Unexplained Flying Objects caught on high speed camera. Help?

WATCH IN HIGHEST RES - Dark spots are just lens dust from what we were doing.



I was out recording footage on our new high speed camera and randomly remembered the 'sun obliteration' technique I played around with many years ago on my Sony Camcorder.
Thought it might be interesting to try it on this new contraption.

Using a distance guide of an object around 800m away, I set focus, dialled down shutter speed, frames between 500fps and 1500fps (you can tell by the cropping, more crop = faster fps).

All objects over 100ft away should be focused, under 100ft they would not really register on camera due to blur.

Set it at the Sun, zoomed in on our guttering which was about 40ft away, and captured these clips.

You can see lots of 'lights / objects' going all directions, only visible in the sunlight on camera, not by naked eye.
There is even what I would class as a 'rod' on one of the clips...any idea?

All these were filmed at a minimum of 500fps, so all objects are moving INCREDIBLY fast.

So make of it what you will, hope you enjoyed it atleast.

All objects over 100ft away should be focused, under 100ft they would not really register on camera due to blur.

The edge of the roof seems quite well focused and visible. How far away did you say it is?

If they're only visible about 100ft from you...wouldn't you have seen them with your naked eye if they were so close and anything to be excited about.

a reply to: Phage

Roof was around 40ft in front of me, about 25ft up at that point.
The roof was actually quite de-focused, but due to the way the camera does high speed, it defines dark areas as pretty...harsh lines.

originally posted by: Atsbhct
If they're only visible about 100ft from you...wouldn't you have seen them with your naked eye if they were so close and anything to be excited about.

As I said in the original post

You can see lots of 'lights / objects' going all directions, only visible in the sunlight on camera, not by naked eye.

Saw nothing by naked eye.
Remember this is recording at very high shutter speed at 500 - 1500fps.
So 1 second of recording = 1 minute at 24fps (which is what this plays at).

a reply to: WICrush

but due to the way the camera does high speed, it defines dark areas as pretty...harsh lines.

Nonsense.

You captured bugs and fluff.

a reply to: WICrush

Maybe you can catch the bugs, and then crush them.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: WICrush

but due to the way the camera does high speed, it defines dark areas as pretty...harsh lines.

Nonsense.

You captured bugs and fluff.

and thus, dreams were crushed. hehe.

a reply to: Phage
Just because you don't understand something, you don't have to mock.

High speed cameras define the 'edge' of a blurred object as it's harsh edge, as this was a high shutter speed it was already very dark.
So the roof fell into underexposed territory, hence it just blacks out the entire block from the further blurred extent.

Example, I can have an extremely blurred sphere completely out of focus in camera, but if the difference in light is large enough, that object will transform into a solid harsh edge sphere from the outer extent of the blurred perimeter.

a reply to: Phage

I quite agree. It is an interesting camera perspective depicting the bugs, pollen and dandelion fluffs at that distance. The sunlight happened to highlight them nicely. Thank you for sharing, but don't see any ufos nor rods!

Edit add: Sorry Phage! That was meant for the op, not you. I only had to agree with your post, though.

a reply to: CynConcepts

Fair enough
I just don't see how bugs can be that visible at between 70-100ft on a fairly short focal length.
Quite a decent size in the camera which would only be expected if I was using a far longer focal length.

Hmm

a reply to: WICrush

The sunlight reflecting off of the airborne objects create an illusion of objects being of greater size than they are. Hmmm?

a reply to: WICrush

i think the footage is interesting. I wouldnt go with bugs or "fluff"...I hear one new every day.

a reply to: WICrush

Bugs...sorry to be so short

Did they change the amount of post or replies a new member needs to have before being able to make their own thread?
Hmmmm
Oh yeah, I'm going to have to go with airborn pollutins myself

Wow, awesome reception to the new member. I bet he's really looking forward to contributing to future threads now.

OP: Good catch, keep it up!

a reply to: WICrush

Fasinating footage.. I love high speed stuff
I seen similar videos, with the same angle along something with the sun around the corner.
My guess would be dust flower pollen reflecting sunlight as seen in this video.. similar setup

originally posted by: Macenroe82
Wow, awesome reception to the new member. I bet he's really looking forward to contributing to future threads now.

OP: Good catch, keep it up!

you just saying 'good catch' will only inflame him to see whats not there. im 100% behind the other more inquisitive responses which compelled him to give a very good definition and explanation of the how out of focus objects can have harsh lines.

good catch Phage, CynConcepts etc. this is what UFOlogy needs; not just 'keep it up'. if the fluff is rooted out, im sure the OP will be more in tune when he sees something truly out of the ordinary.

keep it up
:up

To me, most appeay to flap. As you state its 1 second of footage, so they appear slower but they also become smaller and less luminous the further away from the sum they move.

I have to go with insects also, but don't stop. You seem to have decent equipment. Beats an iPhone absolutely.

Cheers

a reply to: WICrush

Anyone remember rods?
Was that a thing here on ATS?

Probably something similar to that...