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.

 

Is this real or not? Take a look.

page: 1
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 1 2009 @ 09:01 AM
link   
See the title, and I'll provide a link to the image.

Click here to go to the image

My girlfriend just pointed this out to me. Take a look at the top right.

I'm gonna say fake. Anyone else?



[edit on 1-3-2009 by 4demon]

[edit on 1-3-2009 by 4demon]




posted on Mar, 1 2009 @ 09:04 AM
link   
It is either a photo taken on earth, or one generated in VUE.



posted on Mar, 1 2009 @ 09:06 AM
link   
What evidence do you have to say it's fake? What do you base that on?



posted on Mar, 1 2009 @ 09:12 AM
link   
looks too smudged to be honest... Looks photoshopish to me...



posted on Mar, 1 2009 @ 09:13 AM
link   
reply to post by 4demon
 


Beautiful picture. I think it's a lenticular cloud. They're associated with mountains. I don't know if it's fake because I don't know if anyone is making any claims about it.



posted on Mar, 1 2009 @ 09:24 AM
link   
I'd also say it's fake. It has the general feel of a fractal type generated landscape. The coloring is not quite right in my opinion. The reds are too 'nice' and there's a little too much color in the mid range distance. Most people could render this with a little practice using any of the better generators like Terragen. Sky fog is good for softening the CGI clues.

Here's some examples

WG3

[edit on 1-3-2009 by waveguide3]



posted on Mar, 1 2009 @ 10:23 AM
link   
Being a 3d Artist I'd have to say that it look slike it was either a) Generated in Vue/Terragen or Bryce due to the formations of the clouds. The landscaping also looks a bit too "designed" to be a naturally forming occurrence, the coloring alone gives that away.



posted on Mar, 1 2009 @ 10:41 AM
link   
I'm going to echo the previous comments and say that the image is fake. Or that it's from the early days of color photos because that is the first thought I'd had when I first saw it.



posted on Mar, 1 2009 @ 10:44 AM
link   
looks fake to me. Something doesn't look right about the clouds in the top left corner either?



posted on Mar, 1 2009 @ 11:07 AM
link   
I Don't Know.

Like The Comments On The Picture Say, It Does Look Like That Whole Set Up Is Digitally Made. But I've Taken Pictures That Come Out With Similar Effect. The 'UFO' (I'm Not Trying To Be Skeptical By Putting UFO Like That, I Just Don't Want To Be Wrong Either Way
) Is Smudged, But This Could Be For Many Factors. It May Have Simply Been Moving At Such a Speed It Blured. Or, It May Be Giving Of Some Kind Of Radiation That Distorts The Light Around It When The Picture Is Taken By A Camera.

I'm Going To Say Real. But I've Been Wrong Many Times Before.

-TRS



posted on Mar, 1 2009 @ 11:09 AM
link   
If it was actually real, it would be interesting to know if these allged craft sightings were recognized in some database and even where they come from. Maybe these aliens also have no-fly zones in their own teritories and sectors.

Even if it was real, then what? these pictures and even many videos don't tell us very much about who's flying them. Would you like to take a tour? Sorry, but we'll have to make you forget and implant a false memory.


Many seem to think that if they see one, than they themsleves may have been abducted. Esepcially if there weren't any other people around. Time sure flies when you've been abducted......doesn't it?



posted on Mar, 1 2009 @ 12:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by vkey08
Being a 3d Artist I'd have to say that it look slike it was either a) Generated in Vue/Terragen or Bryce due to the formations of the clouds. The landscaping also looks a bit too "designed" to be a naturally forming occurrence, the coloring alone gives that away.


Have to agree with this.

The whole picture looks and probably is a computer generated terrain.
It doesn't look real at all imo.



posted on Mar, 1 2009 @ 12:16 PM
link   
It doesn't say Photoshop or mention any other program in the metadata. Is there a way to have that info removed?

edit - I'm aware that you can remove some metadata, but I don't know how to remove the program name.



[edit on 3/1/2009 by Curious_Agnostic]



posted on Mar, 1 2009 @ 12:39 PM
link   
reply to post by Curious_Agnostic
 


Yes, any EXIF editor allows you to change or remove anything, including the application name.



posted on Mar, 1 2009 @ 12:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by eaglewingz
Yes, any EXIF editor allows you to change or remove anything, including the application name.


I've looked into this before, and I had a hard time finding one of those programs that specifically said that it can manipulate the program name section of the metadata. Maybe I was just stupid with my googling, so does anyone have a link to a source that specifically says that?

(By the way, I'm not trying to fake any photos. I'm just curious about this so I know if I can trust that part of the data.)



posted on Mar, 1 2009 @ 12:59 PM
link   
I would also think that there are ways in which someone's legitimate photo etc. can than be swapped to appear as having been faked, possibly through servers etc.? Some of this has been suggsted in some NASA photos and doctored pictures of UFOs by adding strings etc. My point is that it may eventually be impossible to post anything real on the internet.



posted on Mar, 1 2009 @ 01:00 PM
link   
The landscape and sky is 3D generated, but I'm sure the UFO is real!



posted on Mar, 1 2009 @ 01:08 PM
link   
I agree with the artificial landscape looks and feels wrong and would like to add that the shadowing on the 'space craft' feels wrong to me as well.

While metadata can indicate whether an image has been through Photoshop for example it can’t really validate or invalidate an image. For example, I used to photograph using a Nikon D70 in RAW mode to keep as much detail as possible and use Photoshop to load the images from the camera onto the PC into a PC usable format. This could lead to somebody inexperienced in this area assuming that they are fake, when actually it is required to maintain as much quality as possible. Likewise the software that came free with my my old 35mm negative scanner was useless and I relied on Photoshop to import the image using the twain drivers.

Again faking the metadata is a mute point really, but for those that want to try it all you need to do save the image as a bitmap, run a basic opensource image converter to convert it to a JPG with no metadata.

If you want you can then add any metadata you want, for example it would be very easy for me to resize the image to 3.1 mega pixels and add the metadata from my Samsung mobile phone. Hey presto a Photoshoped image that appears to be taken using my phone.

I think the only really way we can validate an image is the image itself, not the author or metadata.



posted on Mar, 1 2009 @ 01:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by northerngate
Again faking the metadata is a mute point really, but for those that want to try it all you need to do save the image as a bitmap, run a basic opensource image converter to convert it to a JPG with no metadata.


That could be it. I noticed a great lack of other metadata as well, not just the program name. I haven't looked at the data for tons of photos, but the ones I've seen had a little more info in their metadata than this one. That could be reason for suspicion.



posted on Mar, 1 2009 @ 02:25 PM
link   
One has to wonder why one would be out in the middle of nowhere and just happen to have a pic of a disc in the air as an extra bonus.

There are three possibilities. One, someone has seen a really nice photo and added their nice photoshop addition.

Or , somebody was at a location for a good reason and knew they could get a shot of something that they were expecting.

Or, somebody just happened to be out in the middle of nowhere and just happened to spot a ufo.
The photo was interesting with the landscape alone. Nice photo.



new topics

top topics



 
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join