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.

 

A Choir of Aliens/Light Beings Photographed on a Rooftop!

page: 6
7
<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 26 2007 @ 04:54 AM
link   
Armap,
No need to load those video's on a hosting service that will show in Internet Explorer because this time round, I tried out the below using that pn007_1 photograph and got the results that you got. See information below which are your comments on how you got the results that you did. Tried that out on photograph pn007_1, which I'm to find out... finally, IS the photograph that you increased in size and gamma'd.



(and not the one you posted on the opening post), I cropped the area with the "aliens", resized it to 600% using bicubic resample, and, with Pain Shop Pro 6.0, I used the gamma correction with a value of 1.5 in all channels. In Photoshop I used the levels tool and changed only the middle value (on the top of the dialog) to 1.50.

Just to make it clear, and because I don't know if you saw my previous post where I spoke about it, I don't think that the rectangle shows that it was a copy & paste job, that rectangle around the "aliens" is just the result of the JPEG compression algorithm, as in the test I made.


Also, you are correct in saying that the "rectangle around the "aliens" is just the result of the JPEG compression algorithm" -- therefore, the results are rendered NULL as far as its relevance as to if or not those "alien" are a copy paste job or not because, as we can see, you got the same results with that 'text' experiment.

So here's a recap:
The image I was using to try your techniques on was this one below:

The image above is from this link:www.abduct.com...

Anyway, I had asked you what you meant by the "original" image but did not get an answer from you on that but I had already posted the image above in my posts so you already knew that this was the photograph I was working from and expanding 600% and gamma'ing it to 1.5 but was not getting the same square jpg compression artifacts around the 'aliens' like you did.

At any rate, later on down the road I'm to find out that you were actually using THIS photo below and not the one I was using:


So when I followed your directions on how you got your image results on THIS photo rather than the other one, I ALSO got the same results you did. See image below which shows the results I got after trying out your technique.


So I guess I owe you an apology and I'm sorry for the misunderstanding. Aparently we each were using a different photograph hence why we each got different results. I was using the 'blow up' (which, at the time I thought was the original) of the 'aliens' photo whereas you were using that what you meant as the 'original' photograph.

Also, an important point to raise about image analysis.
-- that the jpg compression artifacts were different on the 'alien choir' blow up (probably 200 percent from the original) image I was using compared to those artifacts in the photograph that Armap was using that was a 600% blow up from the original SUPPORTS that this is all that that box was/is on Armaps blow up image he posted that was around that "choir".
-- so if you compare a photograph that's been blown up 200% to that same photograph that's been blown up to a whopping 600%, you are going to see a dramatic difference in those jpg. compression algorithms that are found around bright objects that are seen in the photograph.
-- When photographs are increased in size by 600%, the jpg compression algorithm form squares around those objects seen in the photograph. (in other words, the object or objects look like they are encased in a box).

-- To the untrained eye, such photographs makes some objects in them "appear" as if they've been Pasted onto the photograph hence why Greeneyedleo thought that "alien choir" was a copy/paste job.

-- It's clear at this point that Greeneyedleo did NOT just, as she said, "adjust the shadows and the highlights" of that photograph and that all.....because it's now clear, thanks to Armap's "reverse analysis" of Greeneyedlea's image, that what she ALSO actually did was increase the size of the photograph by a WHOPPING 600% and THEN adjusted the Gamma to 1.5 -- that's a whole lot more than just "adjusting the shadows and highlights" of a photo. She failed to mention that she also applied those other steps on that photo which explains why she got the results that she did.

-- the fact that she failed to mention those other steps she applied to that photograph was intentionally misleading on her part because her main goal was to debunk that photograph.


[edit on 26-12-2007 by Palasheea]




posted on Dec, 26 2007 @ 06:03 AM
link   
Something this incredible and the person that photographed this was only able to take one picture? I don't know about you guys, but if I could go undetected I would have definitely taken more then one blurry picture of this occurrence.



posted on Dec, 26 2007 @ 06:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by Fo Shiggadee
Something this incredible and the person that photographed this was only able to take one picture? I don't know about you guys, but if I could go undetected I would have definitely taken more then one blurry picture of this occurrence.



The photographer took another photo less than a minute later, but the lights and shapes were gone and the photo was dark.


www.abduct.com...



posted on Dec, 26 2007 @ 11:41 AM
link   
Looks like a St. Elmos fire type phenomenon....could be that this photo is of an electrical occurence, judging by the sounds associated with the event. Many cases of ball lightning have been reported with similar details.



posted on Dec, 26 2007 @ 11:46 AM
link   
reply to post by Palasheea
 


As a professional in graphics...that second close-up looks pasted in....using photoshop you can, as illustrated, do pixel comparisons with bit-mapped images. The clear indicator is the boxing effect around the sampled portion, as described...well done, looks to be a definite paste job...Adobe wins again.



posted on Dec, 26 2007 @ 01:32 PM
link   
[edit on 26-12-2007 by Palasheea]



posted on Dec, 26 2007 @ 01:32 PM
link   
I remember seeing this, or something like it on Rense.com 4-6 years ago.

