Amazing Photo's of S.F UFO Seen Last Summer

reply to post by defuntion


Hi,
I can definitely see the similarites to the craft you show in the picture. And I do tend to agree that is what it is. But why does the spot light not stay continuous? It is a different look from the posted helicopter where you see a big illumination.
If I saw the spotlight reflection on the water stretched out like the craft, I would feel better about it being a helicopter.

Just some input for thought,
Mtmind

"I knew of no object at time the photographs were taken. "

its a time exposure of an aircraft, a deliberate one.

look at the light reflection off the water, how could you not notice it? that thing is lighting the place up pretty good and is well framed in each pic

obvious hoax.

Originally posted by planetfall
"I knew of no object at time the photographs were taken. "

its a time exposure of an aircraft, a deliberate one.

look at the light reflection off the water, how could you not notice it? that thing is lighting the place up pretty good and is well framed in each pic

obvious hoax.

Well, for whatever it's worth, here's what the photographer said about the light from the craft reflecting off the water in those photo's:

The lighting that can be seen on the water, was certainly not visible to me at my time on the dock. I was peering out over the water, shooting direct shots of the landscape just beyond the water. I was basically staring at the water during the time I took these shots. None of the objects or lights in the picture were visible to me. Nothing was of any alarm.

Exaxtly it was deliberate!

a long exposure of an airplane or helicopter, you can see the red dots across it , that is the red lights on a plane flashing on and off as it moves along.

it was deliberate because obviously some exposre compensation was used on the camera settings so that the background wouldent be over exposed through leaving the shutter open.

although if your not familiar with photography I can understand how it may look...so.


but heres the PROOF that clearly shows the exact thing!!! with the white trail and preodic red dots.

a long exposure of a plane on purpose..

www.flickr.com...



:-) badaboom!

I love looking at long exposure photo's.. they're so interesting!

But those UFO photo's were presented in a clever way where it's just not obvious that that's what it is.

Definitely takes a trained eye to tell for sure. No doubt about it.

It's one of those 'is it' or 'isn't it?' ... only someone with a trained eye for those different long exposure techniques that some of the more sophisticated camera's are capable of would be able know with certainty if those techniques were used or not.

It seems like the photographer at least knew enough about how to use those features on his camera to be able to effect such ambiguous photo's like this.

Firstly, let me say I am fairly disappointed at the rapidity of an assumption these are faked or misrepresented. That seems to be the response anyone gets outside the gate. I seem to remember the philosophic human right that a person is innocent until proven guilty, and that so many responses are opposite is I think a concern for anyone looking at societies current pathology with respect to our overall psychological state.

Secondly, I do astro photography and also have a digital cam that is bad in low light conditions, so when I bracket shots get many unusable files. So seen some similar effects, but I'm not convinced the images are faked or misrept yet.

For the long exposure they would have had to tripod it otherwise you would see some ellypting on the city lights. Just the heartbeat of the photographer can do that. Also someone mentioned the water being to crisp, and that is a good point too.

As far as the strobing running light Helicopter theory, there are more than one lights that would show. There should be a green and blue light showing orientation of the aircraft, and I don't see that here. I have not had time to go to my FAA lighting diagrams, but the alleged strobes are about a half to a full second, so that would indicate an approximate exposure length. This does not seem consistent with the other evidence I am seeing and have found in this thread.

Has anyone gotten the Digital File Data from the originals? That has all the information many are basing their theaorys on.

Some due diligence should be performed if we want to really know something about this. I don't think we are just chatting here. We have the real potential of making the first community anomaly reaserch entity outside of MUFON and other UFO researching entities. We should incorporate some careful scientific methods and follow some logical procedures. I can arrange to post the MUFON field guides for us. I'll ask as I am a member and the Nor Cal director is a friend and colleague. They want money for this (I paid 40 smackers) so we can see if a scaled down refrence can be posted here or on an associate site.

I did see the WA-DC image at the time it happened many years ago and actually went to the cam on line to check out its details. I also looked at about a month of stored images from that cam to look how it records aircraft. One of the interesting things about that is that this is restricted airspace and only Airforce One chopper/s and military are allowed in the area. This was big, and I could not find anything to discount it's validity. Many years ago though. At least five years past. Nice reference however.

ZG

Hey y'all,

I am originally from the Bay Area. Marin County to be exact. Apon seeing these
images it sparked a memory of a time that I saw something that looked very much
like the "craft" in these photos.

