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.

 

Amazing new UFO Footage, June 8 Phoenix

page: 4
0
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 10 2005 @ 02:47 PM
link   
I found this high quality enlarged view of the lights that might be of interest to some:


Original full rez pix: 1600x1124 link

Notice how video/image artifacts such as pixelation are NOT present and looks like the objects naturaly fit into the video frame, if a hoax someone spent alot of time and/or money on this........







[edit on 10-6-2005 by quadricle]




posted on Jun, 10 2005 @ 03:03 PM
link   
Here's something I want to bring up
I took this screenshot from the second part, where the lights were moving away and he zoomed in and apparently did not use the tripod anymore

Note the fuzzy horizontal lines where the objects are in motion (or rather the camera panning). I'm no expert on digital cameras but can someone tell me if something like that usually happens on digital cameras when it tries to maintain focus on moving objects?

Another thing, in the second part the camera sway seemed to be very fast and very bad. I don't think anyone can match up to swaying like this with computer graphics. My bet would be that the lights hitting the camera lens is real. Now where exactly the lights come from, that's a different story.

One more thing I wish to point out, some mentioned laser pointers. Can lasers be white? White light is a mixture of all wavelengths of the visible spectrum. AFAIK most if not all lasers use only one wavelength. Red lasers I find most common. I don't think this is a black and white film because you can see green trees to the side.



posted on Jun, 10 2005 @ 03:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by quadricle
I found this high quality enlarged view of the lights that might be of interest to some:
www.fatimages.com...
Original full rez pix: 1600x1124 link
Notice how video/image artifacts such as pixelation are NOT present and looks like the objects naturaly fit into the video frame, if a hoax someone spent alot of time and/or money on this........

Oops, looks like you were doing the same thing when I was making up my post



posted on Jun, 10 2005 @ 03:21 PM
link   
Somebody should interview this guy and quick!

Likely a hoax but the more background we can get on him the better.

I for one would not react very much during the filming of a UFO because I woulde be concentrating on getting the footage - so - I don't think you can really go by that as an indicator.

Might as well give him his 15 minutes of fame - get him on Coast to Coast for cross examination!



posted on Jun, 10 2005 @ 03:30 PM
link   
I feel the quality is poor, and while the tripod is initially set up, the person doesn't zoom in very far. The background is extremely dark, and I think I can just barely make out the horizon. However, due to the darkness, there is no way to judge distance. Also, I found it odd that as the dots begin to appear, they line up in a smiley face pattern, and the formation is not perfect, a couple of the lights are not in line with the others. The secondary angle (when the lights begin to go back out again) is far too jumpy, it appears as if it is looking up at the sky, and again, no appreciable frame of reference. I don't feel the quality of the video is good enough to speculate what is actually happening in the video, however I get the impression that, like so many others on that UFOTheatre site, it is a hoax. How it's done, Not CGI, but perhaps simpler, some fool playing around with flashlights in the distance, with frame of reference distance and size indicators purposefully left out.



posted on Jun, 10 2005 @ 04:43 PM
link   
This is an obvious CG make-up. If I had to time here at work I could us my editing skills in video and produce the same video. (but with oak trees because I'm in Texas)

Also, if you take it frame by frame it looks like something that you can produce in a X studio/ with alittle flash programing behind it. Good but not that good.

But, I do have to say that its a good fake.



posted on Jun, 10 2005 @ 04:50 PM
link   
Here's another shot, modified to show the background mountain range, gives a somewhat better idea in regards to placement and distance:



notice the barely visible powerline going thru the top.....

















[edit on 10-6-2005 by quadricle]



posted on Jun, 10 2005 @ 05:07 PM
link   
You guys are wrong about one thing, that they gave no reaction to what they where filming (in the first tape). If you turn up your volume loud enough you can hear the people filming it say some things... hard to make out what they are saying.

They probly just used a nice camera that only gets sound out of what it's pointed at, so it's hard to hear what they are saying and the wind is really loud. But it's there.

I really don't know... it could be real, it might not be.



posted on Jun, 10 2005 @ 05:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by TruthMagnet
I for one would not react very much during the filming of a UFO because I woulde be concentrating on getting the footage - so - I don't think you can really go by that as an indicator.


I agree, there have been many reported sightings with and without multiple witnesses who just stood and stared quietly.





posted on Jun, 10 2005 @ 05:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by w1kdtr1p

Originally posted by TruthMagnet
I for one would not react very much during the filming of a UFO because I woulde be concentrating on getting the footage - so - I don't think you can really go by that as an indicator.


I agree, there have been many reported sightings with and without multiple witnesses who just stood and stared quietly.




The camerman does say "holy #" or something along those lines towards the end of the vid.



posted on Jun, 10 2005 @ 05:47 PM
link   
If this footage is legit, and something unusal is occuring in the sky, then perhaps the display of lights, appearing and disappearing, forming patterns, may be the aerial equivalent of the crop circle phenomena?!

I won't go so far as to analyze the meaning behind the patterning display, arrival/departure of lights etc... just because I'm not even 1% sold on this siting.

this is a really interesting find, quadricle.... thanks!




posted on Jun, 10 2005 @ 05:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by Agentdemon
The camerman does say "holy #" or something along those lines towards the end of the vid.


