It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


I need your help with two images

page: 7
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in


posted on Sep, 3 2004 @ 11:58 AM
I believe, although I may be wrong, what Kinglizard pointed out was the harsh line between a very pixelized section of the sky and a smooth area.

This image:

has been enlarged 400% There can be seen a distinct difference between the section above the black line and pixelation that occurs below.

The inset is another peice of the photo at the same resolution. The difference is obvious. Notice the pixelation of the aircraft and surrounding sky compared to that of the UFO's and their surrounding area.


posted on Sep, 3 2004 @ 12:11 PM

Originally posted by kinglizard

Originally posted by phreak_of_nature
Just for grins I took a look at some digital photos I have on my hard drive.
They are 100% not edited!
I was able to nitice pixelization in the sky on all of them if I zoomed in far enough.

Honestly there is no similarity between your image and the UFO image. Look at the difference.

OK then.
The question I would have next is why "Clear Out" that whole area of the sky?
I can see clearing out the portion in the left center to "add the orbs", but why the whole top of the image wiped? Was there something in there that wasn't supposed to be seen?

Also, with what JAK was able to bring up, it dosen't look like the plane was added in.

posted on Sep, 3 2004 @ 12:24 PM

Originally posted by phreak_of_nature
[OK then.
The question I would have next is why "Clear Out" that whole area of the sky?
I can see clearing out the portion in the left center to "add the orbs", but why the whole top of the image wiped? Was there something in there that wasn't supposed to be seen?

Thats a good question unfortunately its impossible to answer without the original image. We can speculate but it obviously wont be conclusive. All that can be said is that the sky in the image has been altered with some type of digital imaging program.

posted on Sep, 3 2004 @ 03:53 PM
First let me just say it was nice to log on this afternoon and see so many posters back me up.

And I also understand where Agent Smith is coming from but I don't personally know Simon or Dr.Jim and so would question anything they post just as I would question anyone else's post. Especially with the possible game stuff people weret talking about.

As far as having us just try to analyse where the photo was taken, good luck. That's like telling someone here just to "hold this envelope of true secret government files...but don't open it" it ain't gonna happen cuz we can't help ourselves.

And while we are sceptical I think that's better than taking everything at face value and an anonynous person's word friend of founder or not. The founder happens to be anonymous as well as far as I'm concerned.

Don't get me wrong I love the website Simon, whoever you are and if that is your real name

If this does end up being part of a new game so be it but yeesh what a huppla.

On a completely different note how freakin' cool is that guy JAK's avatar?

Pretty dern sweet if ya ask me.

Thanks again everybody.


posted on Sep, 3 2004 @ 03:58 PM

Originally posted by kinglizard
Thats a good question unfortunately its impossible to answer without the original image. We can speculate but it obviously wont be conclusive. All that can be said is that the sky in the image has been altered with some type of digital imaging program.

I would agree. I would guess that the original had writing ot something like that, that was removed and the sky was blended over. As for the plane. I think it might have really been in the pic.

My guess anyway.

posted on Sep, 3 2004 @ 04:20 PM

Originally posted by minniescar
Every now and then this group just kinda pisses me off and this thread is one of those that does. This guy asked if we could find the location and identify an aircraft , he didnt ask us to analyize the photos for authenticity yet there are 4 pages of people screaming photoshop.

Well, thats what we do here. Period. Simon knows this, he would not bring anyone to this site and not tell him of this.


posted on Sep, 4 2004 @ 03:53 AM

Originally posted by AgentSmith
Why is that nearly every time I write something, everyone ignores it and then someone else says it 20 minutes later? Does no one read my posts or something? Does everyone ignore me? I'm not that bad am I?

I feel like that most of the time when I post something here

minniescar: Like some others have already said. The location was found by page 2. We did what the guy asked. Some of us questioned the authenticity of the photo, because frankly it looks like sh!t... in my opinion.

phreak_of_nature: Well all digital images consist of pixels. But what kinglizard is pointing out are .jpg compression artifacts and how they are inconsistant with the rest of the sky. The way .jpg compression works is that it will take one pixel and look at the ones around it. If the colours are similar to the original pixel, it will change all those pixels to the same colour. The fewer number of colour information you need to store, the smaller the file size.

So when your compressing an image that consists of a lot of blue sky. It's going to compress it all fairly consistanly. There is no reason why it would compress one area of the sky completely differnt. The only time when you get a noticeable change in compression artifacts is when you get two differnt colours next to eachother. It usually is quite noticeable in highly compressed images.

