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.

 

Possible unknown object

page: 2
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 30 2007 @ 05:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jabbah
I took these pics in Italy (where i live) , Tuscany , near Lucca city (40 miles or so) , The exact place is Castiglione di Garfagnana (In Garfagnana valley ) , the time was 11-11.30 pm , the direction was north i think , but i'm not sure about it.
And no i weren't using the flash.


Thank you!

Well, the shape and relative brightness of the four objects I circled earlier reminded me of the four stars (Betelgeuse, Bellatrix, Saiph, Rigel) of the shoulders and knees of the constellation Orion. At the time you took the pictures Orion is prominent in the Southern sky. Maybe you were facing South?

At any rate, I took a try at overlaying a picture of Orion over your picture. I put red dots on the objects in question in order to see their locations better through the overlay. It is close but not 100% exact. Maybe with more fiddling with scale and rotation I could get an exact match. Maybe I'm barking up the wrong tree.




[edit on 30-12-2007 by IAttackPeople]

[edit on 30-12-2007 by IAttackPeople]




posted on Dec, 30 2007 @ 06:08 PM
link   
Thanks for the photos, I see something in them as well.
I saved them and did a simple auto correct on the pictures.
What turned out were photos that look like they were taken during the day.To me they look like they were taken from the air,but that's my opinion.I say this because to me it looks there is a reflection from the object onto a body of water, or it's a building.The object has a distinct "L" shape so I'm going by what I "think" I see.
Please don't take offense but I find some discrepancies with your original post and what the picture data tells me.
You say you took these last night (29/12/07).
The data says you took the pictures on 24/12/07 at 1:46 and 1:47 p.m. with a Nikon E3200 digital camera.
I read your post stating you've never used photoshop so I won't accuse you of anything.All I can say is it looks like an altered photo using a blue filter to give the perception of night.

If everything in your original post jived with the photo data, I'd be seriously interested in analyzing the photos further.

I'm only offering my own conclusions and could very well be wrong on what the object is.



posted on Dec, 30 2007 @ 06:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Springer
reply to post by Jabbah
 



I did NOT mean to insinuate you hoaxed this in any way.

I was merely pointing out that this could be one of the ways the "F.A.S.T." hoax images are shot.


Springer...



I thought the same thing when I was looking at them, oh my GOD not another F.A.S.T. image!!! I was wondering if anyone else would see it to.

You have an excellent eye Springer... a star for the perpetuation of denying ignorance!!



posted on Dec, 30 2007 @ 07:03 PM
link   
reply to post by 1nL1ghtened
 


I'm very glad I wasn't the only one who noticed it too.
Some days it seems I am alone in the universe...


Springer...



posted on Dec, 30 2007 @ 07:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by citizen truth
Thanks for the photos, I see something in them as well.
I saved them and did a simple auto correct on the pictures.
What turned out were photos that look like they were taken during the day.To me they look like they were taken from the air,but that's my opinion.I say this because to me it looks there is a reflection from the object onto a body of water, or it's a building.The object has a distinct "L" shape so I'm going by what I "think" I see.
Please don't take offense but I find some discrepancies with your original post and what the picture data tells me.
You say you took these last night (29/12/07).
The data says you took the pictures on 24/12/07 at 1:46 and 1:47 p.m. with a Nikon E3200 digital camera.
I read your post stating you've never used photoshop so I won't accuse you of anything.All I can say is it looks like an altered photo using a blue filter to give the perception of night.


If everything in your original post jived with the photo data, I'd be seriously interested in analyzing the photos further.

I'm only offering my own conclusions and could very well be wrong on what the object is.


I don't remember exactly the time because i shooted several pics that night , saying "last night" was only a way to introduce my thread (sorry 4 the lack of accuracy), and yes i've used a blue filter 4 the photo(an option in the photocamera , blue color or something like that) , but it was night and i repeat : i've never altered these pics with any program , i have uploaded on my computer then watched them , no alteration of any kind.
Huh , the photos were taken from my balcony.
Citizen truth i've posted these photos hoping 4 someone to analyze them , so i will be thankful to you if you do .



posted on Dec, 30 2007 @ 07:46 PM
link   
I noticed this also. I've read through a few of the F.A.S.T. threads that have graced the main page in this forum over the past week. I was behind the commenting though, so I didn't jump in after the fact.

