Photographer captures stunning images of UFOs above Hatfield

reply to post by KnownUnknown


Yeah this is hatfield in herts.

I live in welwyn, about 10 mins from hatfield.

I would say it could be possibly light aircraft as there is an aerodrome nearby where I live but they rarely do night flights.

There are a few other reports from hatfield that are actually on that newspaper's website, I'll see if I can dig them up.

Edit...

www.whtimes.co.uk...

Seems like quite alot of UFO activity around here actually, albeit over a few years.

Most of them were probably unidentified light aircraft as we have a couple of aerodromes in hertfordshire

reply to post by splittheatom


Interesting pics, with some personal relevance for me, so S+F!

I'm assuming there has been UFO activity above Hatfield because British Aerospace has it private runway there for testing new vehicles? At least it did in the early 80's when I lived 100 yards off the end of the runway!

Is the BAe site still open there? Is it publicly "closed" but still has activity?

I'm reasonably certain they're just internal reflections off the window. More images are available here:

www.flickr.com/photos/36250307@N03/6290442704/in/set-72157627875873619

But kudos to the photographer for making the originals available.



Incidently, all DSLRs can take exposures of unlimited time, you just need a cable release.

reply to post by ArMaP


The 60D should have a bulb mode which you can use for longer exposures.

Regardless, these pics and the explaination seem entirely bogus. Clarification is needed but I doubt any will be forthcoming.

I found more photo's here www.flickr.com...@N03/page2/ They do back up the 20minute exposure time.
If it was behind his window then it's just lights reflecting from a source somewhere I would guess.

I have also checked google street view to see what type of lights they have in the street. Without knowing the actual address I can't be certain these are the same but who knows.

reply to post by ArMaP

PS: I don't think the Canon 60D has such a long exposure time setting, from a quick search I think the maximum is 30 seconds. So it looks like it was 20 minute session (with just two photos) instead of a 20 minute exposure, as the article says.

I think you might be right there

reply to post by PhoenixOD


But the 60D has bulb mode so you can take longer exposures.
en.wikipedia.org...(photography)

Bulb Mode: This mode is similar to Manual exposure, in that it lets you control both shutter speed and lens aperture independently. However, instead of a fixed shutter speed, the 60D offers a Bulb shutter, allowing long exposures for as long as you hold the Shutter button down. (The top panel info display reports the elapsed time, from one to 999 seconds, as the exposure progresses.) To avoid camera shake, you can also control the exposure time using an RS-60E3 cabled remote switch, or one of three infrared remote controls -- the RC-6, RC-5, or RC-1.

www.imaging-resource.com...

What I'd like to know is how he got 20 minutes of exposure without it being completely washed out by light pollution.

reply to post by pazcat


If the maximum is 999 seconds (I don't understand if that's the maximum time or the limit on the display) it's not enough for 20 minutes, that's "only" 16 minutes and 39 seconds.

And I don't see anyone waiting 20 minutes pressing a button.

reply to post by ArMaP



Even on the most basic cable releases (like mine) you depress the button and it locks in place. You can literally leave the shutter open indefinitely, or at least until the batteries run out.

reply to post by ArMaP


Even with a tripod it would be very hard to get the picture without camera shake. He would have had to have been using a cable remote.

TBH im just not believing the story behind this image.

reply to post by BagBing


Thanks for the information, I am only used to cheap cameras.

Originally posted by ArMaP
reply to post by pazcat

 

If the maximum is 999 seconds (I don't understand if that's the maximum time or the limit on the display) it's not enough for 20 minutes, that's "only" 16 minutes and 39 seconds.

And I don't see anyone waiting 20 minutes pressing a button.

I think it's just the maximum on the display screen, I'm fairly certain you can expose for as long as the battery holds out. At least that's the case with my older 20D.
As the other poster said really.

But I think there is some deception of some sort with these photos.

reply to post by newcovenant


You copied my signature

reply to post by RelSciHistItSufi


No it was closed before I moved here. Where I think the site used to be, there are now new houses, a second campus for the university, a few offices and a David Lloyd gym. The gym is actually one of the hangars that have been renovated.

There are still signs that there was a site there, but no, there's no activity, although I know there is still aeronautical studies at the university as I'm a first year student there (Not doing aeronautical engineering though).

Anyways, judging by what others have said about the photographs they are probably reflections from the streetlights as they are mostly the old orange bulbed ones around welwyn and hatfield.

Originally posted by ArMaP
reply to post by Lowneck

 

The article isn't clear about it, that's why I said "If, as it says on the article, that's a 20 minute exposure".

The article also has this:

Photographer Jason Reeve took the dazzling pictures from outside his north-west-facing bedroom window, in Chantry Court, with a 20-minute exposure.

If, instead of a 20 minute exposure, it was a 20 minute photo session, why only one or two photos?

PS: I don't think the Canon 60D has such a long exposure time setting, from a quick search I think the maximum is 30 seconds. So it looks like it was 20 minute session (with just two photos) instead of a 20 minute exposure, as the article says.

Most digital cameras has ”bulb” function which is equivalent to”B” in analogue cameras working from 1 sec up to infinity.

The problem is “sensor overheating” after about 10 min, which automatically shut down the cameras, so I am not sure how he got it on 20 min! also with cameras nowadays with insane ISO setting of 12500 still he went for Bulb at higher than 10 min..?


I don’t buy it.. sorry.!

reply to post by splittheatom


Thanks for the update! The noise was horrendous so seems its more peaceful now...

Hello people! I took these images you are talking about! First off, I saw this UFO with my own eyes with out a camera! I used a canon 60d on bulb mode with a 20 min expo! The image that looks more like a funnel was a 1/3 sec exposure! If you look on my Flickr page ( link on previous threads) you can we the star trails and the Ufos on a long exposure. Any questions , pleas tweet me @ jasonlreeve

I'm a photographer and u can do unlimited exposures as long as your sensor doesn't over heat!

reply to post by Jasonlreeve


Correct, at most if it was cold out he could go for longer, but would still have to deal with "hot pixels" from over saturation of parts of the ccd/cmos sensor.

As for star trails if he is using a equatorial style mount for his camera with proper polar alignment and PEC( periodic error correction) then yes it is easy to get shots at low ISO/gain levels without the common star spin most people are accustomed to.

Being into astrophotograpgy for a long time these do not look like the common hot pixels some might say they are as hopefully before taking a 20min exposure he would have taken some "flat field" and "dark shots" to compensate for these well known sensor effects.

These pics are genuinely odd.

Wow! Those are way cool! They look legit to me.

Indeed they are very odd! And as I said before! I saw one UFO with the naked eye! Myth Exif Data is on my Flickr page! Search jasonlreeve Flickr