This topic is in the Aliens & UFOs discussion forum.  (rss)


Photo of a "Black Triangle"


<<  9    10    11    12  >>



reply posted on 17-1-2006 @ 06:31 PM by Nventual


Although it doesn't explain why the original picture is a different angle of the craft and why it seems to be a photo taken of another photo.



reply to this post:   copyright & usage 


reply posted on 17-1-2006 @ 06:52 PM by warpboost


Well if the craft is computer generated and then cropped into another picture, maybe the crator made several models of the craft at different angles etc?



reply to this post:   copyright & usage 


reply posted on 17-1-2006 @ 06:59 PM by Nventual


I've emailed him about it, I'll post his answer here.



reply to this post:   copyright & usage 


reply posted on 17-1-2006 @ 07:04 PM by nullster


Nventual - I am betting he posted the image on CG sites. Possibly as a "work in progress". Whats on his site is the shot he wants to display. I am sure he has many renders different lighting/positions and so on.

I make a tens if not hundreds renders of models and scenes that never make it on my site. I'm sure if someone emailed him he would verfiy this. He would probably be amused that his shot stumped allot of us.



reply to this post:   copyright & usage 


reply posted on 17-1-2006 @ 07:39 PM by info_junkee


Well i just wana add that i dont think its faked, i think it is a still shot from an xfiles episode as stated earlier.. and just blurred up to look more ..real.

I saw the episode ive seen them all. Just wish i had it on dvd still id takes loads of stills and see if thats there, it is fully on show in many angles, one point mulder is directly under it.

Nothing alien about it tho unless the technology and plans came from aliens..



reply to this post:   copyright & usage 


reply posted on 17-1-2006 @ 07:44 PM by nullster


info_junkee - You missed it Nventual solved it on Page 11.
It's a CG scene.

Here's the direct link he supplied. >>UFO Solved ATS Link

Any bets?
It will probably be another week before this picture comes up again.



reply to this post:   copyright & usage 


reply posted on 17-1-2006 @ 07:51 PM by info_junkee


oh god sorry, stoned again i read half the posts then had to give in n jump to the end, il go check that now.



reply to this post:   copyright & usage 


reply posted on 17-1-2006 @ 08:04 PM by info_junkee


I duno about you guys but im so fedup with fake pics tho i guess i should laugh is there ANY vids or pics on this site of aliens or ufos that CANT be dEbUnKeD??

Show me pleeeeeeeease!?



reply to this post:   copyright & usage 


reply posted on 17-1-2006 @ 08:11 PM by AceWombat04


This article has been linked to before, but I always find it amazing that msnbc.com would so openly support the existence of these "black triangles," whatever they may be.

www.msnbc.msn.com...



reply to this post:   copyright & usage 


reply posted on 17-1-2006 @ 08:51 PM by info_junkee


I didnt realise they were so popular... i still think they are old fashioned for some reason.. i duno.. maybe things are more advanced on my old planet and ive unconcious memory

Its probably ancient to aliens like a spitfire to us. Maybe there are no aliens exchanging technology, instead maybe the powers that be have the ancient texts from say... india.. talking about vimanas and how to build them etc.. but they dont want us to read that stuff thats why its so hard to find anyway... so yeah... they could just let us all believe the conspiracys that our government deal with aliens.. cause at the end of the day its safer for them, its all earning money and they know where we are all at....



reply to this post:   copyright & usage 


reply posted on 18-1-2006 @ 07:39 AM by Nventual


First email back from him.

"The UFO is the only cg. The rest is a photo.
This is the only image I made with this UFO."


Once I showed him the other photo he replied with.

"It my picture that someone has stolen. They have just graded the image which is why it looks a bit different.

It is a photo of real trees and the UFO was added in 3d."


And then with.

"Actually I just compared it to mine and the ufo is different.

I think it was done by a friend of mine because he is the only one with a copy of that photo. We had the idea together to and it looks like he has painted it because he was better at drawing than 3d.

So I can confirm that it is a real photo... of trees. The ufo is added."

I guess that explains it.



reply to this post:   copyright & usage 


reply posted on 18-1-2006 @ 09:05 AM by pkrska


Kinda late posting here cause I just seen this thing... on this forum... and the first question comes to mind is why is it out of focus?

The second question is why are there not more photos of it?

Wouldn't it make sense that if you did manage to grab your camera in time, perhaps in the rush of excitement, you forgot to check your focus, but then after taking the first shot, well, there would be a tonne more pictures taken and in focus.

No one in their right mind buys a standard camera which needs to be manually focused unless you know something about cameras. Most autofocus cameras work extremely well. The foreground does suggest a bush, or more likely a tree that was in front of the user... however, why not just step aside and provide a clearer picture of the 'thing'?

Another one of those fake pics I think. There are just too many inconsistancies to think about on this one. Why oh why? I hate it when the focus is off... what is this like your first time with a camera? And what's up with only one pic and it happens to be the one that's out of focus? Start clicking away man... What? Was it your last shot on the film? Or was it a digital camera? Well, that explains that eh!

One last question, was this guy hiding behind that tree? It does look like a very feable tree to be hinding behind. Reminds me of a Charley Brown Christmas Tree. For one thing, the branches suggest this guy was either very tall or that tree he was hinding behind was very short!

[edit on 18-1-2006 by pkrska]



reply to this post:   copyright & usage 


reply posted on 18-1-2006 @ 10:47 AM by nullster


pkrska - Those will always be valid arguments when it comes to seeing still images. Why aren't there multiple pictures? The reality is setting up CG shots can be a complex affair. Visual consistency can be tough especially if you have allot of post work for each image. ie: touch up and filter treatment work in Photoshop.

When it comes to UFO movies, I'll note most are always low resolution not to mention heavily compressed. The compression artifacts keep the bad details from showing through. So the lower the resolution the easier details get covered up. If people were to present higher resoltion video with less encoding, it would be easier to spot inconsistancies.

A sample video produced in 1998
UFO_Flyover.MOV

Nonetheless it is just a matter of time before we get a flood of some real nice renderings that will be hard to discount.



reply to this post:   copyright & usage 


<<  9    10    11    12  >>







Top Topics Right Now:



Active Topics Right Now:



ATS MIX Podcasts:











Newest Topics:


















ATS Thread Tag System
Members can add a custom descriptive tag to any thread on ATS. Thread Tags will help categorize our site content, help to cross-reference similar threads, and improve the searchability of all ATS threads. This thread is currently defined by these tags:

, , , , , , , , , , ,
















ATS Server: www2.theabovenetwork.com
Powered by AboveTop:Board v2.3
Header data processed in 0.002 seconds
Page processed in 0.090 seconds
7 total database queries (1)









The Above Top Secret Conspiracy Community Web site is a wholly owned social content community of The Above Network, LLC.





thread