posted on Jul, 15 2006 @ 10:41 PM
I am going to assume that the physical density or solidity of the object would have no extrapolative effect on the pixel density in the photograph.
Having said that, being a light gathering system (camera, and a digital one at that), does the amount of light gathered by the camera from the object
vs. the light gathered from the sky around it have anything to do with the visible differences in pixel density between the sky and the object? We
know that the photo was taken outside near the rail of a cruise ship (photographer statement) in what one could probably be safe to assume is not an
area trafficed by any kind of ground vehicles (aka the deep wild of Alaska so no vehicle headlight reflections). To me this seems to indicate that
an object in the sky either dense enough to reflect more light to the camera than the surrounding sky or the object is internally
emitting more light than the sky around it making it stand out more than its background.
This last statement is at minimum partially true due to the center light the object is emitting. I would also think that a reflection would come
through on the photo as a bit more obscure or blended in with the background and certainly less defined that what is shown on this photo. This thing
has a definately discernable and possibly classical shape to it. I've taken many digital photos with refelections in them and they tend to be a lot
more washed out than this one is.
I am going to definately going to stay in the camp of a solid, genuine photo of a object that looks to be a craft of some type yet to be identified.
This is probably one of the more convincing photos I have seen in quite a while. Certainly better than the typical shaken but not stirred orbs,
seagulls or long exposures off aircraft landing or taking off.....oh, and it doesnt look like a turkey vulture either....