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.

 

Morphing UFO Pictures you can even see the stars around it!

page: 4
30
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 16 2011 @ 01:14 PM
link   
These have not been photoshopped 99% sure of that, Object is also not blurred 99% of that and from the animation, the object is not continuously falling to earth, it seems to stop in one place for an extended period of time, also 99% sure of that!

OP, how long were you watching these and what happened in the end, did the ligh disipitate or fly off?




posted on Jan, 16 2011 @ 01:27 PM
link   
My friend,


Originally posted by Itop1
These have not been photoshopped 99% sure of that


I 99% agree with you on that


The other 1% of course going to into the resizing of the images!


Object is also not blurred 99% of that and from the animation, the object is not continuously falling to earth, it seems to stop in one place for an extended period of time, also 99% sure of that!


Its a amazing what the eye can see until questioned


Be safe be well,

Spiro



posted on Jan, 16 2011 @ 01:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by ArMaP
About the stars in the photos, can someone point to where they are and their movement?

I think that most of the things I see are hot pixels on the sensor.


Could be hot pixels. There are a few light sources you can only see when adjusting the image:
rapidshare.com...#!download|728tl|442922604|ATS_user_sugarcookie1_ufo_photo_ps_edit.rar|951
^bmp with no jpeg compression

edit - that link screwed up. try this
edit on 16-1-2011 by tetsuo because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 16 2011 @ 01:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by sugarcookie1
reply to post by Hellas
 


yes your right it was taken with a FinePix S3100 with a modified manual trigger ..but im not hear to argue with you in my heart i know what i took and what i took it with i have no reason to lie ..If you want to belive the pics are a hoax thats up to you ..but i stand by my pics 100 %
and have a wonderful evening


I'm curious about something....
Can you please provide us more details about this modified trigger. The member Hellas who is a photographer and obviously knowledgeable on this topic seems to indicate there is no trigger for this camera.
Perhaps a photo of the modified trigger?

I (and others im sure) are verious curious how one rigs up a manual trigger for a camera like this. I have a camera similar (but not exactly like yours...would love to know how to do this)

Thanks.


With that said....I have a high end HD camera and a tripod. Many times my photos STILL come out blurry. Many things can factors into this. Even a tiny tiny slight bit of wind can screw up the photo. IMO, based on the tons of crappy pictures I take....this is nothing but a blur of some light source - plane, star, etc etc.

Plus based on Hellas' knowledge of speed, etc.....the chance of this being just a blurry light source is very very high.
edit on January 16th 2011 by greeneyedleo because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 16 2011 @ 01:41 PM
link   
EXIF for the 3rd (more distored photo). I do not know all about speed and all that...but maybe these numbers will mean something to someone else

 

[Image]
Make = FUJIFILM
Model = FinePix S3100
Orientation = top/left
X Resolution = 72
Y Resolution = 72
Resolution Unit = inch
Software = Digital Camera FinePix S3100 Ver1.00
Date Time = 2010-08-15 22:13:16
YCbCr Positioning = centered
Copyright =
Exif IFD Pointer = Offset: 286
PrintIM Data = 28 Byte

[Camera]
Exposure Time = 2"
F Number = F3
Exposure Program = Landscape mode
ISO Speed Ratings = 100
Exif Version = Version 2.2
Date Time Original = 2010-08-15 22:13:16
Date Time Digitized = 2010-08-15 22:13:16
Components Configuration = YCbcr
Shutter Speed Value = -1 TV
Aperture Value = 3.36 AV
Brightness Value = -4.55 BV
Exposure Bias Value = ±0EV
Max Aperture Value = F2.8
Metering Mode = Pattern
Light Source = unknown
Flash = Flash did not fire, compulsory flash mode
Focal Length = 36mm
Flashpix Version = Version 1.0
Color Space = sRGB
Exif Image Width = 2272
Exif Image Height = 1704
Focal Plane X Resolution = 4255
Focal Plane Y Resolution = 4255
Focal Plane Resolution Unit = cm
Sensing Method = One-chip color area sensor
File Source = DSC
Scene Type = A directly photographed image
Custom Rendered = Normal process
Exposure Mode = Auto exposure
White Balance = Auto white balance
Scene Capture Type = Night scene
Sharpness = Normal
Subject Distance Range = unknown

