point in the UFO lighting up and illuminating the UFO, then that light goes off and another one turns on, on a different position, and illuminates the same areas of the UFO that were illuminated by the first light.

PTM works by comparing the different lighting from the different sources and creating a virtual model of the surface based on the different shadows created on the whole object by the different light sources.



It appears this is your first exposure to PTM Armap, yes?

Or do you have a copy you can process images for us?


Programs such as Autocad and PTM provide features and options to accommodate different goals and solutions.

The link to the PTM website is just for basic explanation, as PTM (software) works in many ways.

For PTM you do not need an actual physical light source.

You can perfectly create PTM in a virtual environment.

In a computer you can shine artificial light from every angle you want and also at every intensity you want.


As you can see in the video, that is exactly what is being done, shining an artificial light from different angles at the object.

And what a coincidence!..., no matter what what angle the light is coming from, we see an oblong spheroid shaped object.

What are the odds huh?



edit on 1-3-2015 by A51Watcher because: the usual

edit on 1-3-2015 by A51Watcher because: (no reason given)

edit on 1-3-2015 by A51Watcher because: the usual

edit on 1-3-2015 by A51Watcher because: the usual



posted on Mar, 1 2015 @ 12:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: ArMaP

originally posted by: A51Watcher
And I think someone with 22 years experience using PTM software is quite familiar with how 'it is meant to be used'.

I went looking for confirmation before answering this, and I got the confirmation from the man that created PTM, 15 years ago, so, whoever did the video cannot have been using PTM for 22 years.



Confirmation is code for wikipedia huh? LOL

It is correct the name PTM is 15 years old but the technology itself is much older.

That someone claims to have "invented" PTM is really funny as the military intel has been using the technology much longer.



posted on Mar, 1 2015 @ 02:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: A51Watcher
It appears this is your first exposure to PTM Armap, yes?

No, it's the second.



Or do you have a copy you can process images for us?

I do have a copy of the software developed by HP but never used it.


Programs such as Autocad and PTM provide features and options to accommodate different goals and solutions.

Autocad is a program, PTM is a technique.


The link to the PTM website is just for basic explanation, as PTM (software) works in many ways.

Yes, PTM is mostly used to get a good representation of an object's texture, but it can also used for contrast enhancement and different depth of focus, but it always use several images that show a specific object in a fixed position while varying a parameter (light, depth of focus, time)


For PTM you do not need an actual physical light source.

You can perfectly create PTM in a virtual environment.

In a computer you can shine artificial light from every angle you want and also at every intensity you want.

I have been waiting for you to say that, as that's why I talked about "artificial images".


When you use Photoshop (or any other similar software) to change the light source in an image you do not get the same result as if you have done that with the physical object, as the image has no height data (it's just a 2D representation of the scene) and moving the light from left to right (for example) on an image of a face (for example) doesn't change the shadow of the nose from one side to the other. If it doesn't change the shadows, what does PTM have to work with?


As you can see in the video, that is exactly what is being done, shining an artificial light from different angles at the object.

And what a coincidence!..., no what what angle the light is coming from, we see an oblong spheroid shaped object.

What are the odds huh?

That's because the software in which the artificial light is projected doesn't know what to do with the shape of the object, as it doesn't have depth/height information it (regardless of what software is used) cannot really know the object's texture.



posted on Mar, 1 2015 @ 02:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: A51Watcher
Confirmation is code for wikipedia huh? LOL

No, it's exactly what I wrote, confirmation from the men that developed PTM while working at HP.


It is correct the name PTM is 15 years old but the technology itself is much older.

That someone claims to have "invented" PTM is really funny as the military intel has been using the technology much longer.

Then you/they shouldn't use the name "PTM" and use the original name. PTM was created at HP and was introduced by its creators to the forensic community, where it has been used mostly in analysing shoe and tire prints.



posted on Mar, 1 2015 @ 03:05 PM
link   
a reply to: A51Watcher

Thanks for that!



posted on Mar, 1 2015 @ 03:14 PM
link   
Just for interests sake, I would like to see this same process tried on, oh I dunno, maybe a shaky out-of-focus video of a Janet airlines landing light? Or maybe a military flare?



posted on Mar, 1 2015 @ 03:56 PM
link   
a reply to: FosterVS

So would I.



posted on Mar, 1 2015 @ 07:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: FosterVS
Just for interests sake, I would like to see this same process tried on, oh I dunno, maybe a shaky out-of-focus video of a Janet airlines landing light? Or maybe a military flare?



It turns out finding such videos is relatively easy.

