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.

 

disc photographed from aeroplane, very clear

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:
mrk

posted on Jan, 5 2005 @ 01:09 PM
link   
came accross this today and though I would look at it in depoth in photoshop.

The original as downloaded can be viewed here
www.fixit-4u.net... (1184x888 @ 63KB)

As you can see it looks very smooth surfaced but very direct ie: straigh, not the curvy type of saucer most people are accustomed to hearing/seeing.

I noticed there were no artificial artefacts either and the colourtones/blending of the whole image looked authentic which indicated that the object probably has not been later doctored in.

To check this out I noticed there was a slight reflection of pillars or plane exterior/interior being reflected on the window, I adjusted the shadow highlight to bring out this details and as you can see in this image

www.fixit-4u.net...

The reflection is perfectly cast on the objects left side too and there does not appear to be any artificial anomalies either.

Anyone know any more about this image?




posted on Jan, 5 2005 @ 01:20 PM
link   
Here is the header from the jpeg. This usually contains information about the camera that took the picture if the photo has not been tampered with.

----
JFIF  H H Exif II*    6 >  t   z @ u f o a l i e n a i r p l a n e a r e a 5 1 + - - - A r e a 5 1 - - - + c a m e a l o n g s i d e o f o u r a i r p l a n e a n d f o l l o w e d u s f o r a b o u t 5 m i n , t h e n l e f t V E R Y f a s t ! U F O - t a k e n o v e r n o r t h e r n o r e g o n f r o m p l a n e w i n d o w ! 0 2 - 2 3 - 0 2 C
----



posted on Jan, 5 2005 @ 01:21 PM
link   
The saucer is not like any iv seen.It seems to be more evolved.Like its had afew modifications to it.Much less features on it than the original ones back in the 50`s and 60`s.The photos do not look authentic though in my opinion.

Have you noticed that for the majority of the century eversince the beginning of this UFO encounter(since 1940`s/50`s)the saucers that were being taken photos of never seem to have changed much.Im also talking about the triangles etc.They never seem to have been built better per decade like our own advancement in the field of flight here on earth.It was always the original ones that were first sighted that are still been seing today.Do you really think the greys have reached the edge of advancement?Or maby they tend to take more time to advance through technology than us.



posted on Jan, 5 2005 @ 01:23 PM
link   
Either that's a Lazar sports model UFO, or the Testor model of the same, hehe...
I'm thinking this is a parked plane and a model, personally...



posted on Jan, 5 2005 @ 01:28 PM
link   
To me it looks like something that has been done by a 3d program, It looks to good to be real. Do you have a link to the website where you got the original picture from?

[edit on 5-1-2005 by Lucifer340]



posted on Jan, 5 2005 @ 01:40 PM
link   
Wait, wait...

Someone photographed a MOVING UFO from a MOVING airplane and the image is NOT BLURRED?!?!?!


It looks to have way to much lighting beneath though. Especially for such a cloudy sky.



posted on Jan, 5 2005 @ 01:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by blackSt33L
Have you noticed that for the majority of the century eversince the beginning of this UFO encounter(since 1940`s/50`s)the saucers that were being taken photos of never seem to have changed much.Im also talking about the triangles etc.They never seem to have been built better per decade like our own advancement in the field of flight here on earth.It was always the original ones that were first sighted that are still been seing today.Do you really think the greys have reached the edge of advancement?Or maby they tend to take more time to advance through technology than us.


My 2Cents:
They don't really appear to change much. It could be because now that they have mastered the fundamental principals of anti-gravity, they don't really need to change all that much.
For comparison, let's take ocean going ships. We are comfortable with Ships and have been so for a long time. To an alien a Ship from 1900 may not look very different than one built in 2004. Come to think of it, they do look pretty much alike.
Of course the navigational equipment and electronics inside it would be way better than the original ones, but we know what works best and don't change it all that much either. (At least the exterior design bit).

What do u think?

As for the picture, I just hope it's true. Will wait for the photo-experts on this site to go through it.



posted on Jan, 5 2005 @ 01:48 PM
link   
Its fake....

