If someone has a great UFO photo, why should or should not this pic be shared?

reply to post by jerryznv


Could not be a stars in daytime - the only planet you might see in daytime is Venus in the early morning

reply to post by MoEskiMo

Why come here to debunk me. I think they said to stop doing that here in this forumn

Just saw that bit....where and when did amin/mods/owners say accept everything as truth, and not to try to identify things???

Originally posted by artistpoet
reply to post by jerryznv

 

Could not be a stars in daytime - the only planet you might see in daytime is Venus in the early morning

Okay...if you say so!

I guess it couldn't be stars of planets then!

How about satellites or the space station?

reply to post by MoEskiMo


MoEskiMo,
One of the purposes of this forum is to discuss topics based on our opinions and experiences.

Not everyone will agree with what you feel or believe to be true. That is that nature of discussion.
Disagreements over all sorts of things happen every day in real life.
In an aliens and UFOs forum, a topic of controversy, nothing less than a wide range of opinions should be expected.

If you are looking for validation, or coddling for something you already think and believe to be true, then a forum where we debate these things isn't the best place for such.

If, however, you want us to look at the photo, analyze it, and give you our opinions based on what we see from experience, then, you're in the right place, but, criticism is not always swaddled in big kitten soft gloves to shield you against getting your feelings hurt.
Typically, criticism can hurt ones feelings, but, some of that is on the person receiving the criticism, while a bit is also on the person giving such.
If you're so thin skinned as to be incapable of being open to any real criticism, then, I'm not really sure what to say.

From what I see on first glance, there's nothing conclusive or ground breaking with your photo. There are two interesting but ambiguous white dots off to the right of the frame, but, those could be anything from burned pixels on the image sensor, to birds blurred into circular dots by distance and atmospheric lensing as well as the restrictions of image density native to the resolution of the camera.

That's what I see initially, and I don't say any of that to attack you, or try hurting your feelings.
Please keep in mind that over 95% of all reported UFO cases are instances of misidentification.

You say you did not notice these spots while taking the photo, but only after reviewing the photo, so, with zero confirmation with real live eyeballs, these spots could very well be artifacts caused by a glitch in the camera.

Once again, this is not said to attack you or hurt your feelings. This is a process of rational inquiry where the most probable explanations are looked at first because they are of the highest probability for being true.

I will now examine the photo in more detail, and come back to edit this post, or add another post as follow up with my opinions based from my experience as a photographer.

reply to post by nineix


I appreciate your phrasing of words. I would gladly email you this photo. It is not quite as clear on this imageshack. I have hunted for the other smaler objects on it as well and I too cannot find them on the imageshack phto. The other objects are not as clear. I understand your doubt. Sure it is balloons, whatever. But, I will email you this photo to better analyze.

Originally posted by greeneyedleo

Originally posted by uglymod
reply to post by MoEskiMo

 

Photoshop-->Watermark

Whenever we reveal our beliefs that differ from others they will be there to judge. This is human nature, there is no way to avoid other than not sharing that kind of information.

edit on 22-3-2012 by uglymod because:

NO. do NOT do this.
once you open a photo in photoshop or any editing software you have eliminated the legitimacy of it.

ALWAYS share only the image straight from the camera.

OK, I have one for you, I even did a thread on it. I got 4 replies.
www.abovetopsecret.com...
The problem it that it's a 2+ MB file and I can't upload it w/o modifying it.
I know it's still on my card.
Any suggestions?
From what I can see, it is either disk or cigar shaped, with a slight light blue and purple bottom, and has what appears to be an off centered mast.

reply to post by Violater1


Upload it to Tinypic, ive uploaded images bigger than 2mb on there

Ive just looked at the thread....the link sends me to ATS video???

ETA: Its probably because i have still not worked out how to get into that part of ATS lol...hence...no avatar

Originally posted by loves a conspiricy
reply to post by Violater1

 

Upload it to Tinypic, ive uploaded images bigger than 2mb on there

Ive just looked at the thread....the link sends me to ATS video???

ETA: Its probably because i have still not worked out how to get into that part of ATS lol...hence...no avatar

edit on 22-3-2012 by loves a conspiricy because: (no reason given)

No it's not you. It's some ATS glitch.
I'm very careful of where I go and log into.
The upload restriction here is 500 kB

Looks like you caught a couple of orbs. Good work. Thank you for doing the right thing and posting. See, don't you feel better?
I looked at it really close. I couldn't tell, to be honest. It could be a number of things, but If you ask me, I say orbs. They like to travel in pairs. I've witnessed orbs on a couple of occasions. Always in pairs, if not at first, by the end of the sight.
Star for you. Keep up the good work.
TXML

Public domain licenses are the best form of copyright for photograph's of UFO etc.
creativecommons.org...

The reason i say that, what does it say about the intentions of a photographer if he captures some form of evidence of otherworldly activity.. only to copyright a photo with the idea of generating revenue from it. It really raises the question about the "author's" intentions.

Something that would be fit for use, allowing it to be published by non-profit entities, aired on the news, but not allowing people to capitalise and make money off of your photo... while still owing credit to the photographer:
creativecommons.org...

In short, anyone can use it for non-profit purposes as long as they don't sell it as a product.