I concur, but during the beginning with the emergence of lights there is practically nothing said by the witness(es).

[edit on 6/10/05 by w1kdtr1p]



posted on Jun, 10 2005 @ 05:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by Taishyou
Here's something I want to bring up
Note the fuzzy horizontal lines where the objects are in motion (or rather the camera panning). I'm no expert on digital cameras but can someone tell me if something like that usually happens on digital cameras when it tries to maintain focus on moving objects?


That is a very good point and something I missed. I can qualify as an expert
with NTSC/PAL video (I'm an engineer that has designed NTSC/PAL cable
and satellite receivers) The fuzzy horizontal lines that you are noticing are
due to the fact that video is interlaced. That means that a picture (frame) is
made up of two fields that are exposed at different time intervals. At low
shutter speeds (integration times if you really want to be technical) the two
fields will show differing images since they were exposed at different times.
Usually 1/60 of a second apart for NTSC (1/50 sec for PAL). Fast moving
objects or fast camera pans will streak the image and every other line
will be 1/60 a second off from the previous line. All of the even lines will be
at one time base and all of the odd lines will be offset by 1/60 of a second.
The jagged edge of the light streaks are consistent with lights that were
filmed with a video camera and not added on post process CG.

This almost all but proves the lights were actually filmed with the camera
and not created with CG.

And just for those that are a stick in the mud: Yes, such an effect could be
created with CG. But is it likely that it is? No



posted on Jun, 10 2005 @ 05:55 PM
link   
Definitely not a CGI. The person who shot the video made some steady and sudden movements, even with the steadicam feature on with his camera. It was as if he's anticipating any sudden movement from the UFO, he would have to adjust himself and his camera quickly to get a better shot or he'll miss it. One would never know if the UFO would suddenly go up, down, right, left or anywhere while he's videotaping it (or it'll notice what the person's shooting at and move in front of him!).

There are few top-notched computer 3D/animation programs that have "shakey" FX features to make the virtual camera simulate a shaking/movement effect while animating. It's a very intensive work and programming/animating shaking/movement effects for the virtual camera is a very long, tedious process. It's almost impossible for a computer software to simulate a human's movements while holding a video-camera.

Plus moving and animating a multiple-objected 3D object in a 3D computer program is also a long, tedious process.

That's a definitely a live UFO.

You know the best way to ensure the authenticity of a person video-taping an actual UFO event?

Videotape THAT person on location and videotape the UFO as well, then back to the person videotaping it. That would be authentic enough for all of us to see.



posted on Jun, 10 2005 @ 06:14 PM
link   
OK people heres my 2 cents,

!!! I have the EXACT same camera this was filmed on !!!

its a sony DCR-10(x) minidv camcorder

how do i know this?
Turn up the volume and u can hear a buzzing sound

its exactly the same sound as mine (the tape mechanism going round)
same pitch and everything)

plus the fuzzy horizontal lines
thats called interlaced video
and is the cameras native style of recording.


HE DOSN'T use a tripod.
its called "steady-shot" and that compensates for minor camera movement

so when youve got the camera pretty stable or stillish it will be perfectly still
unless u move it a lot.

so the perfect framing is due to him getting the object in view finder, the still-shot of the sony dv stablizes the image as it does with mine and he presses the record button.

also this camera has manual focus which if set on at some piont will even with camera switched off stay in manual focus mode untill switched of

so that explains the hunt-forfocus issue and the fact the lights stay at a fixed slightly out of focus state.

I can tell by the zoomed in part that its real, the way the image reacts when zoomed is 100% consistant with my camera.

theres no way you can emulate the movement of the camera,combined with focus, zooming and the changing of the interlace effect through zooming with CGI and it be perfectly consistant with that of this camera type, I know this camera inside out and its 100% filmed.

I can shoot some similar footage with mine so you can see the steady-shot, interlace, zoom and how it reacts while filming if you want.

(also I have most of the packages described above and if you think you or any 1 can do this with that or similar software, YOUR DREAMING)



posted on Jun, 10 2005 @ 06:53 PM
link   
This is what's on the other side of the moon:




Captured June 10th, 2005, by SMART.ALEC-1



posted on Jun, 10 2005 @ 07:45 PM
link   
Looks real to me. Good find.



posted on Jun, 10 2005 @ 08:02 PM
link   
Hi guys,

just wanted to keep you posted, I managed to get in contact with Brian Bessent, the videographer who shot this footage for a possible interview.

I've asked if it would be cool to answer some questions in reference to this June 5th event.

Would be great to have some first hand account on this.

I will definatly share my findings when and if Brian grants the interview.

later










[edit on 10-6-2005 by quadricle]



posted on Jun, 10 2005 @ 08:06 PM
link   
That would be great. I'm pretty sure it's real though. Real as in not CGI and not a light being pointed at the camera.



posted on Jun, 10 2005 @ 10:13 PM
link   
I'd like this to be real, but my first thought 10 seconds into the video was "this looks like CGI". It just doesn't look right....

[edit on 6/10/2005 by Flinx]



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join