What i'd say happened in that corner of the image is that some one took a partly compressed image. Decided to remove something from that area of the sky, like a cloud or something. Filled in the hole with the gradient tool and resaved it, thus amplifying the already compressed part, where as the uncompressed gradient gets only partly compressed and you get a mismatch in compression artifacts.

Either way it would be nice to get an explination from either Simon or this DrJim person.

posted on Sep, 4 2004 @ 07:47 AM
I'm moving this out of "Really Above Top Secret" as there seems to be some doubt about the authenticity of the images. DrJim hasn't been active in the thread for a while, if he updates with more information that requires some level of care, we'll move this thread back into the confines of RATS.

posted on Sep, 4 2004 @ 08:12 AM
Look good.
1 the speed of the aircraft--unknown---but fast...

2 the speed of the clowds--shape--very fast????


posted on Sep, 4 2004 @ 09:01 AM


I jest joyned so sorry for crashin the thred. I herd about sumthin in big end 4 yeasr ago! There wuz a little web page frum a park rainger about it. I gunna tri to find it.


posted on Sep, 4 2004 @ 09:14 AM
It might be real, or it might be another game.

I like your Bio:

Can be seen here.

Or here:

Bio: It's all just a game.

A little healthy scepticism never hurt anybody.


[edit on 4/9/04 by JAK]


posted on Sep, 4 2004 @ 10:23 AM
Well, I had a lil play around and found that:

The clouds have indeed moved between shots.
The plane seems to have a pretty good path (wouldnt have expected this if it was a photoshop as the images are different so it wouuld be fairly difficult to do it unless the full image is not what I am seeing in these pics).
The balls of light cast a shadow underneathe themselves leaving dark shadows on the underside of rocks, again, not consistent with photoshop as changeing the brightness would make shadows also brighter.
My camera does the thing where there is noise in places and not in others so this is not an issue. And adding noise is a simple task which the photoshopper (if it is indeed fake) would not have forgotten looking at the rest of it.
Shadows on plane seem consistant to a single light source. (ie the sun is shining in the same direction)

So if it is photoshop i would say it's pretty well done and well thought out...

Link if the image doesn't remote...


[edit on 4-9-2004 by A5H]


posted on Sep, 4 2004 @ 12:10 PM
I've tried to Enhance the Aircraft.

Sorry, that's the best I can do at the moment. Hopefully this may be able to help someone identify what it is.


posted on Sep, 4 2004 @ 12:11 PM
its stil an f-16 im sure of it. all the other aircraft mentioned just dont fit. but whats weird is it looks like its dropping a bomb instead of firing a missle at the ufo

[edit on 4-9-2004 by phantompatriot]

posted on Sep, 4 2004 @ 12:33 PM
[edit on 10/2/2004 by esther]

posted on Sep, 4 2004 @ 12:40 PM

Originally posted by esther
OK. I don't know a whole lot about missles/bombs and ammunition, but does that look like a bomb to anyone else? I realize the apparent flash and and trajectory path make it seem like a bomb, but look at it. It's sandy-colored and asymmetrical, not shiny and smooth like I would expect a missle to be. Would it look like this?

Am I missing something? Experienced members, please advise.


i jut made a post saying its a bomb not a missle. cripes

posted on Sep, 4 2004 @ 12:49 PM
The missile looks too big for the image. You could argue that its much closer to the camera so its apparent size is larger than it really is. But if this is the case we would see a smoke trail extending backwards outlining its path in the sky. All we see in the image is a large fire ball looking thing that is supposed to be its propulsion. Look at some real photos of missiles being fired and the trail they leave in the sky. The ones that dont leave smoke trails dont have much of a fireball out the backside.

posted on Sep, 4 2004 @ 12:52 PM
If that's a real aircraft, it's an A-4 Skyhawk.

They are ubiquitous across the United States as they are in use by the Air National Guards all across the country.

Many times hiking in New Hampshire's White Mountains I had chances to see NHANG A-4s flying below me (my altitude on cliffs, mountaintops) doing very nice aerobatics.

The single fin, undersling wings, bomb load, and nose all make it look like an A-4. An F-16 doesn't have undersling wings, for one.

The image is one I could have photographed many times, the aircraft doing maneuvers over a huge national or state park at the observer's level.

Google Image "A-4 Skyhawk" and you'll find what I'm talking about.

posted on Sep, 4 2004 @ 12:56 PM
i agree with kinglizard its either a bomb or a photoshopped missle and i think its a photoshpped missle

posted on Sep, 4 2004 @ 12:59 PM
Terribly photoshopped missile.

No plane in the world is going to drop a bomb that exceeds the plane's velocity.

And there's no anti-aircraft missile in the world that looks like a big finless silver egg being launched off the body rack.

<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in