Please look at this photo and tell me what you think

page: 9
35
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 10:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by larphillips
reply to post by free_spirit
 


That's kind of hilarious that my employee is associated with MUFON. We have something to talk about in the office together.


I don´t think you have anything to discuss with your "employee" as you claim sir.
The original photo was delivered to MUFON as i reported and that's a fact. In my
opinion you are late with this sighting and your "employee" did what was right, if
he got a posible UFO evidence he provided the report to the ones he trusted, period.




posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 10:54 AM
link   
Actually it was emailed to me by the OP and I hosted it on my site. MUFON may hold a copy too but this image did not originate there as far as I know.



posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 11:01 AM
link   
Seen this before it's a bird.



posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 11:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by minkmouse
Actually it was emailed to me by the OP and I hosted it on my site. MUFON may hold a copy too but this image did not originate there as far as I know.


Wrong, the original sent to MUFON by the photographer himself is dated October 12, 2012
and taken on July 25, 2012 at 9:15 AM, it's clear you and the OP didn't knew about this
photo at that time. These are facts and credit goes to the ones who released the evidence.



posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 11:28 AM
link   
"Unidentified" flying object: not a bird or flying superhero tho.



posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 11:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by free_spirit

Originally posted by minkmouse
Actually it was emailed to me by the OP and I hosted it on my site. MUFON may hold a copy too but this image did not originate there as far as I know.


Wrong, the original sent to MUFON by the photographer himself is dated October 12, 2012
and taken on July 25, 2012 at 9:15 AM, it's clear you and the OP didn't knew about this
photo at that time. These are facts and credit goes to the ones who released the evidence.


I'm not 100% sure I follow you. Are you saying the OP got the image from MUFON and tried to pass it off as his own or....
I'm just getting a lot of negative vibes from your posts but no real idea what you are barking about?



posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 11:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by gortex
I think its probably a bird .
sorry


It's comments and thoughts like this that get us no where. C'mon man, do some simple math: how tall is that pole-structure and how far away is that object?

To be fair, I don't have a definitive answer for you either. However, to dismiss this picture so soon after it was posted is jumping to conclusions.

I believe UFO's exist and we will see a being from another planet in our lifetime. But that's me.

Lima-1, out.



posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 11:45 AM
link   
Ok, folks - please don't flame me - this is just my own opinion and result of several hours analysis...

p.s. I'd LOVE for this to be a UFO (ours or 'theirs') - but, I'm regrettably forced to join the "Bird Group". Heres' why:

Although Hi-res is missing (therefore not much in the way of enhancement or de-pixelating analysis available), a very close look at an enlargement, plus lots of research on flight characteristics of birds, leads me to the bird hypothesis. Take a look:



I did not sharpen or otherwise change contrast at all in the above, but while manipulating the image during analysis, it looked to me that I could even make out the bird's eye. If you look closely, you might see the eye yourself.

Also, take a gander at the images below. These are just a few of those I examined when comparing sources with our image in question.



The mechanics of birds in flight is well documented, and the below image may give you a better idea of the physiological considerations that lend credence to this idea, especially the lower right series:



The non-flapping interval is quite long in many species, and many varieties streamline their bodies into a fuselage shape to reduce wind resistance. The upper right figure in the below illustration shows the top-down view of this portion of bird flight:



Incidentally, as most of you may already know, a bird in flight is a very common mistaken UFO reporting error, frequently reported (and as often debunked) on many of the common UFO reporting sites (MUFON, CUFON, etc.):





Just to reiterate: I want to believe! I DO believe! Like many of you, I am constantly searching for proof, good evidence, the real deal. This ain't it. I know the sheer numbers and global exposure of myriad bona-fide, legitimate sightings means we are definitely faced with genuine UFO enigma, likely covered up by TPTB for decades.

There are probably dozens, maybe hundred or even thousands of real, unexplainable sightings - some of which may be experimental black-ops aircraft, others may be from "out there". I accept that.

But I don't think this is one of them. I think a sincere, honest citizen, in the course of his work, taking many, many photographs, simply snapped one shot that happened to have a bird flying through at the moment the shutter was released. The bird was in mid-flight, with it's wings tucked under for streamlined travel through the air, and was captured in the frame while in a paused, mid-stroke of a very common mechanism for fast-flying birds.

By the way, the below link will take you to one of the excellent sites on-line where more of the science of bird-flight, with many photographic examples of "our" bird and great explanations on how and why this is the case:

The Science of Birds In Flight...







edit on 1/9/2013 by Outrageo because:




posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 12:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hawkmoon1972
I have looked at birds my entire life. I have looked at countless pictures of birds as well. This isn't a bird. Or if it is we need to hide our children because it is flippin' huge.


