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.

 

Did I just take a picture of the classic "Flying Saucer" ?

page: 1
2
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 04:00 AM
link   
Ok - I was in West Texas outside of Balmorhae on job duty and I figured I would take some pictures of the scenery there. It is a beautiful country in West Texas. Anyhow, as I got the pictures developed, in one of them I notice this "thing" in the sky. I really have no idea what it is. Hopefully someone here can perhaps tell me what it is in this picture. Maybe its just an artifact? Or some kind of glitch? Who knows.

Im not a professional photographer analyzer by any means, but to the naked eye, it looks like I took a picture of the classic flying saucer here. It looks disc shaped and its at an angle in this picture here that I took:



Im not claiming its a flying disc by any means, its just what it looks like to me. But hopefully someone here will have a better explanation as to what it is and do some analysis for me.

And also, at the time of taking the picture, I did not notice anything in the sky. This was out in the middle of no where and no airport was close to this area by hundreds of miles.




posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 04:02 AM
link   
could be one of those blimps they teather abover food places like Mcdonalds and over superstores when theres a sale on.



posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 04:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by -Blackout-
I did not notice anything in the sky.


But had a flying saucer been buzzing around you would have noticed it. However, birds are such common things that we tend to pay no attention their presence.

What you have here is a bird.

Cheers.

ps Or maybe just a humble insect...
edit on 16-12-2010 by torsion because: redacted



posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 04:05 AM
link   
There were no stores in the area. No towns were close (or even houses for that matter) in the direction that I was going in that picture.

As I said, I noticed nothing at all in the sky before taking the picture. I would have noticed a blimp for sure.



posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 04:08 AM
link   
reply to post by torsion
 


Could be.

But i'd like someone to do some actual analysis that knows what they are doing before we start saying bird or blimp for sure.

And also, down the line, for whatever reason, people take photos and notice strange things in them that they didnt notice before taking the photo. Ive seen many a UFO photo go exactly like this one. Again, I am not claiming its an actual UFO, however, i'd very much love for someone to analyze this photo for me that knows what they are talking and doing before we jump to some knee jerk answers.
edit on 16-12-2010 by -Blackout- because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 04:09 AM
link   
I'm no expert but something raises a red flag when I see pixelation and straight lines around an object that doesn't match the background...



Makes it look like it was added to the image.




posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 04:11 AM
link   
reply to post by -Blackout-
 


Very lazy photoshop job..
You know hoaxers get banned??



posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 04:11 AM
link   
LOL no, this image was not tampered with. I guarantee you it wasnt. Im a lot of things but a hoaxer isnt one of them.



posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 04:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by -Blackout-
 


Very lazy photoshop job..
You know hoaxers get banned??


So quick to jump to conclusions are we?

Typical.



posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 04:15 AM
link   
reply to post by -Blackout-
 


Not quick..Your pic is reasonably high resolution so it's easy to crop and enlarge..

I just saw the neat square pasted in...

Not even a good hoax..



posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 04:16 AM
link   
reply to post by -Blackout-
 


Did you look at the close up I posted? I wouldn't say quick to jump to anything.

Unless you can explain how the pixelation around the object ends in a square of straight lines then I say it is a fake.
That is an obvious sign that the object was added to the image.



posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 04:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by -Blackout-

There were no stores in the area. No towns were close (or even houses for that matter) in the direction that I was going in that picture.


There appears to be several buildings in the photograph.


... i'd very much love for someone to analyze this photo for me that knows what they are talking and doing before we jump to some knee jerk answers.


As you saw nothing unusual that suggests that there was nothing unusual there. As I've said before it's important to trust your own real-time senses and judgment before you trust the results of a digital photograph. The terrain you have photographed has grasses, bushes and trees - known habitats for insects and birds. The indistinct object looks like a close-up insect or distant bird.

Sorry, but I can't see any reason for further analysis.



posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 04:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by Wally Hope
reply to post by -Blackout-
 


Did you look at the close up I posted? I wouldn't say quick to jump to anything.

Unless you can explain how the pixelation around the object ends in a square of straight lines then I say it is a fake.
That is an obvious sign that the object was added to the image.


I have no idea why that pixelization is around the object in the picture. So no, I cannot explain why its like that. I didnt tamper with the picture at all. So unless the people at Wal-Mart did when I went there to pick them up after they were developed, then I dunno what else to tell you.

And also, ive been one of the biggest posters on this board that is against hoaxers. I wouldnt do that. I also have better things to be doing than trying to fool some silly kids on the interwebz into thinking I took a picture of a flying saucer lol


As I said, i'd rather have someone analyze that picture that knows what they are talking about and looking at.



posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 04:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by torsion

Originally posted by -Blackout-

There were no stores in the area. No towns were close (or even houses for that matter) in the direction that I was going in that picture.


There appears to be several buildings in the photograph.


Yet there wasnt.



posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 04:31 AM
link   
reply to post by -Blackout-
 


It's certainly tiny and indistinct enought to be a classic flying saucer photo. :-)



posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 04:32 AM
link   
Pixelation is due to JPG compression. Parts of the image with more information are more compressed resulting in artifacts. If you look closely you can notice a square grid, JPG compression works by spliting the image into a grid and compressing each part.
edit on 16-12-2010 by MattDalpe because: typo



posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 04:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by Wally Hope
reply to post by -Blackout-
 


Did you look at the close up I posted? I wouldn't say quick to jump to anything.

Unless you can explain how the pixelation around the object ends in a square of straight lines then I say it is a fake.
That is an obvious sign that the object was added to the image.


Zoom in on the telephone lines. Its pixelated around them also. I guess I added those to the photo also huh?



posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 04:36 AM
link   
reply to post by MattDalpe
 


Yup. Especially when there is a decent amount of contrast between the object, and the background.
Black and white line art is the worst of all..



posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 04:41 AM
link   
What do you mean by "getting the pictures developed"? You took them with a film camera? They look digital to me.

BTW it isn't just pixelation around the UFO, it's blatantly a perfect square of pixelation. It looks like you simply cut out the object with a square cut tool instead of putting the effort in to manually cut the object itself.

Try harder next time, especially when there's a risk of ban.
edit on 16/12/10 by Nventual because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 04:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by -Blackout-
There were no stores in the area. No towns were close (or even houses for that matter) in the direction that I was going in that picture.



Originally posted by torsion
There appears to be several buildings in the photograph.



Originally posted by -Blackout-
Yet there wasnt.


Are these not buildings?






top topics



 
2
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join