It was a cold, clear (very clear) morning in the fall, and I had just left my front door
to walk to my truck that was in the driveway, to jmp in and head for work. It was still
dark out and I paused for a moment before getting in my truck to look at the stars
in the sky. Again, it was an extremely clear sky that morning, and the stars seemed to
acually illuminate the dark sky.
So there I was, looking up at the stars, when all of a sudden, this "craft" appeared
from behind some palm trees that paralelled the West side of my driveway which faced
N-S. The "craft was so low to the ground that I could actually make out the shapes
that mad up the shape of the thing. It appeared to be like a plane without wings of
any kind. Basically, just a fusalage. The shape was not smooth either, as it seemed to
have panels that mad up the outside surface. Almost angular panels.
The other thing about this "craft", was the fact that it had no (visable) lights on it
anywere. It was also made no sound at all. It was creepy to see something that
large and that close to you and have it not make any noise.
The "craft" was moving in a North-East direction towards the Sacramento area, and
I watched it move along it's path and it seemed to pick up speed as it progressed
further away from me.

I did'nt tell anyone at work about waht I saw that morning for reasons that some may
understand. I did tell a friend that night what I saw, and he thought I was nuts.
But the next night that same friend called me to say that he had heard on a morning
radio show in Sacramento that people had called in that saw the same thing I did
that morning. (My friend was working on a new hospital in the Davis area at the time)
He said that the show did it's own little bit of reserch and found out that it was a
secret military vehicle.

Jump to five years later, moved to SoCal:
I am at a bar in Valenia, CA with my girfriend at the time and was talking to another
couple that was near us. The guy was serving in the military and he was a some sort
of techinical engineer. Well, after a few drinks, I somehow thought of that moriing in
NorCal, and what I saw. I told him the story and even what my frind said about it being
a top secret military vehicle.
He said that he could'nt tell me waht it was, but he could say what it certainly was'nt.
He said that there is now way that the U.S. military would test fly anything top secret
in the skys above the Bay Area, as the Russian Consulate is there and to do that would
be stupid.

Well, that's my story. Make of it what you will. But that thing I saw fly over my head
that morning looked allot like the craft in the pictures that this thread is about...Only
with the lights turned off.


Peace,
MS

ZG,

I'm sure there must be a way to contact the photographer to access the original photo's.
The interview was conducted this past Oct... only a few weeks ago.

We have his name and where he lives so that's a good start.

Maybe someone could try to contact the emcee of that radio show and find out the photographer's phone number.

I agree that it's definitely worth the while to have those photo's analyzed... based on what you're (ZG) saying here it would be a real bummer if those photo's are in fact authentic UFO images but no professionals analyze them to verify that!

[edit on 15-11-2007 by Palasheea]

reply to post by ZeroGhost


To be fair, I do remember on the Washington DC image that the car lights at the bottom of the image where time-stretched by a fraction of a second. Some other things had me neutral also, but I did not see anything similar in that cams records.

Washington DC UFO
.

ZG

MadSigntist,

Thanks for stopping by! What a fascinating story and thanks so much for sharing it with us!

It's interesting that those photo's sparked memories of your own sighting that occurred in that same basic area where those objects are seen in those photo's -- and that what you saw is very similar to that UFO seen in those images. It must have been difficult to remain silent about that sighting at work that day..

And the information you got from that person who's in the military who knows about those flight rules over the bay -- including advanced aircraft... got to read that over again but it's useful information in regards to our discussion on this object seen in those photo's.

Very interesting read and very informative... thanks!

Originally posted by ZeroGhost
reply to post by ZeroGhost

 

To be fair, I do remember on the Washington DC image that the car lights at the bottom of the image where time-stretched by a fraction of a second. Some other things had me neutral also, but I did not see anything similar in that cams records.

Washington DC UFO
ZG

The lights on the ground are more stretched in that DC photo than those lights on the ground level seen in the SF photo's... I have to look again at that but it seems like the DC photo's looks more time-stretched than those other ones.
Good point and will be brought up again a little later here.
.

OK as promised
when i posted the SF pictures i had the usual its a long or everexposure, its a helecopter or a plane taking off, thats fine thats what it may have been until you check further ufo sightings, very similar craft or even the same one? opposite sides of the USA Washington DC, and the channel islands Opposite side of the world,

Washington was a security camera no chance of a long exposure as it records real time well for security,

www.stevequayle.com...

Second link a good one this plane flying over the channel islands spots UFO reported to be a mile wide reported by ground radar and two other craft in the area, and oh yeah a passenger decided to take a picture also not a time exposure a simple picture,

www.ufocasebook.com...


I just want to know how a passenger on a plane can take a steady over exposed picture which matches what a pilot his co pilot and two other lots of pilots have seen?

seems to me someone wants a debunk of this type of craft?

there are other links out there this object has been seen and pictured 3 times more that times i have seen this year, ill have to let others find those links though i dont have time right now sorry

Keep it up Palasheea a star from me and a flag

reply to post by MadSigntist


Nice note MS.

It passed right over me I guess. I'm in the south bay area. Actually direct in the approach vector for SFO and Oakland, so see incoming from most inland transits. I was also as a boy on the approach to Sacramento Municipal Airport and my 2nd story window had a perfect view of aircraft coming in every few minuets at 400-1K ft., so I got very good at discerning aircraft types from light to commuter. My window here also is facing Sacramento and SFO/Oakland approach. Sometimes I can see a string of lights all the way to the central valley. I have a shortwave and I was listening to pilot- to-tower with it for a while.