I will see about having some processed.



edit on 1-3-2015 by A51Watcher because: the usual



posted on Mar, 1 2015 @ 08:27 PM
link   


and moving the light from left to right (for example) on an image of a face (for example) doesn't change the shadow of the nose from one side to the other. If it doesn't change the shadows, what does PTM have to work with?


the light is already moving on the ufo. there's more than one light source on the ufo, and it is spinning (the ufo, that is).
edit on 1-3-2015 by undo because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 1 2015 @ 08:35 PM
link   






posted on Mar, 2 2015 @ 03:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: undo
the light is already moving on the ufo. there's more than one light source on the ufo, and it is spinning (the ufo, that is).

Is the light changing position on the UFO? If the light is fixed on the UFO and the UFO is spinning then there aren't any changes in the light and shadow, as the light remains in the same spot on the UFO.

I think that, even if the light was moving on the UFO, those images would not be useful for PTM, as a light on the object projects shadows in all directions and PTM is expecting light sources external to the object, so all the shadows are projected in the same direction for it to be able to calculate the normal for each pixel, from which it can create a reproduction of the texture of the object.



posted on Mar, 2 2015 @ 08:14 AM
link   

originally posted by: ArMaP

originally posted by: undo
the light is already moving on the ufo. there's more than one light source on the ufo, and it is spinning (the ufo, that is).

Is the light changing position on the UFO? If the light is fixed on the UFO and the UFO is spinning then there aren't any changes in the light and shadow, as the light remains in the same spot on the UFO.

I think that, even if the light was moving on the UFO, those images would not be useful for PTM, as a light on the object projects shadows in all directions and PTM is expecting light sources external to the object, so all the shadows are projected in the same direction for it to be able to calculate the normal for each pixel, from which it can create a reproduction of the texture of the object.


the ufo is spinning. it has light sources on it that are spinning also, and there may even be light sources on it, that remain stationary, as well (those parts of the ufo that are not spinning). meanwhile, as the spinning part is spinning, the entire craft is also changing angle relative to the viewer.



posted on Mar, 2 2015 @ 09:41 AM
link   

originally posted by: undo
the ufo is spinning.

That I understand.



it has light sources on it that are spinning also, and there may even be light sources on it, that remain stationary, as well (those parts of the ufo that are not spinning).

So, parts of the UFO are spinning and other parts are not spinning, but the whole UFO is spinning?
That I don't understand.



meanwhile, as the spinning part is spinning, the entire craft is also changing angle relative to the viewer.

For PTM to work it needs images in which the object doesn't change angle but the direction of the (external) light changes.



posted on Mar, 2 2015 @ 11:14 AM
link   
a reply to: ArMaP

take a merry go round, for example. the base of it, never spins but will turn if the entire merry go round is picked up and physically turned.

since each image is a moment in time where the angle is snapshotted, but is being acted upon by variations in light vs. the spinning of the light sources as the angle changes, whether stationary / turning or spinning/turning, there are plenty of opportunities for sensitive graphics software to pick up nuances in light and shadow.


edit on 2-3-2015 by undo because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 2 2015 @ 12:36 PM
link   
a reply to: A51Watcher

Unfortunately we have people that think looking at LOW sorry VERY LOW RESOLUTION blobs of light in stills and video can be shown to be alien craft by using some edge detect, posterize or any other effect that can be used on a picture in photoshop or any other image editing software.

The smell of bull cookies fills the air, 35 yrs of taking pictures from fully manual SLR's to my current DSLR gives me the nose for that on MANY threads posted on here.



posted on Mar, 2 2015 @ 01:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: ArMaP
As interesting and as useless as a lava lamp.



I agree. I honestly thought the video was intended to be a joke.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯



posted on Mar, 2 2015 @ 05:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: undo
since each image is a moment in time where the angle is snapshotted, but is being acted upon by variations in light vs. the spinning of the light sources as the angle changes, whether stationary / turning or spinning/turning, there are plenty of opportunities for sensitive graphics software to pick up nuances in light and shadow.

Yes, there are plenty of opportunities, but the data that can be collected on those occasions is not usable by PTM.



posted on Mar, 2 2015 @ 07:40 PM
link   
Nevermind.
edit on 2-3-2015 by FosterVS because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 21 2015 @ 03:18 PM
link   
I have a few questions regarding Bob Lazar and company:

1) How many times did he, John Lear, Gene and company witness the flying saucers test?
2) After Bob went public, I assume the schedules of the tests were changed, right? I think I read somewhere on the web it used to be on Wedsnesdays at midnight.

3) Has all the footage (photos and video) of the sightings ever been published? I havne't been able to find much on the web, other than some light glowing pretty far away, like the one analized on this thread. Is that all?
edit on 21-6-2015 by Beyond1Reality because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
10
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join