Originally posted by jritzmann
Ok I'm early in this as of yet, I just been busy with so much else...
In looking on Google Image Search for shots of O'Hare I found this shot, which shows an issue of airplane congestion on incoming flights:
You can see the image here, at this link from Google
I was looking for shots that might have been manipulated, or I thought I might come across the same vantage point by some stretch of luck.
But, I noticed it was a little strange that certain angles matched the degrees of the Ohare UFO shot, like the bend in the runway. So I overlayed them. This animation might take a couple secs to load but here's a dissolve on the two:
What I notice is there's either a slight bit of lens distortion IF they arent the same picture. OR, I just cant get them aligned right, which might be due in part to being manipulated for making it into the UFO shot. I've aligned them as best I can right now. Again, there's certain angles like the runway that line up so close it's hard to ascribe to luck in positioning. It's really, really close.
What I note is the wicked similarity of stationary objects, and the lights on the horizon area. We dont see them in the UFO shot. But, when you look back and forth between the congestion and the UFO shot, the UFO shot seems to have dark areas around where the lights *should* be. Could they be painted over? Cloned over with treeline? Seems possible to me.
This begs the question to me: If the UFO shot is overcast, and somewhat dark, and the congestion shot seems to be the same, why arent those lights on? You'd think they'd be auto-eye controlled. Maybe the exposure of the cell phone doesnt depict the light conditions, but it was 4:30, reportedly just before dark. I think those lights oughtta be on...thats just me.
Manipulated? I dunno yet. I can say the grain or noise of the UFO photo appears to be very uniform, but I cant say thats exactly out of the nature of a cell phone cam.
I try to picture someone wanting to fake this shot, and coming across this picture (congestion) and thinking that this almost looks like a UFO shot already.
Now, if it IS NOT the same picture manipulated into a UFO shot, then we're looking at a photo thats taken exceedingly close to the same position of the UFO one. We're currently looking into finding a map of the airport so we can determine if this object was indeed over the gate area as desribed. (unless someone has already done that)
Just an interesting shot I wanted to show, might be a clue. I'll keep diggin.
Originally posted by AgainstSecrecy
seems like none of you really compared the two pics (besides those bad excuses why it has the adobe string in...)
look at both pics.
you'll notice the different backgrounds, next look at the runnway of both pics...they're not taken from the same position.
the faked pic shows that the guy who took the pic stands on the ground.
the ohare pic was taken from inside a plane (perhabs the plane was about to make a touchdown...looks like) the angle is not the same as in the faked pic.
and the ufo in the ohare pic is not at the same height as the plane.
img267.imageshack.us...
[edit on 24-1-2007 by AgainstSecrecy]
Originally posted by AgainstSecrecy
seems like none of you really compared the two pics (besides those bad excuses why it has the adobe string in...)
look at both pics.
you'll notice the different backgrounds, next look at the runnway of both pics...they're not taken from the same position.
the faked pic shows that the guy who took the pic stands on the ground.
the ohare pic was taken from inside a plane (perhabs the plane was about to make a touchdown...looks like) the angle is not the same as in the faked pic.
and the ufo in the ohare pic is not at the same height as the plane.
img267.imageshack.us...
[edit on 24-1-2007 by AgainstSecrecy]
