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.

 

Extracting and animating data from the "UFO Video Captured By Homeland Security"

page: 1
99
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:
+41 more 
posted on Aug, 26 2015 @ 02:33 PM
link   
Unusually, I’ll start by explaining what this thread is NOT about. This thread is NOT about conclusions reached in relation to the content of the video discussed below. It does NOT seek or invite debate as to the UFO/UAP/bird(s)/balloon(s) shown in the video.

Instead, this thread is SOLELY about extracting and animating data from this video. If you don’t think this is necessary or worthwhile (a view that, incidentally, I can certainly understand...) then obviously there is no compulsion to take part.

Think of this thread as representing some first baby steps in an analysis of the video, sharing some resources and challenges with ATS. It is intended to seek to avoid polarised discussions by narrowing potential areas of dispute - particularly by sharing or creating tools to extract data from the relevant video and to display it in various formats.

In particular, this thread is about:

PRRR Treat 1 : A version of the video with an indication of frame numbers, for ease of analysis and sharing screenshots/information.

PRRR Treat 2 : A set of the relevant frames online, so that anyone with a frame number from the above video can directly link to it.

PRRR Treat 3 : A set of the relevant frames to download, as a large zip file of png images (about 1.4GB) or a much smaller pair of PDF documents. The PDF documents probably suffice for the purposes of the challenges below.

Challenge 1 : Extracting data from the video into a spreadsheet (partially completed)

Challenge 2 : Plotting and animating some of that data (whether using After Effects, Cinem4D or otherwise) on a map or maps (whether sourced from Google Earth or otherwise).


With that disclaimer out the way, let the games begin...

Some of you may have seen the 162 page report released on 11 August 2015 by the "Scientific Coalition for Ufology" about . Press coverage has included an article on the website of The Express, a British newspaper and an article on the website of The Mirror, a British newspaper.



The video and SCUFOR report were also discussed in an "Open Minds" podcast interview of two members of the SCUFOR team (Robert Powell and Morgan Beall). There have also been various online discussions relating to the relevant video before and after the SCU report, including a thread on ATS in 2014 and another thread started here on 12 August 2015 entitled “UFO Video Captured By Homeland Security Analyzed”.

Since the report was released on 11 August 2015, I have been working together with an ad hoc group (PRRR, “Puerto Rico Research Review) of about 20 UFO researchers and skeptics from all walks of life and several countries who came together to critically evaluate statements and conclusions made about the Puerto Rico “UFO”/“UAP” video. This group includes many of the members of the Roswell Slides Research Group that deblurred the mummy placard together with the addition of several prominent names in the field.

I would not usually start a new thread on ATS which overlaps with an existing thread. However, I think that there are a number of steps that could be taken to potentially narrow (if not eliminate) the issues in dispute. I know from experience that Page 17 or 20 of an existing thread is generally not the place to post new resources and challenges. (I’ve been given the green light by SkepticOverlord to start this further thread...).

Some of the relevant challenges are ones which the PRRR are covering anyway, but more hands would make for considerably faster progress. Personally, I think members of ATS could make a considerable contribution to the effective resolution of this case.

I would like to thank two of the authors of the SCU report (Rich Hoffman and Morgan Beall) for remaining friendly and, indeed, cooperating with requests I've made in relation to the SCU report despite my expressing the view that there appear to be issues with its contents that I'm working on.

One of the other authors of the SCU report (Robert Powell) joined ATS recently to post about “the type of tripe remarks made on this site”. While I would agree that there are certainly some “tripe remarks” posted on ATS, I believe that ATS has previously contributed to various ufological debates. Since actions speak louder than words, I hope ATS will join in addressing some of the challenges outlined in this thread.
edit on 26-8-2015 by IsaacKoi because: (no reason given)




posted on Aug, 26 2015 @ 02:33 PM
link   

Treat 1 : Video with frame numbers



Quite a few people have been posting frames from the video, or referring to parts of it, without it being clear which exact frame(s) are being referenced.

The version of the Puerto Rico "UFO"/"UAP" video below is annotated with frame numbers and a time code, to assist with more accurate analysis and sharing of data. It has been helpfully created and shared by PRRR member Lance Moody.



(You can also download an AVI copy of this version of the video from the PRRR website, for ease of analysis).

The frame numbers in this version of the video can be subjected to analysis in conjunction with the numbered images of each frame which Lance Moody also shared (see PRRR Treat 2 and PRRR Treat 3 below).

