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.

 

Triangular UFO with NOISE, in space! (during SpaceX Dragon Craft launch to ISS.)

page: 6
56
<< 3  4  5    7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 21 2018 @ 08:44 AM
link   
a reply to: peacefulpete

Here you go again - nit picking about other poster's spelling and use of English language.




posted on Dec, 21 2018 @ 08:48 AM
link   

originally posted by: oldcarpy
a reply to: peacefulpete

Here you go again - nit picking about other poster's spelling and use of English language.


*posters'




posted on Dec, 21 2018 @ 08:56 AM
link   
a reply to: peacefulpete

My sides.



posted on Dec, 21 2018 @ 09:22 AM
link   
a reply to: oldcarpy

My head!



posted on Dec, 21 2018 @ 10:14 AM
link   
a reply to: JimOberg

If you are really Jim Oberg I'm honored, yes I hadn't really thought about that in years, the mention of triangle shapes brought it back. Our home at the time was on the North Fork of the Couredelain River in the Idaho panhandle, it was probably at or near it's closest point to the surface and was very nearly directly over head, I must have had as good a view as anyone.
Always thought it was a UFO but in retrospect the pie shape behind the bright point was probably the afterglow (penumbra?) if that's the term.
(Psst, we share a last name)



posted on Dec, 21 2018 @ 01:39 PM
link   
a reply to: peacefulpete

If you check photos that show stars you will see shutter speeds are a few seconds. The timelapse video as I explained is made from shots with very high iso a fast lens f1,4 and 3 SECOND exposures.

Realtime video will be between 15-30 FRAMES PER SECOND so can you not see the problem.

If the video of Dragon X is exposed to show it then it wont show stars like the Apollo & ISS images.

Hot pixels happen when a sensor heats up due to operating for an extended time or the iso is pushed now is that clear enough my hobby is photography and for nearly 40 years and like a few others on here I take shots of the night sky.



posted on Dec, 21 2018 @ 04:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: wmd_2008
a reply to: peacefulpete

If you check photos that show stars you will see shutter speeds are a few seconds. The timelapse video as I explained is made from shots with very high iso a fast lens f1,4 and 3 SECOND exposures.

Realtime video will be between 15-30 FRAMES PER SECOND so can you not see the problem.

If the video of Dragon X is exposed to show it then it wont show stars like the Apollo & ISS images.

Hot pixels happen when a sensor heats up due to operating for an extended time or the iso is pushed now is that clear enough my hobby is photography and for nearly 40 years and like a few others on here I take shots of the night sky.


I honestly don't understand what you're saying. And sorry, but I doubt that you're actually saying anything lol.



If you check photos that show stars you will see shutter speeds are a few seconds.


What lol. Photos don't need a specific shutter speed to photograph the stars...




The timelapse video as I explained is made from shots with very high iso a fast lens f1,4 and 3 SECOND exposures.


What timelapse video? SpaceX vid was broadcast live. Are you calling the live video... a timelapse video? If so, why?




Realtime video will be between 15-30 FRAMES PER SECOND so can you not see the problem.


^I don't think there's a requirement of frames per second... for a vid to count as real-time...

Even if there is, did you actually measure the frames per second of the original vid from SpaceX?




If the video of Dragon X is exposed to show it then it wont show stars like the Apollo & ISS images.


^If it shows it, then it won't show it? What lol.

And I already explained that the stars are not "hot pixels," because the stars appear when the camera's lens is obviously adjusted to receive more light.



posted on Dec, 21 2018 @ 05:05 PM
link   
a reply to: peacefulpete

You really are dumb when it comes to photography/video . Let me explain for you the hard of learning. A timelapse is a video of still images which shows an event which covers many minutes or even hours. So each individual image can have a shutter speed lasting from half a second to many seconds. When all images are in the video editing software a video is rendered at 24 -30 frames per second. A REALTIME VIDEO is filmed at 24-30 frames per second thats why it's real time for example 5 secs of video represents 5 secs of time. If shooting at 24-30 frames per second then the shutter speed needs to be quicker than 1/24 to 1/30 th of a second since it takes a few seconds to expose for a star thats why stars won't show on the video.

I explained why I showed the NASA timelapse if the Dragon X video is realtime which it is and is exposed to show the craft stars wont show..

