image 1165

a reply to: Blue Shift

I will post a recent picture of the fire escape where she was stood to take the original photo. I will include a picture of the exterior of the building to highlight the lack of windows I will also include a picture from the staircase to show the current view. This will be done after work tomorrow, however I'm commuting from Bude tomorrow which is a fair old trek with the added annoyance of tourists!!!

I'm still hoping someone on here is a photo analyst or some such thing, rather than the standard replies of its swamp gas, balloons, birds in fancy dress, drones etc etc etc.

It would be helpful and refreshing to have a professional opinion.

originally posted by: shinzaun
I'm still hoping someone on here is a photo analyst or some such thing, rather than the standard replies of its swamp gas, balloons, birds in fancy dress, drones etc etc etc.

It would be helpful and refreshing to have a professional opinion.

Well, what do you think it is? Bottom line, I think it's an image of some sort with no associated physical evidence or even a single eyewitness (since the "object" wasn't seen by anyone at the time of the photo). In other words, a curiosity to be filed away. What do you think a profession photographer will able to tell you that we haven't already told you? That it's aliens? What do you want?

a reply to: Blue Shift

I would like someone with expertise of digital
photography to examine the picture. I would like them to examine the image thoroughly and report their findings, I KNOW the image hasn't been tampered with, I KNOW the premises she has worked at for the past 15 years, unfortunately my informing other members of this that and the other, has no evidencial merit whatsoever. Hence my desire for an image specialist to either:

A: debunk it with evidence to back up the debunking.

B: admit to not knowing what the image is showing.

If an image analyst can't say what it is then that rules out, reflection, lens flare, lens artifacts etc etc. Which would leave us with a verified image of a UFO, which to answer your question, is what I believe it is.

I would be happy with either outcome from a professional, I just want verification of what it shows. What I don't want is people immediately stating it's this or that, which is THEIR knee jerk reaction. It seems the old adage of, "pics or it didn't happen", doesn't suffice anymore.

We, as a species, know very little of our world, I know that statement will anger a few, but, it's true. Who is to say a smart phone camera can't record things we can't see?

Many thanks

originally posted by: shinzaun
Which would leave us with a verified image of a UFO, which to answer your question, is what I believe it is.

But a photo isn't going to tell you that, no matter how many experts you get to look at it. To you it is unidentified. Okay, you got your "U." Was it flying? Not even you can say. So unfortunately, you don't get a "F." Was it an object? Nobody saw an actual physical object, and there doesn't seem to be anything in the image to show that it was a physical object of any kind. No shadows, no shading. So there's nothing there that says it's even an "object." So no "O."

As for cameras recording things we can't see, yes, there are certain highly specialized cameras that can capture images above and below our usual visual spectrum. Was the camera used one of them? Unlikely.

Sorry, what you have are some unidentified shapes in a photo. That's the end of the trail. It's disappointing, but not just for you. We WANT someone to come up with good, definitive UFO photos. That's why a lot of us are here. We don't want you to fail. Unfortunately, this is just another one of hundreds with nothing substantial to back it up and similar to many we've seen before.

Not wanting to tread on anyone's toes here, being no expert, but the cases of lens flare I have seen, in my experience, are not oval and do not seem to have form. I suppose a anamorphic image would have oval lens flare but your wife's appears to have been taken on the 'Photo' setting, which on my phone would be square and undistorted. If the aperture on your wife's phone was oval, then so would any lens flare. I am assuming the aperture is round and as with a smartphone, will be fixed as wide as possible. Also, there does not appear to be any sign of star burst effect or streaking of light. The forms appear extremely similar, regular in shape and both have highlights at the top and bottom.

Is it a double artefact from the same source?
I have no idea why that would happen and what would cause it.

Of course, you could have faked it but as I have said before, what would be the motive, reward and reasoning behind the design and appearance of the 'UFOs'?

I hope you get the answers you are looking for.

a reply to: Blue Shift

I don't know what that is, could be a plastic bag... A flying eyeball? I'm no expert with photographs I just know I've never seen the effect the Op brought to the table with his wife's picture.

Yeah it could be a reflection, it was taken outside apparently. I'd suggest recreating the shot under similar conditions with the same phone/camera.

Those windmills are huge btw. I don't think it's a plastic bag. We are talking about that thing to the right of the windmill?

a reply to: shinzaun

99 out of 100 of these kinds of images that were taken, and the photographer did not see any object at the time of the photo being taken are lens flares, reflections, or other all explainable things.

Now if this photographer says they saw this thing with their own eyes before taking the image then we have something mysterious. (And if they were looking up in the sky admiring the views while considering taking images of it then they would have seen a thing like that.

In every single case I have seen similar to this, the person(s) taking the pictures did not see anything and only report it later after reviewing their images, which means the almost foregone conclusion is that it is just a misidentification of camera aberrations and reflection stuff. Seeing an object with their own eyes before the picture taking is something else entirely.

originally posted by: shinzaun
I'm still hoping someone on here is a photo analyst or some such thing, rather than the standard replies of its swamp gas, balloons, birds in fancy dress, drones etc etc etc.