The concensus was that it was fake.



posted on Dec, 26 2007 @ 04:17 PM
link   
reply to post by Palasheea
 


I am glad that everything is cleared, at least that is one problem solved.


As for what the image shows, I think that IAttackPeople, in this post, found the best explanation.

It really looks like the same image but seen from a slightly different position (more to the left?) and with a different light, like it was seen with night-vision.




posted on Dec, 26 2007 @ 04:55 PM
link   
Well, you showed that photo with that jpg compression stuff around it like those "aliens' were in a square cut out and I'm sorry I was so persistent but I really needed to find out how you were able to effect those results without spending a lot of trying out this and that in Paint or Photoshop to try to get the same results. The fact is, when you got those results yourself, then it was obvious to me that there was some 'process' involved toward getting that photo to look like that. But the bottom line is, I thought I was already using the 'original photo' but in actuality, it was really that gentle blow up of that photo that's on the second page of that article. I was just so focused on trying to find out how you got the results that you did, I completely forgot about that pn007 photo that was on the first page! So this really slowed things down and I really was getting frustrated hence why I finally asked you what was the "original" photo you were referring to because by that time, it occurred to me that you've got be using a different photo than the one I was testing out. This has been an extremely confusing thread!!

At any rate, it NEVER occurred to me that someone would GO AS FAR as actually blowing up photo 600% and use that gamma correction utility in Paint and THEN use the Brighten/Contrast feature to enhance that result to see how that image would look UNLESS they were hoping to show VERY DISTORTED and MISLEADING jpg compression artifacts in that photo to support the copy/paste argument.

And that Greeneyedleo said that all she did was 'adjust the shadows and highlights" of that photo (she used pn007) and nothing more, is, in this case is not really giving a true statement on the actual process she used to get that image looking that way. I just always assume that people usually tell the truth in most situations, but to find out that she went great lengths to 'effect' those results like she did is just so mind boggling to me!!

Anyway, I'm glad we got this thing straightened out.

I comment later on your most recent post... interesting approach... um, but let me look at it closer..




[edit on 26-12-2007 by Palasheea]



posted on Dec, 26 2007 @ 05:02 PM
link   

Light Object Getting Air


NOTE: Photo two [image source: files.abovetopsecret.com...] has a misconceived red outline of a roof which has no center point and is in fact a straight line from left to right, theres no window vent as is being conceied by the red outline in this photo. Very misleading but I get the point which is attempted here to depict that it is possible sometimes to find relative shapes within a photo.

I myself was making photos of a auto that may neighbor wants to sell (INFINITI J30 for $650.00) not a bad deal if you have a engine cause the engine needs replacing in this car, everything else in very good condition, leather seats, rooftop vent, stereo surround sound, just some hail damage to the black exterior body and some bumper maring is all that I find wrong. So one photo shows a reflection of the sun off of a quartz rock I have behind a fence in my yard off to the left while on the driver side near the front tire I see a (white-light spaceship deminsional shape) and it appears to have wanted to become photographed as I see the trails of the light swooping down behind this object of white light HERE, I looked at this closly and it looks like its trying to suck air out of the tire with some sort of nozzle, the owner living next to me always has a flat tire and I go air it up often. Besides this I notice above the auto rooftop objects that are not present in the background appearing as some sort of maze shielding or boxy figures. I don't know what these objects are or why they are in this photo. Other photos I have doctored up to cover the objects entirely on either side of the vehicle so as to keep the relative size photo to display but only show the vehicle (this is what makes boxy type edges on a photo with unrelated content as has been noted in the rooftop images as being perhaps a hoax), one I covered the license plate and theres a slideshow [ webpages.charter.net... 0.html or webpages.charter.net... ] showing this auto on my Charter site where I have this auto for sell webpages.charter.net.... Otherthan this incident I have found dropplets of a green glowing substance in abundance ontop of the grass underneath a monkeybars that once was erected in the middle of the back yard, the night before there were noises coming from outside in the back yard but noone checked this out, next morning I went to mow and found the substance, I do not have samples they got lost over time.

