It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Digital photo analysis

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 14 2007 @ 09:12 AM
link   
Hey there folks.

A couple of days ago I posted a question over in the JRitzman forum asking about the differences between two photos that were submitted here in the UFO forum. It has to do with being able to tell whether or not a photo has or has not been "photoshopped".

But since the question has had only one reply and only a little over 40 views, I'm wondering if perhaps the JRitzman forum just doesn't get enough drive-by traffic to generate any replies.

I'm not just "pimping" my thread here. I would sincerely appreciate some feedback from some folks who are knowledgeable in this area.

Thanks, and here is the link to that thread.

www.abovetopsecret.com...




posted on Dec, 14 2007 @ 09:22 AM
link   
The 1st picture looks like a smudge, the 2nd looks like a bird. Either way if your gonna fake something at least make it look like a UFO! I wasn't impressed enough to even care if they're fake or not



posted on Dec, 14 2007 @ 09:37 AM
link   
reply to post by jainatorres
 

I agree with you regarding their value as ufo evidence. I'm using them simply as examples for my question about how one is to judge the "virginity" of a photo.



posted on Dec, 14 2007 @ 10:35 AM
link   
answered your question. Sorry with the Holiday rush I've not had a ton of time lately.

The blocking is seen a lot, but is not a clear sign of anything other then typical artifacts of jpg compression or averaging.

I've seen some fakes that show light blocking, but what gives them away more is differences in pixels between the composited object and the background, and that hearkens back to me looking at film grain in negatives. Not exact, but similar in the idea.



posted on Dec, 14 2007 @ 10:54 AM
link   
Talking UFO here, as from WR Lyne's research:

They are highly electric... voltage wise and thus radiate UV or purple light
which is caught in photos. This when not moving in a hover.

Moving along you see bright and black areas at times due to the
camera catching forward and reverse plasma or lightning.

Thought you would want to know.



posted on Dec, 14 2007 @ 06:22 PM
link   
Thanks for the reply.

So, the reason that the one photo has the blocking and the other does not would be due to the camera or the settings on the camera?



posted on Dec, 14 2007 @ 10:54 PM
link   
reply to post by Noscitare
 


All I gathered was that the camera has to deal with a bright light source in
one case, which the object light is perhaps visible to the eye, and in
the case of not seeing an object that shows in a photo is a dark cloud,
sometimes even with a circle disc of light.

Some UFOs on video:
www.youtube.com...
www.youtube.com...
www.youtube.com...

My youtube link has a slide show of photos with links under more info
or search for ats member photo under CYRAX.



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join