I own a Meade ETX 90, and I agree 100% with the atmospheric distortion theory. The telescope is just powerful enough to give stars 'mass' visible to the eye, but not powerful enough to resolve on the star itself. The result is a blurry vague sphere, and upon correcting the zoom on your eyepiece it looks like a pattern of moving lights. The patterns appear to be constantly changing, and if one were to snap a photo of the star through the telescope at any given moment, one would see different 'shapes' in the image, based upon the pattern of light the scope could visualize, filtered through the distortion of the atmosphere, and limited/compressed by the ability of the camera (or your eye) to resolve the image.

WOW that was a run on sentence, sorry!


Anyway, I'm just an amatuer with a telescope, but these images look familiar to me from my own time stargazing, and my own troubles trying to resolve the images I see. I've never been able to track a satellite or the ISS, they move too fast! The Meade has autotracking, but I've never really used it, planets/stars/nebula are pretty easy to track manually.
I understand that there are websites that provide Satellite data though, if anyone wanted to try...



posted on Dec, 31 2007 @ 08:40 AM
link   
What I was able to notice is this - or is that what he's talking about? Either way, does seem interesting for sure. Looks like an extraterrestrial ship. Check the animated image I did, in order to point it out -




Thanks for sharing, Jabbah.

[edit on 31-12-2007 by TheoOne]



posted on Dec, 31 2007 @ 11:33 AM
link   
reply to post by TheoOne
 

Thank you too for your help , whatever it is must be huge!




posted on Dec, 31 2007 @ 01:24 PM
link   
I find these pictures fasinating, i also think the way jabbah has worded his responces that he is pretty much telling the truth (IMO) he words his responces like he really does not know what some people mean with their technical jargon and i believe what he said when he just pointed and shot,

This will always be the way the Indistputable evidence will be found purley by accident, being a Geologist wont let me help with any kind of analysis but i can still give my gut feeling an i believe the OP is hiding nothing just needing help understand what was in the night sky around him one dark night as he was taking photo's.



posted on Dec, 31 2007 @ 01:30 PM
link   
I believe what you saw could be an etheric manifestation of some sort.
This formation appears between clouds as a mild reflexion and the dots you spotted could be etheric nodes. Observe clouds at night and you will notice this.
Nodes appear after picture process because they tend toward the infrared spectrum I believe.

This is part of the strange attractor equation and it looks like a natural phenomenon. I believe This force field can hypnotize you or at least attract your attention because we are exposed to this subtler medium as early as embrio state.

The polygone you see could be of scalar nature, as if a tetrahedral mineral was trying to crystalise in the cloud, because some ordering field was manifesting nearby.



posted on Dec, 31 2007 @ 01:41 PM
link   
I'll ask Jeff Ritzmann to have a look Jabbah. He is an expert in imaging and photographic analysis. He has his own forum here at ATS, www.abovetopsecret.com... as well.

I'll let you know what he thinks or he will post his findings here in this thread.


Springer...



posted on Dec, 31 2007 @ 02:45 PM
link   
Hello-

I think the circled pics "Iattackpeople" posted tells a lot of the story here.

I want you guys to figure it out (seriously, this'll help a lot of people to be able to ID quite a few images we often see in UFO photos...especially those that are hard to make out.)

Lets ask this: why would the circled upper left object, be the same orientation of the bottom right one. What possible reasons would cause this.

Anyone?



posted on Dec, 31 2007 @ 02:56 PM
link   
I'm going to have to go with IAttackPeople on this one as well.

I used the following picture of Orion...



Then outlined the stars in M$ Paint, increased the size by 160% and overlaid it onto the original...



Looks like a pretty snug fit on the 4 corner stars with the belt hidden behind the clouds.


[edit on 31-12-2007 by Zarniwoop]



posted on Dec, 31 2007 @ 03:28 PM
link   
At least no one is asking for proof.
Yet.

I have some suggestions, but first want to comment that I am somewhat less interested in dissecting the technical limits and abberations of hardware/software/optics at resolution limits of digital imaging hardware than more detailed and distinct UFO images. That said, I will tell you what I know.

At this level of dissection of a digital image there are so many possible causative possibilities that the possibility of these being even conventional aircraft Airliners, Planes, satellites and orbiting reflected light is a lower probability than simply of stars. What time of day/night where these shots taken?

At common levels of resolution limits, depending on the settings, and the particular optics and CCD response to source light and conditions, as well as the software in the processors function set, the objects you can see could be many things.

It cannot be clear until you do some tests. These tests will either show causes for distortion at a pixel level (you would not normally notice in full resolutions), or will discount any possible camera processing artifacts proving true anomalous objects.