Very fake


Such photos damage the UFO community.

IMHO




posted on Jan, 5 2005 @ 01:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by merka
Wait, wait...

Someone photographed a MOVING UFO from a MOVING airplane and the image is NOT BLURRED?!?!?!



If they were both moving at about the same speed, there would be no speed blur. No?
Seems (from the header of the file) the UFO was tailing the plane, so I'd guess they'd be at about the same speed.


Edit- Just wanted to add that I'm not yet convinced if it is genuine.

[edit on 5-1-2005 by Vivek]



posted on Jan, 5 2005 @ 01:50 PM
link   
Ok, my apologies for my crappy paint program here at work that doesn't save in jpg...but...

Left, the UFO from the pic in the first post.
Right, the Testor model kit UFO.



What do YOU think?


Sure, it could be the old Lazar sports model...however there are other reasons (some already mentioned) to think fake on this one....

PS-damn thing only saves in .gif or bitmap, if needed, I can do a better one at home, but I think this gets the point across

[edit on 5-1-2005 by Gazrok]



posted on Jan, 5 2005 @ 02:02 PM
link   
I agree with Gazrok, this is just the Lazar model and a static plane.









[edit on 5-1-2005 by CINTELA]



posted on Jan, 5 2005 @ 02:15 PM
link   
Real or not, it's a thing of beauty.


I hope some real image experts can analyze this photo. I dont want to hear anymore of that "it looks to good to be true so it's must be a fake" crap.



posted on Jan, 5 2005 @ 02:25 PM
link   
Well, for me it's the following..

1. The clouds appear to be pretty high above...unlikely to be that high in appearance if out of a plane window...

2. Few planes I can think of that one would look out the window and get that view of a wing.

3. The object looks too in focus to be much farther than the wing. Either the wing would be in focus, and the UFO blurry, or the UFO in focus, and the wing blurry. This seems to suggest they are the same focal distance (roughly) from the camera, and so it's a likely model.

4. We know of a model IDENTICAL to the UFO in the photo.

5. The reflections evident also lend to it likely being a parked plane.

Those are my reasons, though admittedly, I'm an image novice....



posted on Jan, 5 2005 @ 02:28 PM
link   
That's funny... I've seen this disk before, isn't it meant to be a real one?! I guess, it's fake.. anyway.



posted on Jan, 5 2005 @ 02:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gazrok
2. Few planes I can think of that one would look out the window and get that view of a wing.


that was what made me think it was a fake. also there's a slight ring around the ufo.



posted on Jan, 5 2005 @ 02:35 PM
link   
Well it sure looks real; however I am wondering why the light source is coming from below the saucer, why is the wing of the aircraft so out of focus?

Last, why are the windows of the airplane so clean and clear?



posted on Jan, 5 2005 @ 02:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gazrok

3. The object looks too in focus to be much farther than the wing. Either the wing would be in focus, and the UFO blurry, or the UFO in focus, and the wing blurry. This seems to suggest they are the same focal distance (roughly) from the camera, and so it's a likely model.


The wing doesnt look blurred to you? To me, it at least looks not as in focus as the UFO.

But the whole wing has me questioning the photo anyway. Like you said, that's an odd angle to view the wing at. I'm trying to figure out what kind of plane that would be to view the wing that way out of a window. Also what exactly is the wing reflecting? Damnit, when you want to report a sighting you've got to include a sh1tload more information in order to expect people to analyze it.
Also, more pictures from different possible angles wouldnt have hurt either.



posted on Jan, 5 2005 @ 02:54 PM
link   
Can you provide further information as to the origins of this photograph. I personally feel it is not authentic. I think the texture looks too reflective to be real. However, I am not concluding either way.



posted on Jan, 5 2005 @ 02:56 PM
link   
More informations about this picture and the one who took it would be appreciated. If this pic is real, it's the pic of the century.



posted on Jan, 5 2005 @ 02:57 PM
link   
Yeah, more info and an original source of the pic would be nice.




top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join