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.

 

Oddly shaped UFO sighting

page: 17
9
<< 14  15  16    18  19  20 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 25 2010 @ 07:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by reticlevision
Maybe...
Here's a little something for you.
not a lot of data, but I haven't found a way to spoof the original EXIF date/time stamp, and I've tried.
Doesn't mean it can't be done, though....
bunches of file formats too
Viewer


Reticlevision.....

I'm back now, so I'll have a look at all this.

Cheers mate
Maybe...maybe not




posted on May, 25 2010 @ 07:27 PM
link   
reply to post by Maybe...maybe not
 


If you can send the images my way, I can run a few checks on them that aren't available to the public.

Thanks.



posted on May, 25 2010 @ 07:32 PM
link   
I might be heading out for a bit, so if I don't answer thats why



posted on May, 25 2010 @ 07:41 PM
link   
reply to post by Maybe...maybe not
 


Maybe...
disregard that about the time stamp
I just discovered a photo I took with my cell phone back in 1865 according to that viewer



posted on May, 25 2010 @ 07:42 PM
link   
ATS Team:

Here are the “direct” photos + EXIF data.

I note the following initial observations:

- The date data for both photos is 16 April 2010

- The time data for both photos is the same to the “second”: 10:12:30

- No camera ID appears in the data

- The image is noted as a thumbnail

I will continue to look at this as time allows (I am supposed to be working!)

Comments welcome…..

Photo 1 “direct” (scroll right):



Photo 2 “direct” (scroll right):



Photo 1 “direct” with EXIF data (scroll right):



Photo 2 “direct” with EXIF data (scroll right):



Kind regards
Maybe…maybe not



posted on May, 25 2010 @ 07:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by ALLis0NE
reply to post by Maybe...maybe not
 

If you can send the images my way, I can run a few checks on them that aren't available to the public.
Thanks.


ALLisOne.....

Many thanks


If you U2U me with an e-mail address, I will do that.

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not



posted on May, 25 2010 @ 07:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by BlueFireWolf
FINALLY.

I managed to get the files off my phone the right way (i think), and I have sent them to maybe...maybe not.

EDIT: Oops, I may have done it wrong again... I'll send you a fixed one... maybe, I dunno. I'll wait till you post the results.


BlueFireWolf.....

I just saw your subsequent edit.

Can you please send me your "fixed one"? (many thanks).

We need it because there are "problems" with the EXIF data in the photos you just sent me, as posted.

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not



posted on May, 25 2010 @ 08:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Maybe...maybe not
 


In my opinion, its not possible that they both could have the same time of 10:12:30. I would think there would be at least one second or two seperating the time between the pictures. The type of camera should not be blank if directly from the phone.



posted on May, 25 2010 @ 08:55 PM
link   
Can someone supply a summary of where we're at with this...?

What's with the new EXIF data - any significance?

48 hours and nobody has produced anything to say conclusively this is a hoax.



posted on May, 25 2010 @ 08:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by FOXMULDER147
Can someone supply a summary of where we're at with this...?
What's with the new EXIF data - any significance?
48 hours and nobody has produced anything to say conclusively this is a hoax.


FOXMULDER.....

Please review my posts including "direct" images, EXIF data & commentary:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Edit to add:

Sorry....I misread your post & I see you did that. My comments in the post allude to "problems" with the EXIF data.

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not

[edit on 25-5-2010 by Maybe...maybe not]



posted on May, 25 2010 @ 08:59 PM
link   
this picture u took. it look like the portal was open and ufo was coming out of it. that is one of proof or evidence there are portal opening on pic. I saw one simliar to on other pic. but it was Repitlian (NAGA) come out of portal. i have seen it.
NO JOKE.



posted on May, 25 2010 @ 09:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by FOXMULDER147
Can someone supply a summary of where we're at with this...?

What's with the new EXIF data - any significance?

48 hours and nobody has produced anything to say conclusively this is a hoax.



Ditto!!

Please. What does this all mean???

Sheesh, it's been told that this person "God"created the entire world in less than 144 hours and he....... didn't even have internet access with all its conveniences!

C'mon now!



posted on May, 25 2010 @ 09:04 PM
link   
reply to post by Maybe...maybe not
 

Is it possible for a camera to take two photos in the same second?



posted on May, 25 2010 @ 09:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by FOXMULDER147
reply to post by Maybe...maybe not
 

Is it possible for a camera to take two photos in the same second?