(The frame numbers in the frame set created and shared by Lance Moody are very similar to, but do not appear to be exactly the same as, the numbers used in the SCU report. At some point, apparently near the end of the video, it appears that a difference of one frame is introduced between the PRRR frame set and whatever set was used by SCU).

edit on 26-8-2015 by IsaacKoi because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 26 2015 @ 02:34 PM
link   

PRRR Treat 2 : Frame Set with individual URLs



A set of the relevant frames online, so that anyone with a frame number from the above video can directly link to it.

The numbered set of the 7027 frames in the above video can be found online at:

prrr.isaackoi.com...



Each frame also has its own URL, so direct links can be posted. (Posting such links on Facebook and some forums will automatically display an image of that frame). For example:

prrr.isaackoi.com...



edit on 26-8-2015 by IsaacKoi because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 26 2015 @ 02:34 PM
link   

PRRR Treat 3 : Downloadable frame set (zipped png files and PDF version)



PRRR has also made Lance Moody's frame set available as a zip file for ease of downloading by anyone wishing to do their own analysis. (The zip file is rather large, being approximately 1.4GB.

prrr.isaackoi.com...

Lance Moody's frame set has also been made available by the PRRR in two relatively small sizes PDF files (about 200MB combined) - allowing you to scroll quickly through the frames (particularly using Adobe Reader) and/or use PDF software to jump to a specific page etc.

prrr.isaackoi.com...

prrr.isaackoi.com...

I’ve found this PDF format was found to be very useful to quickly scrolling through frames in Adobe Reader to pick out the numerical data displayed on each frame to set out that data in a spreadsheet (see Challenge 1 below).

These relatively small PDF documents probably suffice for the purposes of the challenges below.

edit on 26-8-2015 by IsaacKoi because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 26 2015 @ 02:34 PM
link   

Challenge 1 : Extracting data from the video into a spreadsheet (partially completed)



The Puerto Rico video displays a number of pieces of information on each of its 7027 frames. This amounts to a mass of information.

One of the first baby steps involved in an analysis of the footage is to extract at least some of that mass of information.

I, together with other members of PRRR (particularly Lance Moody), have been working on extracting data from the video into a spreadsheet to allow for cross-checking, additions, analysis and (as outlined in Challenges 2 and 3 below) potentially mapping some of the data and animating it.

The draft spreadsheet below gives pertinent information for various frames, with the columns containing the information indicated on the labelled screenshot below (e.g. Column A states the relevant frame number, Column B states the relevant URL for that frame, Column C states the date).

A fuller key indicating the contents of the various columns is also given below.



edit on 26-8-2015 by IsaacKoi because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 26 2015 @ 02:35 PM
link   
A rough draft key to the various letters is included on a page on the PRRR website and the current draft (which is evolving fairly rapidly) is pasted below.

A: Frame number

B: URL for relevant frame

C: Time Code (minutes)

D: Time Code (seconds)

E: Time Code (frames)

F: Date : States “26Apr2013” throughout video, i.e. 26 April 2013

G: Time (hours). The time display is in format HH:MM:SS. Increases from 01:22:07 to 01:26:01 (i.e. 3 minutes 54 seconds) during the video, which has a duration of 3 minutes 54 seconds – prima facie indicating that the video is continuous footage.

H: Time (minutes)

I: Time (seconds)

J: Time Zone indication. States “UTC+1.0” throughout video. Prima facie this indicates that [insert].

K: States “Ground track” throughout the video. This indicates [insert].

L: States “AUTO” throughout the video. This indicates [insert]

M: States “VIC” throughout the video. This indicates [insert]

N: States “COR-A” throughout the video. This indicates [insert]

O: States “IR” (Infra-Red) throughout the video. This indicates the mode used (i.e. infra-red as opposed to electro-optical).

P: Indicates zoom. The camera consists of three different cameras in one Electro optical Wide 10-200mm zoom, Electro Optical Narrow at 955mm and The Infra-Red camera with zooms at 27, 135, 675, and 2024mm. This number increases and decreases a few times during the video (with values of 135, 675, 2024) – i.e. the Infra-Red camera zoom values.

Q: States “AUTO” throughout the video. This indicates [insert].

