Recent UFO Laser Beams Camera Effect Proved!, page 2

It isn't a artifact produced by the camera, and I intend to prove it.

The OP said he used a Nokia 6300 which has a still/video camera that uses a 2MP CMOS sensor according to here and here.

According to that last URL the camera/sensor is nothing special (hardly surprising):

Camera. This handset has 2mpx camera (CMOS) which is not that much according to today’s standards, but it is still pretty enough for a middle class model. Nokia decided not to bet on camera part, it is more of an optional feature. This is why camera’s module that was selected for 6233 is one of the cheapest, and provides average quality, if not to say bad one.

So the camera on the phone is probably used in many other likely older phones, and not just the Nokia 6300. Nokia basically threw it in there - this is certainly no "product main feature" boasting revolutionary advances in picture quality.

It has a sensor that is also nothing special. These things are made in large volume by companies like Sony, Samsung, and Canon. They use proven technology, that basically doesn't change much from sensor to sensor, but the important thing I'm trying to get at here is that sensors are all for the most part quite similar, and they have well known flaws which result in image artifacts.

The only type of artifact that comes even close to looking like what the OP posted is 'blooming', and blooming does not happen with CMOS sensors, only CCDs:

Smear
Smear occurs when a very bright portion of an image causes an entire column of pixels to overload and bloom to white. Here’s an example of vertical smear.
--snip--
Any bright point of light can potentially cause smear; common offenders include street lights and car headlights; it can also happen if the camera is shooting footage of a camera flash, or even the sun. Avoiding smear involves lowering the exposure enough that the bright lights don’t bloom and trigger a column of smearing; stopping down the iris to bring down the brightness of the bright lights can eliminate smear entirely, but also may cause the overall picture to be too dark. Smear is also one of the “dead giveaways” that your production was shot on video rather than on film; film doesn’t “smear” like this. Controlled lighting can eliminate all traces of smear, but in uncontrolled circumstances it’s going to happen. CMOS sensors function differently and are immune to smear.

Source: SENSOR ARTIFACTS AND CMOS ROLLING SHUTTER

'Smearing' or 'blooming' on a CCD sensor:

There are no other artifacts that even resemble this - remember, this is a bog standard camera we are talking about here.

Here are multiple pages listing all the artifacts that can be produced by digital cameras and lenses:
photo.net...
www.kenrockwell.com...
www.dpcorner.com...
csmt.uchicago.edu...

Also, if this was an artifact, then why are none of the other lights in the footage 'reacting' the same way? You would expect lights of the same brightness to have the same effect on the sensor, but they don't! (compare above image to the two below) Even brighter lights in the same image do not create this effect. Why do you think they call it 'CCD overload'!

The lighting being filmed is no where near bright enough from that distance to overload the sensor, and even if it was, it's not a CCD, it's a CMOS sensor, which as I pointed out above is immune to blooming.

Also, anyone that has ever seen blooming knows that it isn't a fleeting occurrence as in the OP's footage. It remains visible whilst the light source stays in the frame and remains above a certain brightness. These street lamps are obviously not changing their brightness in any way.

Here are some screen shots from the OP's second video:

There you have it folks. It can't be the sensor or the camera.

The OP is making this up and trying to hoax us.

[edit on 26-11-2008 by C.H.U.D.]

[edit on 26-11-2008 by C.H.U.D.]