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.

 

What would make a convincing UFO video?

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 20 2008 @ 11:25 PM
link   
reply to post by sarcastic
 


In all seriousness, I'm not sure video evidence would be enough to turn a skeptic into a believer. We've all seen it. Much of it is mired in debate because of the typically poor (consumer grade) video quality and amateur operator control.

I'd like to see a modified Canon XL2 video camera with the following built in:

Altimeter
Barometer
Thermometer
Laser range finder
GPS
Low-light
High-definition
Gyro stabilization
32x (or more) zoom
Polarization/Glare filter

The data from all of these instruments would be displayed real-time, heads-up style on the video itself--like a time code. THEN we might have some convincing video, provided the operator doesn't screw up.

That would be one expensive $$$ setup though. Thoughts?

[edit on 20-5-2008 by telepath]

[edit on 20-5-2008 by telepath]




posted on May, 20 2008 @ 11:40 PM
link   
Videos would be even better.

Taken by multiple reliable witnesses from multiple angles. Showing the entire encounter from as early as possible to the method of departure.
Various shots, from distance with foreground objects to fully zoomed.

'Cuz all that fancy camera info could still be faked



posted on May, 20 2008 @ 11:56 PM
link   
reply to post by eaglewingz
 


Truly. Hm, what about a three cam system... with different fixed zoom levels, maybe from two or three locations.

I've started a new topic about "reliable" witnesses.

What makes a reliable UFO witness?
www.abovetopsecret.com...


EW, imagine a theoretical situation where a UFO encounter of some kind was to take place. What would be your minimum criteria to establish the UFO encounter as factual?

[edit on 21-5-2008 by telepath]



posted on May, 21 2008 @ 12:16 AM
link   
reply to post by eaglewingz
 


He's right mulitple videos from different angles is all we have to go on anymore, thanks to ppl enjoying CGI hoaxing. Even then we have to take it with a grain of salt.


[edit on 21-5-2008 by djvexd]



posted on May, 23 2008 @ 09:38 AM
link   
Thanks for the feedback. It is sad that there are many people out there who get a kick out of "muddying the water" with their visual spam. It's a waste of everyone's time, especially the hoaxer's own time. You'd think that there is enough sincere work to be done in this field.

The skeptic's equivalent of "Operation CHAOS" for UFOlogy.



posted on May, 23 2008 @ 09:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by telepath
reply to post by sarcastic
 



I'd like to see a modified Canon XL2 video camera with the following built in:

Altimeter
Barometer
Thermometer
Laser range finder
GPS
Low-light
High-definition
Gyro stabilization
32x (or more) zoom
Polarization/Glare filter



how about a small truck to carry the camera and battery pack on?

Don't forget IR and UV cameras attached!

Even if the Pope himself video taped the whole thing, and swore that it was genuine on all Christiandom, there would be skeptics out there who would be sucking in the air through clenched teeth shaking their heads, and I'd be one of them.

Its not the video footage we want. We want to be there!



posted on May, 23 2008 @ 09:55 AM
link   
::sigh:: I know you're right about that. Unfortunately experience is not something that can be "transmitted."

My personal experience with them was harrowing. Having an ET being toy with your soul is not pleasant. I wouldn't wish my experience upon anybody.

That said, I do understand the basic curiosity of UFOs and aliens. I've heard of people going far into the wilderness with powerful (pencil type) lasers and summoning UFOs with them by aiming them straight up at night. I don't know if this is true. I've never tried it. It's worth a shot though I suppose.



posted on May, 23 2008 @ 09:56 AM
link   
To convince me, I would have to be the one taking the video or maybe right beside someone else taking the video. Otherwise Roland Emmerich convinced me when directing "Independence Day".



posted on May, 23 2008 @ 10:15 AM
link   
All I would need to be a believer is some detail , many eye witnesses to verify the event occured and elimination of the possibility of a hoax by any paranormal activity (like an impossible arial manuver).



posted on May, 23 2008 @ 10:34 AM
link   
Get decent gear... not just something from any consumer store. That would immediately propel the quality upwards.