You obviously haven't a clue !
edit on 21-12-2018 by wmd_2008 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 21 2018 @ 05:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: wmd_2008
a reply to: peacefulpete

You really are dumb when it comes to photography/video . Let me explain for you the hard of learning. A timelapse is a video of still images which shows an event which covers many minutes or even hours. So each individual image can have a shutter speed lasting from half a second to many seconds. When all images are in the video editing software a video is rendered at 24 -30 frames per second. A REALTIME VIDEO is filmed at 24-30 frames per second thats why it's real time for example 5 secs of video represents 5 secs of time. If shooting at 24-30 frames per second then the shutter speed needs to be quicker than 1/24 to 1/30 th of a second since it takes a few seconds to expose for a star thats why stars won't show on the video.

I explained why I showed the NASA timelapse if the Dragon X video is realtime which it is and is exposed to show the craft stars wont show..

You obviously haven't a clue !


You obviously are just writing paragraphs of jargon.




I explained why I showed the NASA timelapse if the Dragon X video is realtime which it is and is exposed to show the craft stars wont show..


That hardly resembles a sentence, but beyond that: No, you have not explained why the video can't show stars. Especially, when it seems to obviously be showing stars.

I was going to quote your last sentence, of 5 words, with 2 extra spaces added for no reason. But the site won't even let me quote you, without automatically correcting it, lol.



posted on Dec, 21 2018 @ 05:25 PM
link   
a reply to: peacefulpete




You obviously are just writing paragraphs of jargon.

Actually, no.


Especially, when it seems to obviously be showing stars.
Stars that do not move in the frame even though the spacecraft has moved 2,000 miles or so around the planet? ("Around" italicized for a reason.)


edit on 12/21/2018 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 21 2018 @ 06:53 PM
link   
a reply to: peacefulpete

Here a correctly exposed picture of the Moon one of mine notice the shutter speed and we have NO stars visible



1/400th of a second f8 iso 400, Sony SLT A37 with a 300mm lens (heavy crop)


Here are some pictures of STARS mine again notice the shutter speed 10 seconds.

All f3.5 10 secs iso 1600 one at 20mm the other 2 18mm focal length.

Pleiades & Taurus




Taurus the V shaped stars at top of picture and Orion below




Moon just about to rise the fat looking star above it is actually Jupiter and a couple of stars from Orion on the right Betelgeuse & Bellatrix.



Lets look at the other exposure details iso 400 for the Moon, iso 1600 for the STARS
Now the Aperture f8 for the Moon f3.5 for the STARS f3.5 that lets in more light than f8

If I had taken the Moon shot at f8 and iso 1600 the shutter speed would be reduced to 1/1600th of a second.
If I had shot the Moon at F3.5 and iso 400 the shutter speed would have been 1/2000th of a second
If I had shot the STARS at 1/400th of a second and f8 like the Moon the iso setting would be over 1.6 million iso

Here is a video of a Sony A7S one of the best low light cameras you can buy

f1.4 1/30th of a second but 256,000 iso



Now if that was shot at the same settings as my star images f3.5 iso 1600 the shutter speed would need to be 30 seconds.

The camera that filmed the Dragon X could NOT show the Dragon X correctly exposed and ALSO show stars it's that simple. If the camera used was digital then it's hot pixels .
edit on 21-12-2018 by wmd_2008 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 21 2018 @ 07:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: peacefulpete




You obviously are just writing paragraphs of jargon.

Actually, no.



Oh, it's not jargon?

Well then please translate:




You really are dumb when it comes to photography/video . Let me explain for you the hard of learning. A timelapse is a video of still images which shows an event which covers many minutes or even hours. So each individual image can have a shutter speed lasting from half a second to many seconds. When all images are in the video editing software a video is rendered at 24 -30 frames per second. A REALTIME VIDEO is filmed at 24-30 frames per second thats why it's real time for example 5 secs of video represents 5 secs of time. If shooting at 24-30 frames per second then the shutter speed needs to be quicker than 1/24 to 1/30 th of a second since it takes a few seconds to expose for a star thats why stars won't show on the video. I explained why I showed the NASA timelapse if the Dragon X video is realtime which it is and is exposed to show the craft stars wont show.. You obviously haven't a clue !



posted on Dec, 21 2018 @ 07:16 PM
link   
a reply to: peacefulpete



Well then please translate:

The camera settings were insufficient to show stars.

