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.

 

Strange Photo of UFO!

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 8 2005 @ 05:28 PM
link   
I came across this new photo of a UFO taken on July 7th, in Modesto, California as reported on UFO casebook.



Definitely not your average flying disc or glowing orb.

The whole picture and report can be viewed at UFO Casebook.

It reminded me of those flying rods that most say are digital anomalies caused by bugs flying into the picture.

Edit: Just to be clear the rods were not seen until the video was ran in slow motion, but this object was visible in the sky, which is why he photographed it. So I know it is not the same thing, it just reminded me of them.

[edit on 7/8/2005 by Hal9000]




posted on Jul, 8 2005 @ 05:33 PM
link   
It looks very odd. The Roswell rods are straight while this thing looks uneven.
Maybe we are not seeing the whole thing?



posted on Jul, 8 2005 @ 05:59 PM
link   
It does look somewhat like those Roswell Rods..

This also looks like a short duration time exposure photo of a regular aircraft
with blinking lights..
There is no EXIF data in the larger version. so I am assuming it was taken on Film..too bad.



posted on Jul, 8 2005 @ 06:09 PM
link   
It is strange, but with these types of photo's you might as well discard it right away. I would be more impressed if he would of atleast took more photo's or video, who takes 1 or 2 photo's when you see something like this? I'd snap as many as I possibly could without using them all (Never use the last photo or 2 incase it gets closer, or changes)

[edit on 8-7-2005 by bsr5]



posted on Jul, 8 2005 @ 06:25 PM
link   
It does seem strange that only one photograph was taken when it was obviously a good chance to take them.

Its interesting, but it seems fishy.

The actual photo is much better than the zoom and crop.

visit the link.



posted on Jul, 8 2005 @ 07:11 PM
link   
It does seem strange that only one picture was taken. I would like to here more about the sighting. I wonder how long it was visible, and how fast was it moving. Maybe more witnesses will report the same thing, which would also add to the credibility.



posted on Jul, 9 2005 @ 09:11 AM
link   
A similar ufo was photographed over Washington, DC last year. All the heads on ATS said it was photo shopped.



posted on Jul, 9 2005 @ 09:28 AM
link   
WARNING WARNING
Huge mothership approaching !!!

and those look like docked orbs to me


ive seen similar cigar shaped UFOs in a documentary "out of the blue"...they were filmed in Russia floating over a city....and photographed from the civil airplane and observed by all the peassangers on board...just a simple big black tube bigger than the airplane



posted on Jul, 9 2005 @ 09:28 AM
link   
As mentioned, it looks like a timed exposure of an aircraft...I would guess no more than 2 seconds. If you look at the origional picture, the trees are a little bit blurred, meaning they were exposed for a time and were in motion from wind.

I'm 99% sure it's just a plane with a 1-2 second exposure.



posted on Jul, 9 2005 @ 09:44 AM
link   
Actually.
I don't think it looks unusual at all. If you look at a lot of the reports from the 50s, many describe long, cylindrical craft that are lined with very strong lights that seem to 'snake' up and down the hull. There were several incidents where airline pilots witnessed cylindrical craft like these... and, as someone joked above, they have been associated with the 'mothership' of popular UFO lore.



posted on Jul, 9 2005 @ 10:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by sensfan
I'm 99% sure it's just a plane with a 1-2 second exposure.


If it were time a time exposure with blinking lights, wouldn't the lights be uniform along the entire length? I don't know, I'm no photographer, but that is what I would expect. But then I used to think those rods were real too.


edit: Also if it were a time exposure, the lights would be elongated for the length of time of each exposure. Or if the lights are blinking, they are blinking very fast, while the aircraft is moving slow, and would be uniform across the length.

[edit on 7/9/2005 by Hal9000]



posted on Jul, 9 2005 @ 02:12 PM
link   
Hal9000,

Those are really good points about the lights and exposures.
I'm more of a photographer, than an aircraft expert..But I do take tons of
time exposure photos. Usually at night...looking for Meteors mostly..
I know that aircraft lights blink in different patterns..Some people can ID a craft by the pattern,,not me!

Some of my night time photos have aircraft in them..I have 1000's of them,
but I can search through..see if I can find something similar...If so, I'll post it..

Space



posted on Jul, 9 2005 @ 03:20 PM
link   
ok.

Didn't take as long as I thought it would.
Here is a 15 second timed exposure of a plane..don't know what kind.
First, the overall shot.




Now a closeup of the area containing the plane..


The similarity to your original post, is what made me think plane, right from the beginning..
the pattern of blinking is different..but you can see that the dots are not elongated, mainly because the duration of the "blink" is so short..



posted on Jul, 9 2005 @ 03:48 PM
link   
spacedoubt, that's an excellent example of what this could be.


In your picture, I can count 15 lights, and you say the exposure was 15 seconds, so the lights are blinking once per second. But this plane had a continuous pattern. It's pretty strange that the main body of the plane appears so bright, but probably due to the long exposure.

Now in the picture in question, the pattern would be 4 blinks every second, then off for like 6 seconds, then another 4 blinks. The plane could have been flying at an angle so the lights would appear closer together. The only anomaly is that the left upper quadrant of lights is missing one light. So the photographer, had to start the exposure, and stop it just right to have four lights on both ends of the exposure. If your right, it's pretty slick, and clearly done to deceive, because they would know it was actually a plane, and still reported it as a UFO.

Thanks for the post.

So what does everyone think, is it a hoax?



posted on Jul, 9 2005 @ 04:06 PM
link   
It's a flying canoe are you guys blind, can't you see the paddles. It must be a prop for some new movie coming out, maybe without a paddle 2
. It probably is just a plane that has been exposed for a few seconds.



posted on Jul, 9 2005 @ 04:49 PM
link   
To the best of my memory, the plane in my photo, had a continuous white light, and a continuous red light that was much dimmer. If you look closely you can see the slight redness on the right hand side..

I think the original photo may have had a dimmer red light that also blinked.
the red light was off at the middle of the exposure..It made the "body" of the thing appear skinnier..

I think the original photgrapher was pulling our legs..




top topics



 
0

log in

join