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.

 

Can anyone tell me what this is (pics)?

page: 2
1
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 11 2008 @ 01:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by ST SIR 86
sorry guys but what IF that is a real ufo and not a fake its sooooo easy to debunk it , isnt it all we have to do is fix the pic to prove weather it is or it isnt
thats the real fun in the investigation, tell me how many of you debunkers out there carry your camera ready on a tripod or is the camera on the mantle piece
or in the bedroom in your wardrobe. e.g race outside and take a pic ....
Now try holding the camera perfectly still and try and track with your hands an
object in the dead of night thats doing warp ten up in the sky above with all the excitement throw'en in
debunkers need to learn about pictures first i think
if you focus on an object up in the sky that closer to you than whats in the background i.e stars, the stars will be out of focus and being very small dots of light i can understand why theres no stars to be seen in the pic
OMG debunkers realy need to get their facts up to scratch and when was the last time you took a photo of a ufo at night and posted it .... i bet if you did you'll cop some of your own medicine......no matter how real you say it was.....

[edit on 10-1-2008 by ST SIR 86]

[edit on 11-1-2008 by ST SIR 86]




posted on Jan, 11 2008 @ 02:07 AM
link   
reply to post by lightworker12
 


I tried most filters and tweaks in GIMP, using threshold i can see that there is something in the middle; a light object whatever but i can't tell what it is for sure.

resized image #4 (threshold)



resized image #4 (color levels)




[edit on 11-1-2008 by tangent45]



posted on Jan, 11 2008 @ 02:45 AM
link   
reply to post by lightworker12
 


Lightworker,
I immediately saw what you were talking about. Many of them look blurred, maybe all, and I assume that was due to some auto setting on the camera.

IMO, from the story you described, this could be a remote electric drone of some sort. There's nothing in what you said that indicates that it was or was not a form of advanced tech. It could have been someone having fun at your expense. Unfortunately, it seems you may not be able to find out with the photos you took. Even if it was something relatively mundane, your dog could have had that reaction from hearing it swoop around in a way that seemed threatening.

As far as the attitude of some people here, I think it's rude and ridiculous. I remember when I first signed up to ATS, one thing that made me come back was seeing a few threads with questions that could have been easily attacked but were treated with respect unless debunked. Just because you ask for help identifying something doesn't mean you're claiming anything (which I didn't see you were) or that you deserve any of the rude responses you got. As I said, it took me about 2 seconds from your first post to see what you were talking about.

How does it make sense to bash out of laziness (can't scroll around in a big photo) and imply someone is lying when they simply asked for help. I've seen this behavior around here more and more, really disappointing, and not what I thought ATS was about. Star for your trouble.



posted on Jan, 11 2008 @ 02:57 AM
link   
reply to post by lightworker12
 


Well, at least you had some sort of camera to try and take some pics, lightworker12 .... my fear is that I am going to see something unexplained and 'wont' have a camera on hand


I don't think you have undeniable proof of a UFO on film this time, but at least you and your pal Paul have a story to last you both a lifetime eh


Here are your pics adjusted in hopes of finding your answers.

Bzzzzzzz



posted on Jan, 11 2008 @ 07:42 AM
link   
reply to post by lifestudent
 





As far as the attitude of some people here, I think it's rude and ridiculous. I remember when I first signed up to ATS, one thing that made me come back was seeing a few threads with questions that could have been easily attacked but were treated with respect unless debunked. Just because you ask for help identifying something doesn't mean you're claiming anything (which I didn't see you were) or that you deserve any of the rude responses you got. As I said, it took me about 2 seconds from your first post to see what you were talking about.


Well said lifestudent.

Ok, I know nothing about shutter speed. but I know for a fact that if I saw something like that I would probably be shaking so bad I wouldn't get a good pic if I tried. I just have an average digital camera, and I don't care how big, let's say, a full moon appears, when I take a picture it doesn't look anywhere near as big.