[edit on 26-12-2007 by OoTopNotchoO]



posted on Dec, 26 2007 @ 06:07 PM
link   
reply to post by OoTopNotchoO
 


I think that the "white-light spaceship deminsional shape" (couldnt you think of an simpler name?) is just light entering the lens from the side.



posted on Dec, 26 2007 @ 08:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by ArMaP

 


I am glad that everything is cleared, at least that is one problem solved.


As for what the image shows, I think that IAttackPeople, in this post, found the best explanation.

It really looks like the same image but seen from a slightly different position (more to the left?) and with a different light, like it was seen with night-vision.



It looks like that "alien choir" is partly transparent in some area's than others where we are seeing those branches that are hanging the side of that house through them, in some area's, that's in the background. The being that's to the left of that tree is leaning right and it must be more opaque because we are seeing that it's over part of that tree...


I've been looking at pn007 in an editor, and now I'm seeing why it looks like the Choir is 'in a box' because on the immediate right side of the choir, we are seeing the edge of the house of that section that comes out a little which explains the straight edge seen with that photo is lightened up a tad bit. I've added red lines to show the top and that edge of that part of the house to your animation:


Also, the spottiness of those pixels are the leaves and branches of those branches are are hanging over that side of the house that they are standing in front of.
Your animation shows this very well.

Too bad we don't have the original photograph. Who knows how many copies and size changes that photograph pn007 has gone through before it was posted on that webpage -- copies of copies, all of which would add to more enhancements and distortions in those jpg compression artifacts....
Because that original photograph is not available, it's next to impossible to qualify if this photograph is authentic or not.


[edit on 26-12-2007 by Palasheea]



posted on Dec, 26 2007 @ 10:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by ArMaP
reply to post by OoTopNotchoO
 


I think that the "white-light spaceship deminsional shape" (couldnt you think of an simpler name?) is just light entering the lens from the side.


Yes, simpler name, seems that much could be true but it could be what has made the wooden fence other side of the ditch behind the car and yard to appear as some sort of maze or disfigured its fency appearance. Light was coming from the SouthWest, It was either near noon or past noon, the reflection off the Heavy & Large Quartz Crystaline Quary Rock I have also seems strange as it has a rustic redish color and is white very few clear crystaline slices on its cut surface and it is glowing brightly from the sun, it could have caused the circular area we see on the passenger side of the auto but as for some light below the inline direction of the rock and or the sun and the swooping behind the light object clearly deminishes as if it has taken a turn adverse of the other lens reflections I see like as if it was moving ultra fast which I cannot accomplish making a picture, I shake surely but not so fast like that and it seems to last longer than a shake I have other things in the photo appear stable and the blue circle in the end corner of the object nearest the auto body I think a reflection off the lens is not likely. I do not have photoshop, All I have is Irfanview and a image program that came with my Wii Lexmark printer so I cannot analyze the blue color and compare it to the blue colors in other photos I have seen of light objects. It does appear to be very close to a similar blue color. The 'white-light spaceship' or just 'white-light' object has some blue color intensity, if this signifies anything maybe the color is an eye or a transmitter antenna also of light characteristics. This brings me to believe in another dimension. Obviously I could be imagining this dimension but in the slideshow you will see a similar photo near the same view all photos taken the same time and there is no glare and no object. I think the object nailed me making pictures of the auto and wanted a very close look at wom I am, but no I am not paranoid in the least. I downloaded these pictures onto my computer there was no developing involved from any store or mail order so i noticed the spot and did not include it as a slideshow picture but used it seperately. I am still puzzled as to what made this happen if it did, its nt from the sunlight glaring though. I really do not know, I just thought I would mention this coloration thing abecause of the argument I went through with the photoshop guys picture diagnosis. I like that house image and the light definition using the box technique, thats great.

Picture Set A. Auto


Image with no Reflections Same Side near left front driver side (640x480)

Image with reflections Same Side near left front driver side (640x480)


Picture Set B. Cropped from auto picture


Image with reflection from White Quartz Crystaline Quary Rock (184x378)

White Light Object (384x447)



[edit on 27-12-2007 by OoTopNotchoO]



posted on Dec, 27 2007 @ 08:31 AM
link   
reply to post by OoTopNotchoO
 


First, if you want to use any photograph for any real purpose, including selling that car, I would strongly suggest that you get a better camera, those photos have an extremely low quality. The fact that the camera cuts part of the image at more or less 1/5 from the top makes it look like a screen capture from a cheap web camera, and that is not good.

Second, the thing you call "reflection from White Quartz Crystaline Quary Rock", to me, looks like the Sun reflecting on the right side rear-view mirror. That reflection, although much smaller because of the relative positions of the objects (Sun, car and camera) can be seen in this image.

Third, to avoid this type of things, photographers use a type of shade shaped like a funnel that attaches to the lens to keep parasite lights from entering through the lens.