Originally posted by MoEskiMo Gee, the whole thread started with how to protect my photo.

Why didn't you use the (© MoEskiMo) like I said?

reply to post by lost_shaman


I tried to say protected by MoEskiMo and I did not get pic to work. So I reposted and it worked, then, maybe I should have stopped while I was ahead. Thanks for your info.
I sent the pic to another member to better examine, since imageshack was not showing the pic in a good format.
They got and they are looking at it. I guess I should have stuck with my intuition of not posting. I really just wanted info, as my opening thread states. But, I gave in and posted, with great regrets. I should have kept the pic for me only.

reply to post by MoEskiMo


Okay, below is a zoomed and compressed thumb of the most clear 'dot' on the image.
The one pictured is the one closest to the center of the frame:

clicky for bigger


For comparison in image resolution between the two, here's also a compressed image of the plane:

clicky for bigger


Keep in mind that both images are slightly false since I took crops of the original 92dpi image resolution frame, and boosted those crops up to 9999.99 dpi on a rough 1inch x 1 inch square.

I say slightly false because by taking 92dpi and increasing that up to 10kdpi, you're just breaking up the bigger pixels into smaller pixels for a smoother look where the software behind the scenes does some calculations based on what it 'sees' on the image.

Looking first at the jet plane that we know to be a jet place, you can clearly see how unclear it is even at this image density. We've got what's called lens-blur creaded by the quality of the camera, optics, processing, shutter shape, focal length, ISO setting and other such fun technical photo-babble.

The fuselage, for instance, appears to be split at the front, or stacked as a double fuselage.
We can't tell if this is a passenger airliner, freight, or really even the make/model of the jet, how many engine pods it has or anything, though through some squinting, you might could guess there's 2 large engine pods, but, that would be a guess, and we've no way to verify that either.

Now as to the other thing, the one 'dot' that was most clear, just as with the jet, we get quite a bit of ambiguity. The shape of the dot is somewhat circular, but, in accounting for lens blurring as seen with the jet, we must infer that there's some doubling effect here as well.

What is it? I don't know. I can't say.
We don't have a definite shape due to all those factors I mentioned earlier. Nor do we have a size, even relative to the jet which we could guess at just from looking at any jet on the planet, because this dot might be 50 feet way, or 50,000 feet away.
It's not anything we can tell for certain.

Thus, in the nature of things Unidentified, this is as of yet Unidentified.
Alien flying saucers? Eh, I'd not just to that conclusion yet.

There's still a number of other things that can checked.
This photo, according to the EXIF data was takenon 9.05.2009 at 5:08:54 AM
Is this time correct? I'd think it would be darker outside if this was taken at 5am in the morning.
If incorrect due to not adjusting the time/date on the camera, then, please let us know when this photo was captured.
Where on the planet were you located when you took this photo?
Further, were you aiming straight up, or in what direction? North, South, East, West, North East, South West, etc.

Such information can give us data enough to look at what planets and stars were doing what and where they were positioned in the sky at that time.
We could then rule out or maybe even confirm whether or not these might be planets, or stars since such can indeed be seen in the daytime sometimes.

reply to post by nineix


Did you find the other 3 in the other image?? Or was it still just the 2 visible??

The one to the right of the one you have played around with looks like a reflection of the first.

reply to post by nineix


I was in Alaska, the time is more about 11:45 am, and yes in June the sun is up pretty much 20 hours right about then. There were other dots, two were together in a different area. Did you see this, these are even further away. The two most clear are far but not high. It is an area where you could see for miles. I would have to say I was pointing West.

reply to post by loves a conspiricy


That's a good observation which brings up another question. Was this photo directly outside, or was there a window or any glass between the camera and the subject(s) framed in the image?

When zoomed in on the image I have indeed looked around other areas of the frame and found several darker spots that look more to be processing artifacts than anything else.

The lighter dots, other than the one I've posted, there appears to be two more both of decreasing definition.
As said with the first of most clarity, there's even less to be said about these.

Had we a place, direction and height in sky, plus accurate exact time and date, we could check if these were stars or planets as part of the logical path of investigation, even if they are not, but, it's not proper to say they are or are not anything until checking and ruling out/confirming for sure.

I was standing outside waiting on a taxi. I guess it kinda looks like a relection, but to me it has a shape. and right above that to the left a bit you can almost see another shape appearing.

reply to post by MoEskiMo


Was that June of this year, last year, or 2009 as displayed in the EXIF data?
Also, what day in June?

You'd be surprised at how much the sky moves around. There's a big difference of position of stars and planets between, say, Jun 1 and June 20, so, an exact day and year would much.

when you say West, about how high in the sky from straight up were you pointing? One quarter above horizon, half, 3 quarters?

Such measurements help a great deal.

reply to post by nineix


thank you for taking the photo and investigating it.
I would have to say, that from living there for several years, there were not any planets hanging at this time. There is actually a fifth dot, more alone, more to the right, harder to find in all the blue. It too is further out than it is high. I know it is hard to decipher anything, and I sincerely appreciate your true effort.

reply to post by nineix


no, it was 2009, about 1/2 over the horizon, approximation would be June 28, 2009, after the summer soltice for sure, and that day I was going to start cooking/working at the resort about 12:30, so it was approximate 11:45 am