It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by stang56k
The object has some pixalation around it
Originally posted by hikix
The pixels being around the object is NOT an indication of a cut and paste job.
If you zoom a digital image, you will see pixels surrounding all objects. Zoom onto the trees around 400% and you will notice that the trees have pixels surrounding them also, some of the trees pixels are also perfect squares just like the 'ufo'.
My conclusion, yes it is an unidentified flying object since there is no way of telling exactly what it is by the picture. But that doesn't mean aliens are in it.
Dude, the guy that I got it from barely knows how to check his email let alone crop # in with photoshop or something.
btw, theres somthing that is dark in the top middle of the sky too.
The mountains display the same kind of sloppiness and bleeding of texture into the entire JPEG square pixel grouping matching the style and look of that around the "UFO". So it's safe to say it's not a cut and paste.
Hey, let me explain how jpeg comrepssion work. When it compresses an image, it takes areas with the same color and make it as one square area. Thats why jpeg images often has square areas. In this case the image could be original, and not copy paste. If you look closer on the image, the compression has done its job with the squared areas, when it ends u with the "ufo" bit, it cant make out the "common" compression color and leaves the image area in tact.
Originally posted by Noscitare
Well, if this is the case (that JPEG compression (and by extension digital photography in general?) will inherently make a photograph appear to have been manipulated) then I think that the use of digital photography needs to be reconsidered, at least for the use in capturing images of objects which are claimed to be paranormal.
I'm now going to wander into some heavy speculation: If what tep200377 writes is true then we might need to ask some deeper questions as to the development of digitization in general. Why is digital taking over from analog? Is the world of our human senses (what we might refer to as "reality") digital or analog? Have all of these digital recording media which are possibly inherently faulty methods of recording the world, been pushed on us for the very purpose of preventing us from accurately determining what an unknown image is?