Edited because of stupid errors and not re-reading the post.


[edit on 27/12/2007 by ArMaP]



posted on Dec, 27 2007 @ 09:16 AM
link   



posted on Dec, 27 2007 @ 12:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by blueyedevil666
Looks like a St. Elmos fire type phenomenon....could be that this photo is of an electrical occurence, judging by the sounds associated with the event. Many cases of ball lightning have been reported with similar details.


I agree, it does sorta LOOK like that but then, what do you call this?


Also, when one analyzes that ball of light in the pn007 photograph, the jpg compression pixelization quality is much more subtle where the gradation of the light generated from that object disperses and illuminates that entire area where it's located in that photo. There's no squared off pixelization that one would expect to see when it's blown up 600 percent nor are those pixelizations as distorted like those objects in the sky.

I personally am not ruling out that this photograph is a fake because anytime you see any squared off pixels around an object at any scale, one does have to analyze things in more depth because of that to rule out photo tampering. But having said this, there are some aspects of this photo that ring true to me on a stronger level of certainty... that ball of light seems to be one of them.


[edit on 27-12-2007 by Palasheea]



posted on Dec, 28 2007 @ 09:32 AM
link   
reply to post by Palasheea
 


well i gotta tell ya....when i FIRST saw this, i immediately thought spider too close to the camera lens.Look at the motion of the event...also the way it drifts down as if on a silk line....think about it.



posted on Dec, 28 2007 @ 12:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by blueyedevil666
reply to post by Palasheea
 


well i gotta tell ya....when i FIRST saw this, i immediately thought spider too close to the camera lens.Look at the motion of the event...also the way it drifts down as if on a silk line....think about it.


Can you give us a link to a video of a 'spider' that's looks like that white ball of light in that video?

I think this would help me to consider your observations on what's in that movie clip.



posted on Dec, 28 2007 @ 02:51 PM
link   
It looks like those figures you put on your roof (Like santa's sleigh/reindeer, etc)...and taken with nightvision so it comes out greenish. I don't really think this is anything special.



posted on Dec, 29 2007 @ 05:49 AM
link   
reply to post by ArMaP
 


Not Much Else To This
I was not trying to make anything of this auto sale or the fact surrounding one picture but your right the rock seems to be behind the auto mirror and the glare coming off it seems more likely to not be coming from the rock. As for the other thing of a cheap camera I will do something about that one day and try to get better pictures for the slideshow so it won't be so bluish reflective of light off the windows and try to open the doors to make interior pictures, I'm no photographer by a long shot but I have some good pictures from earlier times not for sharing. I don't have any reason to invest right now in a better camera, I felt it cost so much for someone to transport a vehicle that no one would care to look anyway and merely thought that if someone local wanted to drive over and see for themselves they could, that was the general idea so I had as I don't care attitude and the owner can wait for that drive by wanting to buy the vehicle.

I studied the space-ship light object with a program I found for free named Paint.NET Beta 3.22.2918 and made some interesting discoveries, when I did a enlargement and then a inverse and then the histogram I noticed a santa like figure leaning towards the wheel, so this is not a space-ship and seems more like some sort of indirect reflection because the object is not in a direct line with the sun and the lens, it is generated it seems somehow perhaps from moisture which could be dangles from the electricity wires that feed the house or TV cables that hang above the vehicle attaching to the house or the electrical meter attached to the side of the house which has a glass dome that could very well produce a reflection of some strange object. Youv'e seen them before a glass dome shape over the counters so if part of the glass was either dirty or had paint on it this could cause a different shape of which was captured on camera, I saw nothing but the program does recognize this object as a solid form and it has definate edges and the swooping does appear when looking at the darkened negative.

I quit! Cause if it is a Killer Bee I don't want to shot anymore pictures, I have been attacked twice so far in my yard and each time go stung five times and was sick for two weeks couldn't walk couldn't smell or taste foods, had to stay in bed struggled to get to the bathroom using a walker taking at least 30 minutes for just ten feet. Soon I regained my strength and was able to walk again. The 15 or so Bees I went out and killed which I found in a white PVC sewer pipe I have stacked at the back fence since removed so to mow there which I was doing both times when attacked. Yips it hurt my buns and legs, I was wearing short pants and them bees got all over my legs and in my pants and I ran.

Pictures Histogram Study


Swoop-direction (640x480)

Image Study Negative_Cropped_Histogram (193x154)

Image Study Enlarged_Cropped Histogram (775x619)

Image Cropped Histogram (349x320)



[edit on 29-12-2007 by OoTopNotchoO]

[edit on 29-12-2007 by OoTopNotchoO]



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in

join