FOXMULDER147.....

Once again.....apologies if I sounded rude.....I'm trying to do this in between work tasks!

Is it possible to take 2 photo's within the "same" second?

Well, it might be, but it does depend on time taken to autofocus, etc.....

It would have made more sense to me if the 2nd photo was MORE OUT OF FOCUS than the 1st photo because that would have indicated the camera did not take the time to focus for the 2nd photo.

I'm not sure the camera could have focused that quickly for the 2nd photo.

But then again, perhaps the 1st photo was "in focus" & we are seeing motion blur.

I will have to look into the camera specs.

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not

[edit on 25-5-2010 by Maybe...maybe not]



posted on May, 25 2010 @ 09:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by One Moment

Originally posted by FOXMULDER147
Can someone supply a summary of where we're at with this...?
What's with the new EXIF data - any significance?
48 hours and nobody has produced anything to say conclusively this is a hoax.

Ditto!!
Please. What does this all mean???
Sheesh, it's been told that this person "God"created the entire world in less than 144 hours and he....... didn't even have internet access with all its conveniences!
C'mon now!


One Moment.....

I post the info in this manner so that others have the chance to draw conclusions & comment, without being swayed by my own opinions.

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not



posted on May, 25 2010 @ 09:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Maybe...maybe not
 

Don't worry about it. I didn't think you were being rude at all.

This case really is a mystery, isn't it. I think we may have hit a wall, unless we get anymore telling information that is...

I must say - if it's a hoax, it's quite a good one.



posted on May, 25 2010 @ 09:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by Maybe...maybe not

Originally posted by One Moment

Originally posted by FOXMULDER147
Can someone supply a summary of where we're at with this...?
What's with the new EXIF data - any significance?
48 hours and nobody has produced anything to say conclusively this is a hoax.

Ditto!!
Please. What does this all mean???
Sheesh, it's been told that this person "God"created the entire world in less than 144 hours and he....... didn't even have internet access with all its conveniences!
C'mon now!


One Moment.....

I post the info in this manner so that others have the chance to draw conclusions & comment, without being swayed by my own opinions.

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not



But if someone can't understand EXIF data and what it represents then.....it's useless. You might as well post your findings in Latin.

We are all not computer/camera/Samsung savvy.

So please, come down to our (my?) level and just tell us, in English, what this means.
Don't editorialize it or memorialize anything. Just tell us your findings. Leave the conjectures to us.

Thanks



posted on May, 25 2010 @ 09:36 PM
link   
Ok, "Maybe...maybe not" sent me the images that are supposed to be "direct"...

They are NOT original, they are NOT direct.

The EXIF data has been modified, and is not original. There is a TON of missing data.

Either the OP tried to use an EXIF editor, and tried to import his own EXIF data (using the same EXIF data on both images with the same date and time)..... or he is really having a hard time getting the image files from his phone to his computer with the EXIF data untouched, and something is changing the EXIF data.

All this can be solved if the OP goes to the "Info" or "Settings" section of his phone and looks for the make, model, software version, etc., so we can walk him through the process of getting the original images.

Until then, this entire topic is very suspicious!

It's not possible for these two images to be taken the same hour, minute, and second, from the same camera phone. Most camera phones can not even compress their images into .jpg in less than 2 seconds, there is always a delay.

..and the EXIF data is too short, the images are getting edited somewhere along the way.

Something isn't right with this topic..



posted on May, 25 2010 @ 09:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by FOXMULDER147
I must say - if it's a hoax, it's quite a good one.


Are you kidding?

The object doesn't even look real... shows signs of editing... the OP can't even provide basic information about his camera... and the EXIF data shows photoshop tags... and the OP can't provide the original images... and the images he does provide have edited EXIF data...

This is not even close to being a good hoax...

[edit on 25-5-2010 by ALLis0NE]



posted on May, 25 2010 @ 09:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by ALLis0NE

Originally posted by FOXMULDER147
I must say - if it's a hoax, it's quite a good one.


Are you kidding?

The object doesn't even look real... shows signs of editing... the OP can't even provide basic information about his camera... and the EXIF data shows photoshop tags... and the OP can't provide the original images... and the images he does provide have edited EXIF data...

This is not even close to being a good hoax...

And what should a 'real' UFO look like? Who can say?

The OP stated near the beginning that he used Photoshop to size the photos.




top topics



 
9
<< 14  15  16    18  19  20 >>

log in

join