First of all, you do not know if any of the members that answered your question are photo analysts or not, right?

Second, I didn't see anyone saying it was swamp gas, balloons or birds in fancy dress, so your attitude is not helping getting a clear answer. If you want a honest answer be honest with the way you present your information.

originally posted by: shinzaun
If an image analyst can't say what it is then that rules out, reflection, lens flare, lens artifacts etc etc. Which would leave us with a verified image of a UFO, which to answer your question, is what I believe it is.

Not exactly, the opinion of an expert is still just an opinion, not a fact, and when someone says they do not know what something can be then it doesn't mean it cannot really be one of the known possibilities, it only means that that person did not consider that possibility as the explanation for what is seen in the photo.

I would be happy with either outcome from a professional, I just want verification of what it shows. What I don't want is people immediately stating it's this or that, which is THEIR knee jerk reaction. It seems the old adage of, "pics or it didn't happen", doesn't suffice anymore.

That adage was never true, and when you ask for opinions (in fact, you didn't ask a thing, you just dropped an image on the thread and was more interested about complaining about being difficult to post images than telling us what you wanted) you will get them, regardless of who give them, so calling them "knee jerk reactions" to me sounds like you are being ungrateful to all the people that spent time looking at your photo and giving their opinion.

Personally, to me, it looks like reflections.

We, as a species, know very little of our world, I know that statement will anger a few, but, it's true. Who is to say a smart phone camera can't record things we can't see?

Many thanks

OP, I've seen a lot of UFO pictures over the years, most with rational explanation.

The photo posted looks very similar to dozens I have seen that eventually turned out to be reflections of light sources reflected from the car glass/ building windows etc.

I think if you were honestly trying to verify the strangeness of the image you'd look at the ceiling at the ceilings of your wife's employer and notice the style of light fixture....

I don't believe they are solid objects. The duplication and the rainbow does point to lens flare to me. My first reaction was reflections from a lamp, but the OP says this was taken outside

a reply to: Drunkenparrot

As already stated she was outside, on a side of the building that has no windows in it, the fire escape door at the top of the metal stairs is solid as it doubles as a security door.
The lighting in the actual office is comprised of Led light panels set into a suspended ceiling.

Thanks

originally posted by: shinzaun
a reply to: Drunkenparrot

As already stated she was outside, on a side of the building that has no windows in it, the fire escape door at the top of the metal stairs is solid as it doubles as a security door.
The lighting in the actual office is comprised of Led light panels set into a suspended ceiling.

Thanks

Well that settles it, it was the mothership from Zeta Reticuli....

originally posted by: vlawde
I don't believe they are solid objects. The duplication and the rainbow does point to lens flare to me. My first reaction was reflections from a lamp, but the OP says this was taken outside

Duplication of the rainbow...where? You cannot have oval lens flare in a proportionately correct photo, they would be round unless the lens itself was oval. As I said, no star burst effect and no streaking. Does anybody actually pay any attention or are the preconceived opinions too hard to dislodge?

We may think that if the eye cannot see it, then it wasn't there but, the camera takes a snap in an instant and maybe they were only there in that instant and the photographer got lucky. A fake image still cannot be ruled out, although no one can say with 100% certainty.

I meant the fact the objects were doubled, typical of flare, reflections etc. I wasn't saying the rainbow was duplicated

a reply to: shinzaun

Did you already upload the original image somewhere?

I would love to take a look at it!!

Peace

I hope you still get around to posting the original pic...

I was looking at the streetlights for Hayle business park, Hayle, Cornwall, UK and I must say it does seem to be reflection but I will reserve judgment until I see the original.



Peace

Okay I guess I'm closing in the exact location this picture was taken..





I'll go and check what lights are around here and if we can find a hit...

Peace

Marsh Lane, Hayle, UK.
From the fire escape to the rear of the Marks and Spencer building.
There are streetlamps on both sides of the lane.



You can see the wind turbine on the hill to the right. Obviously, the picture was taken from the higher elevation of the fire escape. Possibly the sunlight from behind has caught the domes on the underside of the streetlamps. I'm no expert on angles etc.

why so despret for it to be aliens ?
So your theory is First dismiss any thing that could possibly be normal then say its Unknown ?
I still say its simply two drops of water on the phone - camera after all Fact water fact light going through water at the right angle produces Rain bows Fact to Round rain bows .
Does not take a science major to see its a water - lighting artifact .
Wishful thinking - aliens and 350 $ will by a lata at star bucks .

You know why science uses the term swamp gas because so far every photo is full of it .
Lights moving even around the moon during the moon landings OMG aliens never mind the million tons of ice and rocks floating around the moon and earth it has got to be aliens .

To much tv I use to be alot like you but realized it was a pointless presuit I want aliens to show up more then any one but I also relize if they do it wont be a rainbow imaginary ship .
You dont go flying around the galaxy in little one alien crafts it would take a mother ship a BIGGGG mother ship .
You know the kind of thing that is hard to miss lol .

One alien UFOS ????? Must be alien teens who stole dad UFO and went for a joy ride to see the funny monkey men .