I have seen some spectacular UFO activity here with video and photographic. In the 80's I saw giant ellipticals in V formation over the bay with thousands of others on both sides of the bay. FAA radar was a few blocks from me then and I called them on that. Spherical and morphing white shapes, blinking lights stationary and quiet, a buddy across town saw this too as we where talking and many more very interesting sightings I have had. Some while doing astronomy.

There is no lack of activity here. I will post some very interesting sightings and photo-witness-video too. But later. Need to find some projects here first.

Palasheea, get any overflow, I freelance too.

Originally posted by ZeroGhost
Firstly, let me say I am fairly disappointed at the rapidity of an assumption these are faked or misrepresented. That seems to be the response anyone gets outside the gate. I seem to remember the philosophic human right that a person is innocent until proven guilty, and that so many responses are opposite is I think a concern for anyone looking at societies current pathology with respect to our overall psychological state.

i would love for this to be a real ufo, but it is so obviously not...

i take back my original thought, of it being deliberate.

what he saw in real time would look nothing like what developed in the picture, being a long exposure.

this only reinforces my assertion that it is an obvious time lapse shot of an airplane

Originally posted by azzllin
Washington was a security camera no chance of a long exposure as it records real time well for security,

www.stevequayle.com...

the lights on the bridge have the telltale glow of a long exposure, it looks like the distance a plane can easily traverse in a fraction of a second... a long exposure. security cams arent the finest photographic instruments as you can imagine.

Originally posted by azzllin

www.ufocasebook.com...

sorry, video no longer available, but who knows what that thing is? if it was in the sky, its truly a ufo. though, piloted by creatures from another world? unlikely, that smudge could be anything

logical skepticism has validity

heres the vid:



nothing but a witness testimony as far as i can tell, and a guy drawing a pic of it? not good. no one had a camera at the ready?

pilots are human, too, and just as susceptible as we all are to curiosity and conclusion jumping

reply to post by planetfall


I had no idea I was missing the obvious. I would very much entertain a definitive list of the obvious.

Actually I am not fooled by such "obvious" things. I try and look behind the curtain of our first impressions as I know that this would be the first level of screen if I was in such a craft doing survey, (or looking for a good Chinese restaurant late at night.)

Seriously, the history of UFO research clearly shows that many people do not see what is in front of them because they can explain it within their perceptive bubble immediately and dismiss it. Not that I am saying you or others are, but until you can prove a negative without just collecting your favorite posts in a thread, it is actually still up to the more tangible findings. We're not there yet. But I understand how such an open ontology can mess up a day.

I reserve the right to keep open minded and not assume everyone is lieing or stupid before I engage my own meat computer.

ZG

reply to post by planetfall


I have evidence your URL was bad for the UTube piece

The url contained a malformed video id.

Onea Morea Timea!
(tip to L. Welk)

ZG

[edit on 11/15/2007 by ZeroGhost]

[edit on 11/15/2007 by ZeroGhost]

Originally posted by azzllin
Washington was a security camera no chance of a long exposure as it records real time well for security,

I disagree.

Notice in the photo you reference that there is a car driving on a street below your "UFO" that also shows smeared headlights.

This is another long exposure.

Your other link showing the "UFO" pictured outside the window of an airplane does not appear to be a long exposure, but does not resemble the "UFO" posted originally in this thread.

Azzlin, I think you are comparing apples to oranges here. What makes you think all these unique phenomena are related? You've provided no evidence that the original posted is anything but an "long exposure". IMO

Originally posted by azzllin
OK as promised
when i posted the SF pictures i had the usual its a long or everexposure, its a helecopter or a plane taking off, thats fine thats what it may have been until you check further ufo sightings, very similar craft or even the same one? opposite sides of the USA Washington DC, and the channel islands Opposite side of the world,

Washington was a security camera no chance of a long exposure as it records real time well for security,

:

Hi azzillin and thanks for the star! I just got back from some errands and great that you found those images.
About the DC photo.. interesting that it was recorded by a security cam. ZG mentioned some time stretching of those lights on the ground level but since it was a mounted security cam then we know that that photo is not a long exposure shot. I'm glad you pointed that out.

I need to watch that movie but did see that UFO photo on that page... talking about the channel island UFO. I need to read over the details you said about this... about the pilot's recording photo's of it and also the passengers -- but it look again like the same KIND OF UFO. So I think this is important and needs to explored more. It's sort of snazzy Jetson's like design that's unique in it's own way even though it's shaped like saucer type UFO's.

It seems that this thread keeps teeter-tottering back and forth between -- yes it is a UFO and no it isn't but those who don't think it is seem to be much more adament about that. I'm willing to concede if it's found not be a UFO but because there so many good points brought up here to support that it is, I'm going to stay on the fence though I do admit that to me it does look like the real thing. Thanks again for posting this information!

[edit on 15-11-2007 by Palasheea]