R: States a rapidly changing number, with values between approximately [3,500] and [15,500]. The number indicates the distance from the aircraft to the target, in meters. The target is the object detected by the relevant sensor at the centre of the cross-hairs, which is usually the ground rather than any object in the air.

S: States “DFLT” throughout the video. This indicates [insert].

T: States “AUTO” throughout the video. This indicates [insert].

U: This compass shows [insert - ?the direction of true north relative to the crosshairs?]. This compass begins by pointing directly to the right (a position that indicates [insert]) and rotates clockwise to end just to the right of straight up (a position that indicates [insert]). The gradual clockwise rotation during the course of the video indicates [insert].

V: This readout shows values between approximately [+2.5] to [-0.5]. The number is [insert - ?the elevation angle relative to the aircraft, meaning…?].

W: Cross-hairs, indicating the centre of the camera’s view.

Z: States “LI: Disarm” thoughout the video. This indicates [insert - ?Laser Illuminator disarmed/off?].

Y: States “LI: Off” thoughout the video. This indicates [insert - ?Laser Illuminator disarmed/off?].

Z: This readout shows values between approximately [19] to [29]. The number indicates the bearing of the camera in relation to the front of the airplane. The values displayed on the screen are missing a "zero", i.e. 26 is actually 260 degrees. The heading of the aircraft added to this value will give you the azimuth. If the value comes up greater than 360 degrees (as it often does), one has to subtract 360 degrees.



posted on Aug, 26 2015 @ 02:36 PM
link   
AA: States “ACFT (short for “Aircraft”) throughout the video. This indicates that the numbers (which are co-ordinates) below that word relate to the position of the aircraft.

AB, AC, AD, AE: These numbers, which changes frequently, give the latitude of the aircraft (e.g. 18:30:22N). The latitude indicates a north-south position. The equator is defined as 0 degrees, the North Pole is 90 degrees north, and the South Pole is 90 degrees south. One degree of latitude is 60 nautical miles, 69 statute miles or 111 km. One minute of latitude is 1 nautical mile, 1.15 statute miles, or 1.85 km.

AF, AG, AH AI: These numbers, which changes frequently, give the longtitude of the aircraft (e.g. 67:05:48W). Lines of longitude, or meridians, run between the North and South Poles. They measure east-west position. The prime meridian is assigned the value of 0 degrees, and runs through Greenwich, England. Meridians to the west of the prime meridian are measured in degrees west.

AJ: This number (in degrees) indicates the aircraft’s bearing i.e. the direction in which the aircraft is heading. This reading is 11 degrees at the start of the video (indicating that the aircraft was heading [insert – slightly east of north]), drops to zero (i.e. north), starts again at 359 degrees (i.e. slightly west of north and decreases to approximately 137 degrees at 2 minutes 12 seconds (indicating that the aircraft was then heading slightly east of south). The gradual decrease in the relevant numbers during the course of the first 2 minutes 12 seconds of the video indicates aircraft was turning [insert]. The reading after 2 minutes 12 seconds varies slowly and only by a few degrees in the 1 minute 42 seconds (indicating that during this time the aircraft was heading almost in a straight line).

AK: This number, followed by “FT” (short for “feet”), indicates the aircraft’s altitude in feet (?above sea level?).

AL: This number, followed by “FT” (short for “feet”), indicates the target’s altitude in feet (?above sea level?). The target is the object detected by the relevant sensor at the centre of the cross-hairs, which is usually the ground rather than any object in the air.

AM: This number (in degrees) indicates the bearing of the cross-hairs of the camera i.e. the direction in which the camera is pointing.

AN: This number, followed by “NM” (short for nautical miles), indicates the distance of the target from the camera. The target is the object detected by the relevant sensor at the centre of the cross-hairs, which is usually the ground rather than any object in the air.

AO: States “OFF” throughout the video. This indicates [insert].

AP: States “NONE” throughout the video. This indicates [insert].

AQ: States “TGT” (short for “Target”) throughout the video. This indicates that the numbers (which are co-ordinates and distance/bearing information) below that word relate to the position of the target. The target is the object detected by the relevant sensor at the centre of the cross-hairs, which is usually the ground rather than any object in the air.

AR: States “LOS” (short for “Line Of Sight”) throughout the video. This indicates [insert].