When using the gear, be sure to utilize it's functions. If you're fortunate enough to own a zoom lens in high quality, shoot bracket shots at maximum focal and shots at minimum focal lenght. A high quality lens would allow you to shoot fast. ( not after sundown ofc ).

If you're one of the lucky ones to witness ufos over and over again, I wonder why you haven't already bought a decent tripod? That would give you around 1/2 second longer to shoot.
Same thing with video basiclly... orient yourself in your surroundings. We need depth of field. While filming, move to a place that gives you something in the foreground, like a tree or something. If you can try to get something in the background too.
Zoom in and out and leave it at each extreme for 3-5 secs in order to get a clear look at what you want to show.

Staaayyy caaalm... many times people get so damn "OMG!" and are shaking, making the clip more or less useless. If you're with someone try handing the cam / video cam to the other person if you are shaking too much.
Did you bring your tripod? Why not?? If you attach the pie under the cam it takes 3 secs to fold out the pod and you get steady footage...


Detail, long duration video, not something where the thingy flies to one direction and then... what?! Show us the clip where you completely lost track of the object. Show us where it diminishes into the horizont. And keep the last 4-5 secs after this too. If put into a context nothing is too small..

If I could afford a decent videocam, i'd practice running with it. This for the sole purpose of being able to chase what the hell I'm filming. Logic would tell me that the object must be fairly close to a point in front of me. The point it's hovering / circling directly above.
If I could get to that point or just get closer to it, my chance of getting something definitive would increase.

Looking forward to seeing some hard proof


[edit on 23/5/08 by flice]



posted on May, 23 2008 @ 10:43 AM
link   
Sweet! This was the kind of answer I was hoping for. Solid advice I'd say. Well, I haven't eyeballed a UFO for two years, so it's unlikely you'll be getting footage from me anytime soon. After my last encounter, I'm not sure I've dealt with my Grey fears enough to go looking for them in earnest.

When I do go looking though, I'll take your suggestions for sure.



posted on May, 23 2008 @ 10:48 AM
link   

Taken by multiple reliable witnesses from multiple angles...


That's certainly the most important criteria, bar none, these days.

This was what made the Phoenix Lights case so interesting. (Unfortunately, flares still seem to be the culprit for the highly-filmed 10pm event..though the 8pm event is still a mystery)

Forget all the fancy stuff...the biggest thing a video has to hold up against is the cry of fakery. This is MUCH more difficult to fake with multiple witnesses and with multiple angles, and if you add that the sighting takes place in a large public area, with even more (non-filming) witnesses, then you've got a strong candidate... Only videos meeting these criteria would be accepted by the media, and the public at large, and even then, you'll need more than just lights in the sky, to be a "convincing" film....



posted on May, 23 2008 @ 11:02 AM
link   
Thanks Gazrok. Sadly I think my original post has turned out to be a trick question. As Mark Roazhar put it, the Pope himself could film it and skeptics would still be gleefully shooting it full of holes.

Although a convincing medium, motion pictures are not ultimately what convinces people. What could it be then, aside from direct experience? What is the lynch pin?



posted on May, 23 2008 @ 11:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by telepath
Thanks Gazrok. Sadly I think my original post has turned out to be a trick question. As Mark Roazhar put it, the Pope himself could film it and skeptics would still be gleefully shooting it full of holes.

Although a convincing medium, motion pictures are not ultimately what convinces people. What could it be then, aside from direct experience? What is the lynch pin?

Any communication that reveals a technological superiority would do the trick.



posted on May, 23 2008 @ 11:32 AM
link   
This question brought a huge smile to me. I'd have to respond with saying
the cameras on the International Space Station.



posted on May, 23 2008 @ 11:42 AM
link   
I believe there is some ISS footage of UFOs out there. Correct me if I'm wrong someone. Googling it right now. Will be back with an update.



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join