But that is irrelevant, since the camera was pointed at the planet. Unless you think the ISS rolled over.
edit on 12/21/2018 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 21 2018 @ 07:18 PM
link   
Well ill tell you one thing if its a triangle its man made, if its a cylinder its also man made. From research the best triangles we have in black projects are low earth orbit.150,000 miles or less. Taking in consideration we all now about the Tr3b which would be the only suspect in this video. If its a cylinder its all deprived from alien allied tehnology what i see here may in all honestly might be space junk by product. If you think that there is advanced vessels in space that can't control their trajectory for 4 hours. How can you believe that this object is really that advanced? Also this object if you believe it to be advanced. Why would it have 4 lights on ? When NASA or space x cuts a feed thats when what you shouldn't see is seeable.



posted on Dec, 21 2018 @ 07:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: wmd_2008
a reply to: peacefulpete

Here a correctly exposed picture of the Moon one of mine notice the shutter speed and we have NO stars visible



1/400th of a second f8 iso 400, Sony SLT A37 with a 300mm lens (heavy crop)


Here are some pictures of STARS mine again notice the shutter speed 10 seconds.

All f3.5 10 secs iso 1600 one at 20mm the other 2 18mm focal length.

Pleiades & Taurus




Taurus the V shaped stars at top of picture and Orion below




Moon just about to rise the fat looking star above it is actually Jupiter and a couple of stars from Orion on the right Betelgeuse & Bellatrix.



Lets look at the other exposure details iso 400 for the Moon, iso 1600 for the STARS
Now the Aperture f8 for the Moon f3.5 for the STARS f3.5 that lets in more light than f8

If I had taken the Moon shot at f8 and iso 1600 the shutter speed would be reduced to 1/1600th of a second.
If I had shot the Moon at F3.5 and iso 400 the shutter speed would have been 1/2000th of a second
If I had shot the STARS at 1/400th of a second and f8 like the Moon the iso setting would be over 1.6 million iso

Here is a video of a Sony A7S one of the best low light cameras you can buy

f1.4 1/30th of a second but 256,000 iso



Now if that was shot at the same settings as my star images f3.5 iso 1600 the shutter speed would need to be 30 seconds.

The camera that filmed the Dragon X could NOT show the Dragon X correctly exposed and ALSO show stars it's that simple. If the camera used was digital then it's hot pixels .


In other words... "meaningless garbage."

FFS, shutter speed has nothing to do with showing stars. And there's no reason that a camera can't film the Dragon craft at the same time as stars.

And it's not "hot pixels" when the ISS' camera shows stars, regardless if it's digital.

Can you stop wasting my time now?



posted on Dec, 21 2018 @ 07:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: peacefulpete



Well then please translate:

The camera settings were insufficient to show stars.

But that is irrelevant, since the camera was pointed at the planet. Unless you think the ISS rolled over.


Actually, I just think the camera is showing stars. Because... the camera is obviously showing stars.



posted on Dec, 21 2018 @ 07:32 PM
link   
a reply to: peacefulpete

So, the ISS rolled over and the position of the "stars" don't change even though the ISS moved across the equivalent of the width of the United States.

Confirmation bias is a wonderful and somewhat scary thing.



posted on Dec, 21 2018 @ 07:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: peacefulpete

So, the ISS rolled over and the position of the "stars" don't change even though the ISS moved across the equivalent of the width of the United States.

Confirmation bias is a wonderful and somewhat scary thing.


It's actually much MORE abstract for you to argue that the obvious stars, in the live broadcast, are not... stars.

The rest is relatively meaningless. ISS rolling, stars' positioning, ISS moving across the US.

If NASA / SpaceX stated that the stars are not stars, then that would be a different conversation.

However, they didn't say that. Which leaves the obvious stars seeming to be... obvious stars.



posted on Dec, 21 2018 @ 07:49 PM
link   
a reply to: peacefulpete




However, they didn't say that.

Did you ask?



posted on Dec, 21 2018 @ 10:25 PM
link   
a reply to: peacefulpete

I don't know if anyone said this but you can't hear sounds in outer space so... And if you can't but the headline mentions 'noise', it makes some go 'hmmm.....'

Can You Hear Sound in Space? - with an answer from CalTech







 
56
<< 3  4  5    7  8 >>

log in

join