[Thumbnail Info]
Compression = JPEG Compressed (Thumbnail)
Orientation = top/left
X Resolution = 72
Y Resolution = 72
Resolution Unit = inch
JPEG Interchange Format = Offset: 914
JPEG Interchange Format Length = Length: 9143

[Thumbnail]
Thumbnail = 160 x 120

edit on January 16th 2011 by greeneyedleo because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 16 2011 @ 02:10 PM
link   
reply to post by tetsuo
 


Im not good at explaining stuff but i will give it an honest try..I live on a 140 acre farm miles away from any town there is no street lights of any kind its pitch dark out here..I do rember there being a tiny bit of light in the sky that time of year it stays light out till very late..I spend alot of time outside sometimes till 3 am i have a illness that the meds keep me up and im able to breath better outside ..anyhow i had the tripod and camera set up on my picnic table its the kind that sits up very high..I saw this bright blob in the sky that just kept moveing but in one place thats why i said it was morphing i didnt know what other words to use cuz it wasnt flashing it wasnt morphing very fast the reason i took the pics was it stood out so bright in the sky bright like the moon but it wasnt the moon ..the pics wernt photoshoped and i wouldnt know how to use it if i had it the pics are not retouched in any way and i agree there nothing to rave about but i did find them unusal..the camera was pointed into the sky.. were i live the land is flat no moutains or hills under the pics would be a tree line but i dont think any of that would be showing the tree line goes on for miles its untouched land..what happened to this blob is after it was done doing its thing it just shot up into the air with in secs and it was gone and i dont have pics of it doing this ..oh and there was a ton of stars in the sky that night i do rember that and very clear as it is often here at night the skys are beautiful i wish all could see what i see here ..I consider these pics to be of a ufo anything in the sky to me that cant be explained such as these pics is just that ..Ive got many pics of strange things in the sky ..If i thought these pics were fake i wouldnt have even thought of posting them no one wants to get eaten alive on ATS ..I hope this helps even if its just a little and thanks for the reply~~sugar



posted on Jan, 16 2011 @ 02:28 PM
link   
Still waiting for the details on this "modified trigger" of yours. Really shot yourself in the foot there.

If the *other* details you gave are true (Minnesota, August, 2000-2100 hours, Eastern sky) then I'm going to say you took shaky long-exposure pictures of Jupiter which was 10 degrees above the Eastern horizon at the time.

You are on a very long list of people who have had this particular "UFO" experience.

Have a great day!



posted on Jan, 16 2011 @ 02:28 PM
link   
Thank you for the report!

I don't go around taking people's photos and trying to prove they are fake, or try to prove the are real. I just take a look at em and see if there's anything to hint at them being real or fake. We get a lot of fakes, some badly done and some superbly done, here on ATS. There are a lot of people who blindly call hoax and never consider than any photo/video might be real, and also a ton of people who blindly say the photo/video is real and couldn't possibly be a hoax. Those are our debunkers and supporters, and they usually say the same thing for every new photo or video. Kinda like people who always vote for their political party regardless of whether they actually agree with the candidate they vote for.

I don't want you to think I am attacking your photo or honesty! Just assessing the photos - and to me they seem to be pretty decent photos of something that is actually there. It's definitely a UFO - an unidentified flying object. That's the conclusion I have come to based on the evidence so far. Whether the UFO is ET, or something more mundane, is probably impossible to tell. Your eyewitness account indicates this is indeed something out of the ordinary.

