Sky Chariot

a reply to: ArMaP
Im just sensitive

originally posted by: ArMaP
In what way?

Doesn't seem to be enough camera movement to justify the speed-up and exit. The "physics" don't feel right to me but admittedly there's not enough information evident to say anything with certainty.

Not much in the following vid to help but since he demonstrated with an iPhone and because some folk may be unfamiliar with the basic mechanics of lens flare I figured it might be nominally helpful.

a reply to: The GUT

If ur serious about it, please look at OP’s vid in slow motion. The ufo matches the exact movement of the camera including his hand’s involuntary muscle movements.

And the fly-off would seem to be from the camera movement plus the shape of the lens, presumably (making it seem to speed up)...

And every example of lens flare / glare is going to be unique, according to light source and all the other factors...

Also I have been polite as possible while analyzing this interesting case... I haven’t trolled or accused anyone of anything worse than being tricked by their own camera and stuff like that...

I’m glad the vid was posted.

a reply to: The GUT

Lens flare is a combination of issues the light source in relation to the lens, lens construction & aperture and others you can also get internal reflections on inside surface here I posted an example of lens flare ufo's.





This shape is iirc unique to a Canon lens of a certain focal length.

a reply to: wmd_2008

there us a light on a post in the video and it matches the shape of the 'ufo'.

No further news? No real re-enactment? With the time that has gone by since this video was made I suppose the light conditions are completely different now, so the chance of a serious re-enactment is gone.

Meanwhile, I finally found a little time to do something I was thinking about, add the first few frames together to see the trajectory of the supposed UFO. This is the result:



As anyone can see, the "UFO" movement is a perfect mirrored copy of the movement of the lights. We can also see that there's another "UFO" on the left side of the screen, fainter because it's the lens flare of a less bright light, near the bottom of the screen and to the right.

I did the same with the last frames, and I got this:



The "UFO" is exiting the screen at the left and we, once again, can see that the movement is a perfect copy of the light's movement.

Conclusion: lens flare.

PS: just because I could I made two videos with the images used to create the images above.

a reply to: ArMaP

Nice analysis. I knew that I could see the first seconds showing an exact match of movements, with the flare, and camera movement.

originally posted by: visitedbythem
Maybe a curved lens would make it appear to speed up. What ever it was, I was doing my job, as I would want each of you to do, as an ATS member/reporter. That is to get the pictures/ Information to other members before its plastered across the rest of the internet. Im very proud of other members on ATS that get me stories, pictures and information, long before any of my friends and family have it.

I believe there is no deception going on just confusion.

You say your friend saw it before filming and that they usually takes pics at that time instead of video.

Did they see the "light" in the sky or did they see it on the screen and decided to film instead of take the pic?