strange creature photographed at Argentina Airport

reply to post by tcujie

---

Hmm. I am suspicious of the "higher resolution" image. It is still cropped (it shouldn't be square) and the edges are blurry, even on the objects that are 'in focus'. The DImage Z1 should do a much better job than that, even using its 4X digital zoom.

Taken 03/20/2007 at 1:50 pm. With a Minolta DiMAGE Z1

Adobe Photoshop 7.0 was also used

Edit to add: hi res info is above

[edit on 12/11/2008 by hoagy1199]

origin of photo = paint.net.

paint.net = primitive, free version of photoshop.


Photo = HOAX.

Just my 2 cents.

reply to post by Uber Fr0g

---

None of that proves its a "hoax". It has obviously been cropped so yes, it's been passed through some kind of software, which I believe was also used to enlarge it. There is no other visible evidence of it having been doctored.

And yes, I am a Photoshop expert.

it looks like watto from episode 1...

reply to post by Uber Fr0g

---

i used paint.net to resize the photo in the Op.

that is all i did. don't know if your mixing that up with the photo in the link or not.

That's a resample made using (badly) a bicubic algorithm.
I don't think that the original image is available, perhaps someone may ask to CEUFO
ceufo.blogspot.com...

i find it strange that they did setup a blog rather than some regular website though
Ah: link to the Police of La Pampa's website:
www.policia.lapampa.gov.ar...

who will be so brave to ask them if they actually made the analysis mentioned in the article?



[edit on 11/12/2008 by internos]

Just as an example, I managed to make my dog look transparent while I was fiddling with my camera settings the other day .....

Cameras can do weird stuff even if you just switch to a preset mode on them!
I'm presuming we only have the word of the publisher on the shutter speed?
(EDIT: - I just saved the hi-res jpeg and checked the properties! That would have to be moving ludicrously fast to create an effect like mine on that shutte speed!!)

[edit on 11-12-2008 by Bluebird69]

[edit on 11-12-2008 by Bluebird69]

reply to post by internos

---

Exactly! So if the highest settings on that camera were used, then this is less than 1 square inch of the original 2100X1500 pic.

This pic is from the blog too, and I'm guessing it shows the actual resolution:


...of course the color saturation has been brought up here.

It is strange.

the photographer who took the picture of the "flying creature" is an ufologist, member of the Centro de Estudios UFO en La Pampa (CEUFO). This is from an article at Rense.com in 2007:



www.rense.com...

Fabian Romano has also taken a picture of an alledged UFO nearby planes:



View the large and better version of the photo here:
2.bp.blogspot.com...

The story of this alledged UFO photo can be read here, Google translation is available at the website:
ufopampa.blogspot.com...

All of this makes me a little suspicious... I think this may be an ufologist who is a little to eager to provide "proof" of strange creatures/aliens/UFOs.
My 2 cents.

[edit to fix link)

[edit on 11/12/08 by ziggystar60]

Using the big image that Ziggy linked, here's what a zoom shows.


That looks like the image was pasted in, but can't be sure unless one has the original.

The square of differential pixelation sure looks suspicious.

[edit on 12/11/2008 by Badge01]

reply to post by Badge01

---

Hey Badge! Long time!

Those pixels would be innocuous - simple JPEG compression artifacts...

...If they weren't framed by a perfect square. Good eye!

reply to post by tcujie

---

thanks for the bigger picture

bp2.blogger.com...

thanks for the link and the translation internos

if this is only one square inch of the original photo could it be a bug close up to the lens ?






just trying to find an explanation

[edit on 11-12-2008 by easynow]

reply to post by easynow

---

It very well could be. That part that looks like a duck's bill could be drawing our eyes to it and psychologically 'suggesting' that it's something else.

[Edit - mind your apostrophes!]

[edit on 12/11/2008 by Teratoma]

reply to post by Teratoma

---

the only thing with the wasp theory is the knees seem to be backwards and i don't see any antenna on the head of the thing but maybe the blurr has made them hard to see ?

reply to post by easynow

---

...What if the part that we're all assuming to be the head is actually the top of the insect's thorax, and the real head is the part that is to the lower left of that, possibly facing us?

I agree with Nohup on this one. We dont have enough info and theres no telling what that could be... could be a stuffed animal thrown out a window for all we know...

[edit on 11-12-2008 by Grock]

reply to post by Grock

---

No offense, but if you agree that it's not worth bothering with then why did you post? The people participating in the thread obviously think it's worth their time. Personally, as much as I'd love for this to be something anomalous, if it turns out to be something completely mundane I'll still feel like this is a perfectly fine way to spend time. It sharpens the eye and the ol' sleuthing skills.

Now wait!

I see what looks to be a man hanging on for dear life with his right arm...an extremely long right arm.....

also has a very long left arm....

Maybe he missed his UFO and tried to hop on for a ride.... Reminds me of the Twilight Zone "Stewardess, there's a man on the wing of this plane"



Strange things out there.