AS, AT, AU, AV: These numbers, which changes frequently, give the latitude of the target (e.g. 18:29:59N). The target is the object detected by the relevant sensor at the centre of the cross-hairs, which is usually the ground rather than any object in the air. The latitude indicates a north-south position. The equator is defined as 0 degrees, the North Pole is 90 degrees north, and the South Pole is 90 degrees south. One degree of latitude is 60 nautical miles, 69 statute miles or 111 km. One minute of latitude is 1 nautical mile, 1.15 statute miles, or 1.85 km.

AW, AX, AY, AZ: These numbers, which changes frequently, give the longtitude of the target (e.g. 67:09:21W). The target is the object detected by the relevant sensor at the centre of the cross-hairs, which is usually the ground rather than any object in the air. Lines of longitude, or meridians, run between the North and South Poles. They measure east-west position. The prime meridian is assigned the value of 0 degrees, and runs through Greenwich, England. Meridians to the west of the prime meridian are measured in degrees west.



posted on Aug, 26 2015 @ 02:36 PM
link   
Data extracted from the video is included in the spreadsheet at the link below (which is rapidly being developed and will be replaced shortly):

prrr.isaackoi.com... .







While I prefer the Excel version at the link above (and that is the one I would like people to focus upon in relation to this challenge), a draft of this spreadsheet is also on Google Sheets at the link below (again, since the spreadsheet is rapidly being developed the spreadsheet and/or link will change shortly):

docs.google.com...



posted on Aug, 26 2015 @ 02:36 PM
link   
Hence Challenge 1 : completing the spreadsheet.

Many of the columns have been completed for all 7027 frames (including columns A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, J, K, L, M, N, O, P, Q, S, T, X, Y, AA, AB, AC, AE, AF, AG, AI, AO, AP, AQ, AR, AS, AT, AV, AW, AX, AZ)

Some, however, remain to be done or are currently incomplete (namely I, R, U, V, W, Z, AD, AH, AJ, AK, AL, AM, AN, AU and AY).

Some of the fields are higher priorities than others. For example, AD, AH, AU and AY are probably the next priorities followed by AM. Some of the other columns are probably not essential and I am not sure how to include them (e.g. V and Z). I’m not sure what to include, if anything, in Column W at the moment (e.g. possibly “yes” or “no” to signify whether the object was within the cross-hairs in that frame.

I would like to invite some of you to pick a column and take ownership of it by posting in this thread that you will complete the values for that particular column. You can then just scroll through the PDF version of the frame set (see PRRR Treat 3 above) and enter the values in a single column for frames 1 to 7027. Entering values is not as bad as it may look at first glance. The values do not change in every frame so it is possible to cut and paste the values down stretches of the relevant column. If you share your input for your nominated column (e.g. via wetransfer) I can cut and paste that material into the master spreadsheet.



posted on Aug, 26 2015 @ 02:37 PM
link   

Challenge 2 : Plotting and animating some of that data (whether using After Effects, Cinem4D or otherwise) on a map or maps (whether sourced from Google Earth or otherwise).



Once the spreadsheet is completed (or at least the co-ordinates columns – i.e. AB to AI and AS to AZ) then it should be possible to animate some of that data.

Personally, I envisage an animation of the aircraft with a line in one colour indicating the bearing of the aircraft and another line rotated to indicate the bearing of the target from the aircraft. It may then be possible to add an animation of different potential tracks for the ufo/balloon(s)/bird(s). But that’s just a starting point for discussion and development.

Lance Moody of PRRR is working on one way of animating the data (using a plugin for Cinema4d), but ideas for other approaches (or actual implementation of another approach...) would be very welcome.

It may be necessary to break Challenge 2 down into various elements, but let’s see how much interest there is in all of this.



I hope that a discussion of ways to integrate spreadsheet data with maps (whether animated or not) will be productive in relation to some potential future projects, whether relating to individual sightings or (more likely) some potential UFO database projects.

edit on 26-8-2015 by IsaacKoi because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 26 2015 @ 02:44 PM
link   
I don't get all this work mate. what if its a craft not engineered from earth. so what?
what if it is a craft engineered here on earth, so what.
what if its a bird and the distance it is from the camera and the amount of zoom makes it look like its traveling at relative high speed, and it lands at the end, so what.

what if dept of homeland says it was a ufo they don't know more about what it was either and they were just tracking it because it looked cool.

what is this research proving?

if I sound pompous, I'm not trying to be. I'm wondering what difference this makes



posted on Aug, 26 2015 @ 02:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: odzeandennz
I don't get all this work mate.


