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.

 

3D Footage Of Red Orbs

page: 2
39
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 19 2015 @ 08:22 PM
link   
a reply to: shefskitchen

Always works that way with Interstellar tourists. They create the overcast simulation to disguise themselves and draw moisture to refuel. I appreciate what you caught on film, I know that you are excited about the technology you used but what did you observe with the naked eye? How did it differ from the video coverage? Did other see the craft or just you and your Lady?




posted on May, 19 2015 @ 08:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: Spader
Drones are going to be the end of credible UFO sightings. It's so easy to mistakee strange lights in odd formations for otherworldly craft. Oh how the military must be happy. (Blame them on the drones)
Chinese lanterns already did that. Now people are going to be thinking the Chinese lanterns they're seeing are drones



posted on May, 19 2015 @ 08:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: shefskitchen
a reply to: roadgravel

You're commenting on a 3D video, while watching it on a conventional screen. With due respect, I can't take your commentary seriously until you see it in 3D.

To compare: it's like listening to commentary on the first colour TV broadcast, from somebody who has a black & white set. You know?


Then why post it on youtube and link to a forum where people are using normal computer monitor and phones.

So I take from what you are saying that in 3D the two separate lights in 2D form into one red orb in 3D? Or that it cannot be seen in 2D and the two bright lights in the middle of the screen are not the orb.

If my asking questions to understand if I am even looking at the correct thing is offending you, well, tough. Questions happen here.

I stop trying to watch the 'best footage ever' as you put it.



posted on May, 19 2015 @ 08:33 PM
link   
a reply to: roadgravel

I didn't ask folks with conventional devices to tune in. The title quite clearly states "3D Footage".

I didn't get offended. Again, I clearly stated my intent. Sorry if it came across as aggressive.

Nobody but you brought up "best footage ever".

I'm sharing my truth as I perceived it at that moment. Only 1.5 billion people on this planet can watch it via 3D TV, 3D tablet, Occulus rift, Holo lens & google cardboard headgear.



posted on May, 19 2015 @ 08:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: shefskitchen
a reply to: roadgravel

You're commenting on a 3D video, while watching it on a conventional screen. With due respect, I can't take your commentary seriously until you see it in 3D.

To compare: it's like listening to commentary on the first colour TV broadcast, from somebody who has a black & white set. You know?

Can you explain to a layman why a 3d set is needed? I thought 3d was only a red/green offset in which your eyes tried to blend but couldnt that sort of gave an ambient occlusion effect.



posted on May, 19 2015 @ 08:44 PM
link   
a reply to: Gothmog

Sure thing!

An active 3D shutter system, will show the most depth and detail. There will be no distortions or false colours created from overlays of primary colour combos.

A passive polarized system is brighter than the active shutter system, however it only holds half the dynamic range of the active system.

A 2 colour anaglyph system is cute. However riddled with problems. Overlay distortion. Colour distortion. More susceptable to image ghosting, the further an object gets from the focal point. Nowhere near the same dynamic range. Tiny field of depth, especially in a dark video, like this.



posted on May, 19 2015 @ 08:47 PM
link   


I didn't ask folks with conventional devices to tune in. The title quite clearly states "3D Footage".


No where in the opening post does it say 'do not watch, comment or ask questions' unless you watch the videos in 3D.

You should make it clear that '3D footage' in the title means no comments or questions unless a person uses 3d equipment.

I leave your thread.



posted on May, 19 2015 @ 08:53 PM
link   
a reply to: roadgravel

Can't please 'em all. Thanks for your 2 cents.



posted on May, 19 2015 @ 09:31 PM
link   
Oh you're local? I work right on the waterfront Toronto side. Next time these are active (which I hear is a lot) let me know and I'll go check it out.



posted on May, 19 2015 @ 09:51 PM
link   
a reply to: kidcraig

If you're in Toronto, best time to check for them is during fireworks. I assume they're drawn to conflict across the planet, and sometimes city-wide fireworks displays may seem like that.

If you can, get up high. A roof top or balcony, above the street lights. The higher, the better. You can really tell what's what, without light distortion of the street lights.

I hear there are a couple hot spots around town, but I can only speak on my experience. Look to the south west. Find where Dayton Ohio is on a map, then look toward that direction. I always see orbs and cylinders originating from that direction.



posted on May, 20 2015 @ 12:02 AM
link   

originally posted by: shefskitchen
Hi. I've been a visitor since 2003, a member since 2012. By day: I am a stereographer and recording engineer. By night: father and stargazer.

