Been on this a site a long time and now I get pics

reply to post by greeneyedleo


Excellent! How did you acquire that data? I clicked on "properties" and didn't get all that.

I'm not a photo expert, just a hobbyist/afficiando.... but all of the values there that I recognize indicate no value/tone/hue tweaking of the lights.

Incidentally, outstanding camera you have, OP>

reply to post by skywatch


I was just posting a small bit of background for those who seem to question it so strongly. I understood that after the OP first stated it.

There has been no blasting of me and I would not expect less of a group firering questions off trying to find the flaws in my truth. But, I assure you there is no lies to be found in these shots, you are seeing what the camera saw. I saw something much clearer but still could not identify it, that is why the images are posted here.

Honestly, I would be a fool to think we are alone in the universe, but I am not convinced myself that this is alien craft, what I will say is that I live in area that has lots of aircraft and never once was I inclined to photograph them (except for Concords last flight). This was a unique aircraft , the sound was very odd and that is why I have the pics.

reply to post by theukbloke


Apple Aperture does RAW and you can use certain plug ins to use raw in photoshop too.

All you need to do is change the metadata and then you can pretty much call it whatever you want.

Basically to make a story like this rock solid, one should check ALL the original info on the SD card which is shot in either RAW or JPEG or TIFF. Then, you can modify the photo and replace the corrections by copy paste the original metadata.

I mean it's not hard to mess around with digital images. The data info on them is the easiest to fix or change. Making the photos believable is something else.

I am not saying I don't believe the photos are real, I haven't given it much thought, but I do agree that when Adobe pops up in the story, one has to ask some hard questions.

So, if you imported them into Adobe Lightroom, you can also just drag the original file off of the card and post it online for us to compare. S'all I'm saying... then we'd rest assured it's just been through a clean up phase and not a transformation phase.

I kinda maybe see something like a Multiple-Vertically-Mounted, Turbo-Fan configuration with my bad vision.

I would doubt that if the OP has been on here 4 years, he or she would be ignorant of how people are here. Skepticism is supposedly healthy and should be expected. I seriously doubt I would ever be starting any thread like this myself.

And if it was authentic, a professional may even be manipulated to lie saying it wasn't.

It will be interesting to hear more about the sighting details.


Stupid question: Would a video have had even less detail?

Thanks OP for the amazing pictures. I would like to see the original RAW files, but it's probably useless, as you already posted a good crop of picture 1075. As several people already commented on this, I too don't understand why the light on the left is different from the others, sharply delineated. Weird. I see three lights under a dark structure.Whatever it is, it is not a lens flare! The date/times are all different, from 22:28:32 to 22:29:15.

reply to post by theukbloke


Just wondering if you have been able to email the original images that have NOT gone thru AI, yet? That sure would eliminate the whole adobe photoshop mess

And thanks for sharing

[edit on 27-6-2008 by greeneyedleo]

I have to say, for once,

I really am impressed here...

I would like to thank the OP for sharing and for being patient under what seemed to be to many some aggressive questioning and yes to many who read it .. it does appear to be accusational.. no matter how they tiptoe around it.. the accusations seemed very well implied more than once.

I applaud UKBLOKE for responding in a respectful and patient manner and offering originals in the face of so much aggression.

I would also like to note that the OP made no claims to the nature of his pictures other than the fact that to him they were unidentified.. he said quite notable in the original post that he was not claiming they were ALIENS!

reply to post by NephraTari


I stated my stance because I believe people will just take this for face value and believe it is from alien origin. That is why I said what I have said. We are not accusing the OP of lying, we are trying to piece together the photos.

Go in front of a Congressional hearing or even your local courts, you will get the same scrutiny.

Outstanding pictures OP!

.........and thanks for sharing, and you have hold your own with the skeptics here which sometime can be frustrating. Like many others I will wait for some of the experts here weigh in before coming to any conclusions.

Originally posted by Question Fate
These scream military to me. Idk, it just looks manmade.

Definitely not a heli though.

[edit on 27-6-2008 by Question Fate]

This is the tack I am taking with a lot of these UFOs. Why do they always have lights on them? Headlights on your vehicle is a universal coincidence?

On 2nd thought,

could it be.....?
dsc.discovery.com...


June 23, 2008 -- A new wingless, saucer-shaped aircraft is scheduled to take to the skies. Just don't call it a UFO.
Subrata Roy, a scientist at the University of Florida, calls his aircraft a "wingless electromagnetic air vehicle," or WEAV, and if it flies he says it could usher in a new age of aircraft design.

reply to post by Bunch

Like many others I will wait for some of the experts here weigh in before coming to any conclusions.

Experts ask questions. Experts just don't take the information given and come to a conclusion, this is not how science was founded. We ask questions on top of questions.

[edit on 27-6-2008 by jhill76]

Those are awesome pics!!! And really impressive looking craft. I wonder which et is the lucky guys to be flying around in such a cool looking craft. I'd really like to know who is flying that.

Can anyone answer this: By Agent_T (I didn't see an answer on this one)

The only thing I have a problem with is the 'sharpness' of the 'lights'.
For a one second exposure picture of a moving object+handshake too..
I can't understand how it has straight,very focused edges.

In this pic the left 'light' looks like a 'clone' of the middle one..exactly the same edge on the bottom left of each 'light'.
It looks like a 'clone tool' job..Not saying it is.. just that's what it looks like.

But for me the oddest thing is that 'straight' edge..almost single pixel sharp.
I have trouble getting that kind of resolution using a tripod with a fast exposure in daytime.

[edit on 27-6-2008 by jhill76]

I believe this is 100% authentic, this image clearly shows a disc shaped ufo.

I'm just thinking out loud here.
Is it possible it's a firefly?
Not the awful awful tv series, but an actual firefly.

Hey UKbloke! Thanks for the images. CGI has been a great advent for the Movie and Television industries but clearly not so much, for ufologist.

It is a good thing that there are members here that can discern with their knowledge and skills whether or not an image is altered. That way a lot of doubt is eliminated.

For me those are some pretty fascinating pictures and you feel sincere, as someone else said, intuition. I am anxious to read the analysis.

Really cool to have pictures taken by the member posting.

Thanks again!

Peace!
Cindy