What you can do to answer these questions:

(1) Duplicate conditions, shoot some test images with the settings you used as close as possible. Your original images have information embedded for everything including lens appeture, exposure, flash etc.. Called IPTC Metadata like for Adobe Photoshop and similar for other image software can show you this data, or post or link un-processed originals, as many of us have these tools and can help.

(2) Look at any similar images you have and find any similar effects in known objects, like streetlights or car lights at great distances. Look for the way your camera distributes data when the source point is smaller than four pixels in diameter. Many of your images you have taken will have this information.

Some possibilities to consider for these odd light points:

* Atmospheric conditions can distort point lights dramatically. Upper air conditions can make stars distort and swim wildly or remain sharp.

* Aircraft at distances behind clouds and sky such as your images suggest will dim and brighten, but in still images might cause pixels to distort as the CCD attempts to gather and distribute variable photon data.

* Condensation can produce extremely small droplets on your lens that distort point lights. They act like lenses on your lens, but only distort tiny details.

* Dirty lens can reflect any light source at angles not in the viewfinder. For example, some tree sap is distributed from leaves like sweat and very much smaller clear droplets than water, and will adhere to anything. Or, anything airborne in your environment like humidity, including your breath, fibers from your clothing or any fabrics, or dust from anything.

* Dust on your CCD is another cause of such anomalies. I have a Digital SLR, and have had particles that showed on many images I could not see through the viewfinder that only show when I process the images. Most cameras like these Digital SLR's allow you to flip open the reflex mirror and expose the CCD to blow out or otherwise clean them. Follow your camera manufacturers instructions for this and use canned air, not your wet breath.


Your images could be actual alien aircraft (I believe they do exist), or many other things we can list. But at this level of detail, and extraction of image data from such a small number of pixels, we cannot be sure of anything, or discern any possible structure. Do some of the above tests, and you can at least find out what they are not.

I know it is very interesting to find such things, and do not mean in any way that this is anything either true or mistaken, but I have many such examples in my own photography where the information to work with is below any reasonable level of provable evidence one way or another. Then again, if you have had any psychic or similar non-visual data, it could add some evidence we cannot factor here.

In any case, it is good practice to do some science so in the future you can weed out unlikely, mistaken or too scant a data field to spend time on this. Get a copy of Photoshop Elements, Paintshop Pro or just Google "Free Photo Editing Software", and you will find many tools to further your own personal arsenal of image editing tools.

Keep looking. Weird stuff is everywhere.


ZG



posted on Dec, 31 2007 @ 03:41 PM
link   
reply to post by Zarniwoop
 


Excellent work Zarniwoop!. The probability of a match is 98% or better. I would say this is it, and that the shape of each object is actually due to an autonomic movement of the photographers hand/body. I see heartbeat in similar longer exposures common in night shots and forgot to mention that.

Compare shapes of each object. If similar or the same I would close the book.


I'm always impressed by the people here. Sharp Cookies!


ZG



posted on Dec, 31 2007 @ 03:59 PM
link   
I saw some pin points of light.

Sort of what you see in a telescope.


A UFO can exhibit bright as lightning flashes or flares under the theory
of using plasma motors.

So a gathering of a small fleet is possible.

The zoomed in photos shows bright flares, so what else can I say.

Triangle craft perhaps. But not dancing or testing apex motors since
these are stills. In a video capture on a single zoomed in object you
might see movement.



posted on Dec, 31 2007 @ 04:15 PM
link   
reply to post by 1nL1ghtened
 


Looks like plasma light sources to me, far up and away in the sky.

Yet photos closer in the air with bright lights go by without a clue if
the plasma light is from a UFO.
Is just plane lights at night or in daytime its foil balloons.

Plasma meaning lighting and coming from electrified air.
Is bright and its star bight seemingly.

The swirling plasma can take on shapes but a disc of light from the
motor can be seen at times.

Thanks, always like a closer look at these posed photos.
As long as there is light by the object, I can always say plasma or
lighting as one possibility.



posted on Dec, 31 2007 @ 06:08 PM
link   
reply to post by Springer
 


Thank you Springer , that would be great!
And Happy new year (1:18 pm here in italy).



posted on Dec, 31 2007 @ 06:30 PM
link   
I'm sorry, I just don't see anything anomalous, and I really really tried to. Keep looking up and shooting.



posted on Dec, 31 2007 @ 06:34 PM
link   
reply to post by ZeroGhost
 

Thanks Zeroghost 4 your reply , really helpful.I will take a look at these things , expecially other photos made by this camera.
To reply to your answer , no i did not have any psychic or visual data (and never had any) , just sitting there and taking the pics in complete relax.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join