It is quite obvious that you experienced something (and I'm not saying it's alien). As always, I hope that you get the answers that you are seeking.



[edit on 11-1-2008 by hsur2112]



posted on Jan, 11 2008 @ 07:58 AM
link   
reply to post by ST SIR 86
 



Just to clear the shutter speed up;




EXIF Summary: 1/8s f/2.7 ISO160 6mm (35mm eq:36mm)


I believe the 1/8s is the shutter speed - 1/8th of a second.

I know how frustrating it is trying to take a photo of something in the sky at night so it's not a surprise that the pictures aren't that great.. it doesn't mean that it isn't genuinely something other than an RC plane does it?

Also.. what looks like a loop made by the lights might be made from camera shake. those lights could well be just an ordinary plane and amount of shake made them appear to be doing some strange manouvers.




[edit on 11-1-2008 by fiftyfifty]



posted on Jan, 11 2008 @ 08:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by tangent45
reply to post by lightworker12

resized image #4 (color levels)




In my eyes, this looks like a donald duck (devil version because of the color).



posted on Jan, 11 2008 @ 10:53 AM
link   
reply to post by lightworker12
 


Hey LW12-

Could the possibility exist that it had no sound because it wasn't as close as you thought? How do you know it was @ the size of a Cessna w/o anything to scale against?

Just some thoughts/questions. Thanx-

2PacSade-



posted on Jan, 11 2008 @ 11:14 AM
link   
reply to post by ST SIR 86
 


Well, at ISO 160 and 1/8 second, you aren't going to image stars anyway.

I know that in a moment like that it's difficult to focus on fine points - cops who have been in gunfights say they never see their sights - but if the ISO had been cranked up (that camera can go up to ISO 400 and even 800 at minimum picture size), we might have an image without about half the blur.



posted on Jan, 11 2008 @ 12:20 PM
link   
It's an airplane. I see a green and a red nav light.

The crazy movements, are the result of the unsteadiness of the photographer.



posted on Jan, 11 2008 @ 02:05 PM
link   
Now this is the work from my good friend Johhn....










When I get more I wil post..... With some luck maybe we can see what going on inside! But note the square corners.

[edit on 11-1-2008 by Amber~]



posted on Jan, 11 2008 @ 02:15 PM
link   
reply to post by downtown436
 



Sorry but ur wrong! Take a look at the pic now.
I don't know if anyone has noticed the Mother Ships that just sit above our cities doing god knows what.... but they mimick stars..... they flash green..red... yellow...then back. Watch the next time ur out..... nooo they are not planes... I took a pic of one out by my house the other night... its in the process of being analyzed.



posted on Jan, 11 2008 @ 03:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by Amber~
reply to post by downtown436
 



Sorry but ur wrong! Take a look at the pic now.
I don't know if anyone has noticed the Mother Ships that just sit above our cities doing god knows what.... but they mimick stars..... they flash green..red... yellow...then back. Watch the next time ur out..... nooo they are not planes... I took a pic of one out by my house the other night... its in the process of being analyzed.


I am looking forward to hearing more about your photo analysis of what you caught on camera.

I would also like to thank so many people for helping this fellow member with his photo adjustments, and all of the other helpful hints offered.

This is one thing that makes ATS great! I have personally learned so much here that I am different than I was when I first found the site.

Even those antagonizers have their purpose at times. Just try not to personalize any percieved attacks and it is easier to hang in there.



posted on Jan, 11 2008 @ 04:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by ST SIR 86
ok then whos pic is it then yours or the op's photo, im talking about the op's
photo as i didnt know at the time that it wasnt his and on the subject of shutter speed yes i know what shutter speed is ive been an offset printer/compositor for the past 25years and that means i develop negs and print bromides on a daily basis to make offset printing plates!
how do you expect me to know the shutter speed of a pic that was take by someone in another country unless it is stated that the shutter was held open for 30 seconds! .... what you expect me to know the ISO of a camera just by looking at a static picture! not possible unless stated.
oh and on the subject of the sr-71 at mach 3 i was implying that the manouver of 3 tight loop couldent be done at that speed by an sr-71..... in 1/2 second...

however in the past ive seen as im sure you have too seen strange lights in the sky doing manouver s like that in a split second in the media purhaps....
[edit on 11-1-2008 by ST SIR 86]

Just to clarify:
The picture with the 3+ loops was not taken by the OP of this thread. It is in fact a picture of an RC plane. The only reason I posted it here is so you guys can compare how an RC plane looks like at nigth with long exposure.

