Originally posted by jritzmann Honestly if you dont know, throw it to someone who does.
Originally posted by Motorbike Man
The way I'm looking at it is that I would rather not have to rely on anyone else's interpretation, at least at first which is why I was wndering if
there was a sort of base starting point that most people work from.
Regardless if your a seasoned professional or just starting out, having one or two opinions is extremely advantagous to you and/or your analysis. The
reality is that someone else could possibly detect something that you (or someone else) may have missed. Also with various other ones looking at the
same image/video can help substantiate an aspect or fallacy that you've all found. There is to, the power in numbers when a conclusion has been made
and/or determined. It carries much more weight when the same point of view is (pro or con) reported and backed up by other analyzers. When you do ask
for assistance, do not share your opinion but rather wait to see if their analysis corresponds with yours.
Although it has not been mentioned, if it's at all possible to secure a report from the photographer or videographer this can help determine (or at
least weigh heavily) on a decisive conclusion. If the witness is unable to answer simple question such as the direction or POV of the phenomena, it's
quite possible that the credibility of the capture itself may lean more towards a fabrication. Was there any audio removed from the video capture?
Does the Exif (Exchangeable Image File) data exist? Camera settings and scene information are recorded by the camera into the image file. Examples of
stored information are shutter speed, date and time, focal length, exposure compensation, metering pattern and if a flash was used. If the submitted
jpeg photo does not have this information, it's quite possible that the photo sent to you has been manipulated, cropped and/or filtered in some way
by some popular editing program (IE: Photoshop, Corel, PaintShopPro, etc.). Of course for a true analysis to be conducted, the analyzer wants a
untouched original (if possible).
One of the hardest aspects in both still and video captures is in the judging of the distance of the target/object/phenomena from the camera. Distance
and the focal aspects of how the UFO was captured can really be decieving. Did the witness have his/her videocamera on autofocus? Was the photographer
shooting at 1/60 or 1/1000 of a second, or was it also set on a 'auto-mode' feature? if it was a auto-feature, was it in 'sports-mode',
'portrait-mode', 'twilight-mode', (etc.)? All of these if shot at the same object would reflect differant results.
If you remember nothing else, use Occams Razor Golden Rule:
Occam's razor states that the explanation of any phenomenon should make as few assumptions as possible, eliminating, or "shaving off," those that
make no difference in the observable predictions of the explanatory hypothesis or theory. In short, when given two equally valid explanations for a
phenomenon, one should embrace the less complicated formulation. The principle is often expressed in Latin as the lex parsimoniae (law of
"entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem",
which translates to: entities should not be multiplied beyond necessity.
This is often paraphrased as "All things being equal, the simplest solution tends to be the best one." and has been popularized by, among others,
the scientist Carl Sagan. (That is, the fewer assumptions an explanation of a phenomenon depends on, the better it is.)
I've barely scratched the surface here as there are so many differant aspects to learn, I could go on and on, but instead I'll direct you to some
excellent and informative links that should help back what I've said and increase your knowledge on what to look for in an analysis and what
questions to ask in regards to it. If you don't mind investing a few dollars, MUFON has an excellent manual available to its members.
Wishing you much luck in your endeavors,
BLURFOs Are Not UFOs
Physical Evidence Related to UFO Reports, Photographic
Offical UFO Investigations in France: the GEPAN/SEPRA
Triangulation - "Pre-Trigonometry"
UFO Sighting Questionnaire