I have always come to ATS, to find validation through people that may have had similar experiences to mine. Maybe offer support, where I can.Of course, this is also a great resource for real time current events.

My personal policy is to not post threads, that have no current event value.With that said, here is my first post:

Last night around 9:15pm EST, while watching fireworks with my girlfriend: I filmed 4 red orbs in 3D. As the footage will show, a red orb approaches from the SW, slowly and steadily, turning due east as it met my position. 3 more followed. They flew right under a couple 2 engine passenger jets. Smaller planes are also in various shots for comparison.

I reported it to MUFON. Case # 65663
Another observation of the same phenomenon, from 40 miles away: # 65638 - brings validation that they couldn't be fireworks or lanterns

Due to my excitement, I do curse. We have seen & filmed them in 2D before. 2 dimensional shots can be dismissed as anything. 3D telemetry takes away quite a few plausible explanations. Because they keep visiting, I call them friends- regardless of whom is controlling them.






You would have done the members better by informing them that your 3D footage was shot in the anaglyph method: "a stereoscopic photograph with the two images superimposed and printed in different colors, producing a stereo effect when the photograph is viewed through correspondingly colored filters."

If any of you members still have those red/blue or red/green "glasses" that are discarded by the thousands after viewing movie, use them.

Nothing groundbreaking in the videos but the depth is worth the effort.



posted on May, 20 2015 @ 03:19 AM
link   

originally posted by: shefskitchen
a reply to: FlySolo
If you had a 3D TV, you could view the footage in 3D. It would take away a lot of arm chair commentary & pose the tough questions.


How does a white dot on a black background filmed using a low quality camera look any different in 3d? lol



posted on May, 20 2015 @ 04:52 AM
link   
a reply to: shefskitchen

Again we have claims from people re lights in the sky at night with pure GUESSTIMATES on speed distance ect it's simple YOU can't tell you do not have enough information.

It could be a small object close to the camera or a lager one further away.

It is always useful on here to give details of equipment used and exposure details as a great number of members are EXPERIENCED photographers/video shooters.



posted on May, 20 2015 @ 06:33 AM
link   

originally posted by: shefskitchen
Only solid reddish orange. No pulsation. No flicker.



Orbs DO fliker and DO pulsate my friend. They are not a costant and I've been touching distance from them



posted on May, 20 2015 @ 07:08 AM
link   
a reply to: Uggielicious

It's half side by side, which shows a lot of detail. Lighting. Depth & location compared to other objects. Better guage of speed as compared to 2D footage.

Apparently, somebody has applied a sh*tty anaglyph filter, since last night.. That does not help at all, scientifically. In fact, it hurts the case.
edit on 20-5-2015 by shefskitchen because: I noticed the terrible conversion.



posted on May, 20 2015 @ 07:12 AM
link   
a reply to: PhoenixOD

Finally!!!!!! A sensible question. Very true. Black backgrounds do decrease the field of depth.

If it happened in the day, I would have shot it then. But it didn't. Your question leads me to believe I had control over when they showed up.

Did you at least get a sense of depth and comparison between the odd lights, and the normal airplanes?



posted on May, 20 2015 @ 07:16 AM
link   
a reply to: wmd_2008

OK:

Sony Bloggie 3D. Fixed dual f 1.8 lenses.

It's 3D. You're analyzing it from a 2 dimensional perspective. Which is to say, you have no perspective at all if you can't guage the size or distance within the field of depth, as compared to the jet liners.

If you haven't watched the footage in 3D, then how good is your testimony?



posted on May, 20 2015 @ 07:27 AM
link   
a reply to: ufoorbhunter

Me too. I have 2D footage of extremely bright flickering orbs from last year. The so called experts on here would simply dismiss that footage as a plane or a drone.

I provided this footage in 3D, with a title that states it's 3D footage, so those who can view 3D footage can understand I saw something unexplainable.

Both of us have had experiences & I won't take yours away from you. Neither of us are orb experts, though.



posted on May, 20 2015 @ 07:29 AM
link   
a reply to: shefskitchen

Were yours connected with radiant white motherships?



posted on May, 20 2015 @ 08:00 AM
link   
a reply to: shefskitchen

So would it work to use the 3D red / blue glasses or do you need a 3D television? Would the 3D TV work? Does a 3D TV require special glasses?
edit on 20amWed, 20 May 2015 08:01:24 -0500kbamkAmerica/Chicago by darkbake because: (no reason given)



new topics




 
39
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join