Fine. As I said the start of my OP, I have my doubts about spending time on this case. (I offended one of the authors of the SCU report by saying as much a couple of weeks ago). You are, obviously, free to take part or not.



I simply think that if people are going to spend time on the case, these resources and challenges may narrow (or eliminate) potential points of dispute - avoiding wasting time on pointless polarised debates.



posted on Aug, 26 2015 @ 02:53 PM
link   
a reply to: IsaacKoi

I kinda get it.

but clarify for me please. lol.

does your data proves it could not have been a bird, or drone, or any current commercial or military vehicle. ?

pardon my ufo ignorance. hehe. I'm not on the ufo boards too often.



posted on Aug, 26 2015 @ 03:05 PM
link   
I don't get it...
Forgive my dumbass questioning but:
What on earth is a US airplane of HOMELAND security doing over Puerto Rico?
That's not quite homeland is it?



posted on Aug, 26 2015 @ 03:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: odzeandennz
but clarify for me please. lol.

does your data proves it could not have been a bird, or drone, or any current commercial or military vehicle. ?


No problem. The point of this thread is to extract more data and to present it clearly so that we can THEN establish if this was a UFO, bird, drone, balloon(s) etc. My OP does not express any opinion on the result of this work.

The OP is the start, rather than the end, of a process.



posted on Aug, 26 2015 @ 03:22 PM
link   
a reply to: IsaacKoi

Incredible array of information there and undoubtedly you have put a lot of time and effort into this.

I wish I could help, but where should a humble ATSer start....what can we do to help analyse all this data, however mundane or time consuming? Your energy is infectious. Your challenges are clear, but is there anything else we can do if we don't have the resources needed for them?

Super thread, and as usual, you lead the way in showing us how to create something with real nitty-gritty.


edit on 26/8/2015 by nerbot because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 26 2015 @ 03:28 PM
link   
a reply to: IsaacKoi

In examining frames 180-700 I believe the object is always over the water. Around frame 600 you can see the airport in the background. I believe the plane crosses the plane of the water/land and causes the illusion that the object is over land.

From the frames and google earth I believe I have correctly surmised the location of the plane and I used the flight path map from the report to create this little image to show how the illusion could be created:



This is reinforced in my mind because the object seems to change direction and speed, however I believe the object is moving in a straight line and the illusion is being caused by the circling of the plane. This is achieved by the contour of the shoreline in this area. For example, in frame 600 you can see the airport fully in frame behind/under the object with land in the background, showing the object is at least between the airport and the camera.



posted on Aug, 26 2015 @ 03:29 PM
link   
a reply to: Daalder

Ummm, PR is part of the USA my friend, it just isn't a state...



posted on Aug, 26 2015 @ 03:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: nerbot
I wish I could help, but where should a humble ATSer start....what can we do to help analyse all this data, however mundane or time consuming? Your energy is infectious.


With a column of the data in the spreadsheet detailed in Challenge 1 above.

Basically:
(1) Download the current (incomplete) Excel spreadsheet:
prrr.isaackoi.com...

(2) Pick an incomplete column and post here that you will complete that column. The columns that remain to be done or are currently incomplete are I, R, U, V, W, Z, AD, AH, AJ, AK, AL, AM, AN, AU and AY.

(3) Scroll through the frames and fill in the values. Using the PDF versions of the frames in Abobe Reader is probably the easiest way to quickly scroll through the frames. The values do not change in every frame so you can generally cut and paste (or use the Excel "fill" menu and the down option) to cut and paste a relevant value down a column until the frame where the value changes. The PDF versions of the frames are in two files, at:
prrr.isaackoi.com...
prrr.isaackoi.com...

I should warn you, having done quite a few of the columns myself already, that it is pretty boring work.



Challenge 2 should be more fun, but requires some expertise.


originally posted by: IsaacKoi
Challenge 1 : Extracting data from the video into a spreadsheet (partially completed)

Challenge 2 : Plotting and animating some of that data (whether using After Effects, Cinem4D or otherwise) on a map or maps (whether sourced from Google Earth or otherwise).

edit on 26-8-2015 by IsaacKoi because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 26 2015 @ 03:53 PM
link   
I can't help with challenge 2 other than to say don't even start on it until the spreadsheet is 100%.

Give me a column assignment and I will do one.




top topics



 
99
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join