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.

 

What did I catch on film?

page: 1
4
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 29 2010 @ 12:58 PM
link   
These were all taken in succession. I didn't see the object until after I uploaded them to my PC. You can find the data in the image properties. Whatever this object is, it's moving...

The colored dots are just noise from the camera lens.

img688.imageshack.us...
img541.imageshack.us...
img241.imageshack.us...
img27.imageshack.us...
img195.imageshack.us...
img85.imageshack.us...
img697.imageshack.us...
img248.imageshack.us...

[edit on 29-5-2010 by Rancid-Milk-Man]

[edit on 29-5-2010 by Rancid-Milk-Man]




posted on May, 29 2010 @ 01:08 PM
link   
reply to post by Rancid-Milk-Man
 


Could you share some context for the photographs? Where and when taken, backdrop, etc. Thanks


[edit on 29-5-2010 by slane69]

[edit on 29-5-2010 by slane69]



posted on May, 29 2010 @ 01:15 PM
link   
These were taken 5/27/2010 at 10:58PM Central Standard time In Chicago. I was on my roof looking towards the front of my house at a clear patch of sky by some trees trying to take some deep sky photos. The exposure times were pretty close together. I was using a Nikon D100 with a sigma Macro Lens mounted on a standard tri-pod. I'll be happy to try and provide anymore information.

[edit on 29-5-2010 by Rancid-Milk-Man]

[edit on 29-5-2010 by Rancid-Milk-Man]

[edit on 29-5-2010 by Rancid-Milk-Man]

[edit on 29-5-2010 by Rancid-Milk-Man]



posted on May, 29 2010 @ 01:20 PM
link   
reply to post by Rancid-Milk-Man
 

Why on Earth would you use a macro lens to take pictures of the sky?



posted on May, 29 2010 @ 01:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by Rancid-Milk-Man
 

Why on Earth would you use a macro lens to take pictures of the sky?


I don't believe at the time it was fully zoomed in. It has a setting to change from macro to normal. I believe it was set to normal. It's a funky lens

Besides macro lens' are good for deep sky atrophotography

[edit on 29-5-2010 by Rancid-Milk-Man]



posted on May, 29 2010 @ 01:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rancid-Milk-Man
These were taken 5/27/2010 at 10:58AM Central Standard time In Chicago.

Are you sure those photos were taken at 10:58 AM?

Where were you pointing the camera to? Some known star or constellation? If we can identify a constellation it's easier to get an idea of the angular size.



posted on May, 29 2010 @ 01:34 PM
link   
reply to post by Rancid-Milk-Man
 

No. Macro lenses are good for taking pictures of bugs. They do not focus well on distant objects.

Which of these lenses were you using?
www.sigmaphoto.com...



posted on May, 29 2010 @ 01:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by ArMaP

Originally posted by Rancid-Milk-Man
These were taken 5/27/2010 at 10:58AM Central Standard time In Chicago.

Are you sure those photos were taken at 10:58 AM?

Where were you pointing the camera to? Some known star or constellation? If we can identify a constellation it's easier to get an idea of the angular size.


Sorry PM. I originally thought it was 12:58AM but that's when I uploaded them to my computer so it gave me 12:58AM as the date created. The camera is pointing West to the right of O'hare.



posted on May, 29 2010 @ 01:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by Rancid-Milk-Man
 

No. Macro lenses are good for taking pictures of bugs. They do not focus well on distant objects.

Which of these lenses were you using?
www.sigmaphoto.com...


None of those. This is a 70-300mm DL Super Macro Lens. It's a telephoto lens with macro I guess... I only assumed because it has macro written all over it. I'm an amateur star gazer. My brother is a professional photographer who helped me with the camera settings over the phone

[edit on 29-5-2010 by Rancid-Milk-Man]



posted on May, 29 2010 @ 01:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by Rancid-Milk-Man
 

No. Macro lenses are good for taking pictures of bugs. They do not focus well on distant objects.


What Phage said is definitely correct.

It seems to me that a macro lens would be just about the worst lens to use for deep space photography?



posted on May, 29 2010 @ 01:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by Neodoxa

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by Rancid-Milk-Man
 

No. Macro lenses are good for taking pictures of bugs. They do not focus well on distant objects.


What Phage said is definitely correct.

It seems to me that a macro lens would be just about the worst lens to use for deep space photography?



I researched further. It's not a macro lens. Thanks Phage

[edit on 29-5-2010 by Rancid-Milk-Man]



posted on May, 29 2010 @ 01:52 PM
link   
Now to finding out what it is! It reminded me of the dragon on the Never Ending Story.



posted on May, 29 2010 @ 01:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phlynx
Now to finding out what it is! It reminded me of the dragon on the Never Ending Story.

Falkor!



posted on May, 29 2010 @ 02:00 PM
link   
The object in these photos reminded me of the objects seen in Jose Escailla's video "Interstellar"..

Or it could be a little wisp of a cloud... but seems to have some structure in it... hard to tell for sure..
Still very interesting pictures



[edit on 29-5-2010 by alienreality]



posted on May, 29 2010 @ 02:02 PM
link   
You may well have caught a nebulus cloud but which one I could not say.

You would need at least approximate coordinates to even guess.



posted on May, 29 2010 @ 02:07 PM
link   
Those are cool pictures. What was the shutter speed set to for those shots?

Maybe someone can check out your EXIF data. Maybe the trails (for lack of a better term) and what not are motion blur.

The question remains, what is it? I cant say, but its interesting.



posted on May, 29 2010 @ 02:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by alienreality
The object in these photos reminded me of the objects seen in Jose Escailla's video "Interstellar"..

Or it could be a little wisp of a cloud... but seems to have some structure in it... hard to tell for sure..
Still very interesting pictures



[edit on 29-5-2010 by alienreality]


It's not clouds. All the pictures I took with clouds came out pinkish with the exposure.

yfrog.com...

This is why I was trying to find a clear patch of sky to take pictures. It ruined the images lol



posted on May, 29 2010 @ 02:32 PM
link   
It's not a nebulous cloud because, using the back ground stars as a marker, it's obviously moving across the sky.

How many seconds apart were these pictures?

And what is O'hare? To the west of Chicago on that night the constellation Leo would've been setting.

There was also a full moon to the south of you at the time. I'm surprised the sky was so dark in your pictures.


[edit on 29-5-2010 by Neo__]



posted on May, 29 2010 @ 02:36 PM
link   
O'Hare airport? Right. I thought is was some strange name for some constellation.



posted on May, 29 2010 @ 02:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by Neo__
It's not a nebulous cloud because, using the back ground stars at a marker, it's obviously moving across the sky.

How many seconds apart were these pictures?

And what is O'hare? To the west of Chicago on that night the constellation Leo would've been setting.

There was also a full moon to the south of you at the time. I'm surprised the sky was so dark in your pictures.

[edit on 29-5-2010 by Neo__]


O'hare is an airport in Chicago. They're about a minute and a half apart from each other give or take a few seconds.




top topics



 
4
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join