None of the OP pictures have even a single loop in them.

As disownedsky found out, the OP pictures seem to have been taken with a 1/8 exposure, that means the shutter was open for .125 seconds. An RC plane traveling at 15mph would have moved about 1 meter from the time the shutter was open to the time it was closed.

The following picture was taken by the OP:
img242.imageshack.us...
It does seem to me that whatever it was, could have moved by about one meter, but it really depends on how far away the object was from the OP. Now there is no way for us to tell that distance, but the red and white(or blue) ligths are something that's common on RC planes.


[edit on 11-1-2008 by daniel_g]



posted on Jan, 11 2008 @ 07:15 PM
link   
reply to post by lightworker12
 


Hi,
I just looked at your photos. I am also using Firefox so it's easy to click and resize. I can make out various colors against a black background but not much else.
I resized one of the images to the extreme and noticed that the saucer shape at lower resolutions, started to break apart. Although I don't think it's a saucer shape, I can't identify the colors with regard to a specific object.

If you're interested in trying to enlarge the images, it's fairly easy using a free program called Irfanview which you can download at www.download.com. In the search window, just type IRFANVIEW and it'll take your right to the download section.

Also, I'm not surprised your camera didn't show stars, a lot of cams don't have the sensitivity without adjustments.

Sorry I couldn't have been more help.



posted on Jan, 11 2008 @ 07:53 PM
link   
reply to post by lightworker12
 


Same problem in downtown Las Vegas. No stars.
Light polution.

It's hard to see the Area 51 Ufos from Las Vegas.



posted on Jan, 11 2008 @ 08:24 PM
link   
The camera you are using is not capable of what you are trying to do. No amount of manipulation can bring out detail that does not exist. If you are serious you should take photography courses and be prepared to spend 5 figures or more on equipment. I recommend the Nikon D3X as it has by far the best nighttime capabilities. It shoots at impossibly high ISO's and can get great detail in the light of a single candle. About $5,000 for the Body and the lenses you need will be twice or more that amount. I say this to make the point that you are not to blame. Night shots require skill and money. Mostly money.

Those colorful attempts at playing with filters in peoples software may be interesting but they will not somehow produce information that is not in the original.

Your post sounds like you were excited about this. Reading here at ATS and objective observation don't always work well together.



posted on Jan, 11 2008 @ 08:49 PM
link   
Hey guys, I'm a n00b here, but I have a pic that I took in Mexico that has been bugging me for months (thumbnail below). I don't want to make any claims (as I didn't see the object while taking the picture), however, it's just a weird photo - I'd love to get some feedback as to what is (or could be?).

Several friends have seen the photo and urged me to get some feedback on it.



Link to medium sized image on Flickr

Link to hi-res image on Flickr



posted on Jan, 11 2008 @ 09:24 PM
link   
reply to post by MadeSR
 


I see you are a new member.

Welcome to the board. Glad to have you!

Just a little hint................ It may be a good idea to start a new thread with your pic because it gets a little confusing when you attempt to run different pic subjects on one thread.

But of course it is up to you.

Take care and see ya around!



posted on Jan, 11 2008 @ 09:30 PM
link   
If you would feel at all comfortable emailing me the raw photos I would try to enhance them in Photoshop- not meaning any fraud of any kind, just working with the actual pixels. U2U me if you are interested.



new topics

top topics



 
1
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join