Some people will choose not to believe you, others will choose to believe your words. In my opinion, the photos are legitimate and the only thing in question is the story (you sound as mystified by the experience as I am about the identity of the UFO, so everything checks out). All the info you have given us is very much appreciated, we can really take a good look at the photos and see if any good evidence can be gleaned. There is no smoking gun of ET visitation here, BUT still some awesome photos of an intriguing object in the night sky.


edit: one last question - did you move the tripod or did it move at all while you were taking the pictures? can you provide another photo of the night sky without any anomalous objects in it (must be taken by the same exact camera)? that way I can check it against the already posted photos and can tell if those are stars or hot/dead pixels we see in the photos.
edit on 16-1-2011 by tetsuo because: (no reason given)

edit on 16-1-2011 by tetsuo because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 16 2011 @ 02:33 PM
link   
Ok to all those that do not believe there is a modified trigger or shutter release if you want to get technical here it is. Oh and you can buy one too. Here is the link.

Modified trigger or Shutter Release for Fuji FinePix any model

This is what is attached to my camera. So please quit trying to im a liar about my equipment.



posted on Jan, 16 2011 @ 02:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by IAttackPeople
Still waiting for the details on this "modified trigger" of yours. Really shot yourself in the foot there.

If the *other* details you gave are true (Minnesota, August, 2000-2100 hours, Eastern sky) then I'm going to say you took shaky long-exposure pictures of Jupiter which was 10 degrees above the Eastern horizon at the time.

You are on a very long list of people who have had this particular "UFO" experience.

Have a great day!


Read page 3, does jupiter fly around like you see in my animated photo? no.



posted on Jan, 16 2011 @ 02:57 PM
link   
reply to post by Itop1
 


What did you use as a reference to say that if flies around?



posted on Jan, 16 2011 @ 03:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by ArMaP
reply to post by Itop1
 


What did you use as a reference to say that if flies around?


the photos are in exactly the same position, the stars that do not move are in exactly the same spot in each photo



posted on Jan, 16 2011 @ 03:03 PM
link   
reply to post by tetsuo
 


hi and thanks
I dont mind practical criticism in fact i like it you cant get to the bottom of things without it and i understand that..yes let me look around and see if i have any pics without my family in them



posted on Jan, 16 2011 @ 03:05 PM
link   
reply to post by Itop1
 


The stars that do not move look more like hot pixels to me, that's the problem.



posted on Jan, 16 2011 @ 03:06 PM
link   
Take a look at this animation i created...

i365.photobucket.com...

Take notice of the few small black dots to the right, which are stars... they do not move which the main object does.
edit on 16-1-2011 by Itop1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 16 2011 @ 03:07 PM
link   
reply to post by IAttackPeople
 


thanks for your warm reply.. sheesh



posted on Jan, 16 2011 @ 03:13 PM
link   
These are very good pictures. I too am a photographer and i have one concern. If the image in the forground is indeed shaky why are not the others around it. With my experience with photography the image always consists of all objects in it are blurred too or have lines or tracemarks. The Meta Data someone else has shown that the picture was taken within normal paramaters of a night shot so no photoshopping I can see here at all. Great catch!



posted on Jan, 16 2011 @ 03:14 PM
link   
reply to post by Itop1
 


Did you noticed the two lights that appear on the left, one close to the edge of the image and the other more or less halfway between the edge of the image and the main light in two of the photos?

I think those two are stars (they only appear in the first and third image) and the other sharp, pixel-sized lights are hot pixels, pixels that always show the same colour regardless of what the image shows.

If you see those two hypothetical stars try doing the animation using them as reference.



posted on Jan, 16 2011 @ 03:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by Itop1
Take a look at this animation i created...

i365.photobucket.com...

Take notice of the few small black dots to the right, which are stars... they do not move which the main object does.


of course the stars don't move. they're too far away to 'show' movement in a 2 second exposure.

the 'object', obviously much closer, shows movement and nothing more ... again, in a two second exposure.

if it were 'video taped', @ 30 frames/sec, you'd have 60 still shots of ... an aircraft.

another thread references photos taken with a 4 second exposure time .... what do you expect - movement.

[ETA]
a random image taken with a 4 second shutter time
example
edit on 1/16/2011 by 12m8keall2c because: Edit To Add



posted on Jan, 16 2011 @ 03:18 PM
link   
reply to post by JohnieG
 


thank you JohnieG !



new topics

top topics



 
30
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join