I don't know what it is but I know that it isn't a bird


So please explain to everyone HOW you worked out the size of the object



posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 12:17 PM
link   
looks like a bee/wasp/hornet some sort of flying bug, seems a bit big for a bird.



posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 12:21 PM
link   
Looks like a pigion.



posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 12:33 PM
link   
reply to post by free_spirit
 


Dude, I knew about the photo at the time it was taken. I never got around to doing anything with it... I have a life. I didn't know he submitted to MUFON, and I just thought it was kind of funny that he did. Not funny in anything other than a "ha, ha... didn't know you were a freak like me" kind of thing. Now, if you're implying anything different, then you're barking up the wrong tree here and I'm not looking for a fight.



posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 12:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by larphillips
reply to post by free_spirit
 


Dude, I knew about the photo at the time it was taken. I never got around to doing anything with it... I have a life. I didn't know he submitted to MUFON, and I just thought it was kind of funny that he did. Not funny in anything other than a "ha, ha... didn't know you were a freak like me" kind of thing. Now, if you're implying anything different, then you're barking up the wrong tree here and I'm not looking for a fight.


Do you have a pic of that pole from a distance? Do you know from what distance the pic was taken? No need to have the object in the pic. However from this info the size of the object can be extrapolated with certain estimates such as the distance of the object from the poll. This can help determine how large the object is and whether or not it can possibly be a bird. If the bird scenario is eliminated the conversation can go on further.
edit on 9-1-2013 by Bilk22 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 01:30 PM
link   
reply to post by Outrageo
 

Best Star for you Outrageo! Thank you for putting in that work for all.

Especially that gif at the end. Thats how investigation is done.

People need to see "looks like" similarities with other knowns, then they can make up their own minds. You provided that wonderfully.
edit on 9-1-2013 by intrptr because: grammar



posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 01:45 PM
link   
Those who say they can determine the size of the object or its distance from the camera are forgetting that in order to determine those things you need two lenses set some distance apart, not one camera lens.

Stereoscopic vision provides depth perception and allows humans (with two eyeballs) to determine size and range.

This is impossible from a single camera lens viewpoint.




posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 01:46 PM
link   
reply to post by gortex
 


And you would know based on your avy. LOL. Yes I agree it looks like a fast flying bird.



posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 01:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by Outrageo
Ok, folks - please don't flame me - this is just my own opinion and result of several hours analysis...

p.s. I'd LOVE for this to be a UFO (ours or 'theirs') - but, I'm regrettably forced to join the "Bird Group". Heres' why:

Although Hi-res is missing (therefore not much in the way of enhancement or de-pixelating analysis available), a very close look at an enlargement, plus lots of research on flight characteristics of birds, leads me to the bird hypothesis. Take a look:



I did not sharpen or otherwise change contrast at all in the above, but while manipulating the image during analysis, it looked to me that I could even make out the bird's eye. If you look closely, you might see the eye yourself.

Also, take a gander at the images below. These are just a few of those I examined when comparing sources with our image in question.



The mechanics of birds in flight is well documented, and the below image may give you a better idea of the physiological considerations that lend credence to this idea, especially the lower right series:



The non-flapping interval is quite long in many species, and many varieties streamline their bodies into a fuselage shape to reduce wind resistance. The upper right figure in the below illustration shows the top-down view of this portion of bird flight:



Incidentally, as most of you may already know, a bird in flight is a very common mistaken UFO reporting error, frequently reported (and as often debunked) on many of the common UFO reporting sites (MUFON, CUFON, etc.):





Just to reiterate: I want to believe! I DO believe! Like many of you, I am constantly searching for proof, good evidence, the real deal. This ain't it. I know the sheer numbers and global exposure of myriad bona-fide, legitimate sightings means we are definitely faced with genuine UFO enigma, likely covered up by TPTB for decades.

There are probably dozens, maybe hundred or even thousands of real, unexplainable sightings - some of which may be experimental black-ops aircraft, others may be from "out there". I accept that.

But I don't think this is one of them. I think a sincere, honest citizen, in the course of his work, taking many, many photographs, simply snapped one shot that happened to have a bird flying through at the moment the shutter was released. The bird was in mid-flight, with it's wings tucked under for streamlined travel through the air, and was captured in the frame while in a paused, mid-stroke of a very common mechanism for fast-flying birds.

By the way, the below link will take you to one of the excellent sites on-line where more of the science of bird-flight, with many photographic examples of "our" bird and great explanations on how and why this is the case:

The Science of Birds In Flight...

edit on 1/9/2013 by Outrageo because:



That is a truly excellent post, Outrageo.

The content and quality shows that you have thoroughly investigated and reported on the details.

I wish I were able to give more than a star.



posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 01:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by intrptr
Those who say they can determine the size of the object or its distance from the camera are forgetting that in order to determine those things you need two lenses set some distance apart, not one camera lens.

Stereoscopic vision provides depth perception and allows humans (with two eyeballs) to determine size and range.

This is impossible from a single camera lens viewpoint.



No it's not. Let's get the info first.



posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 02:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by intrptr
Those who say they can determine the size of the object or its distance from the camera are forgetting that in order to determine those things you need two lenses set some distance apart, not one camera lens.

Stereoscopic vision provides depth perception and allows humans (with two eyeballs) to determine size and range.

This is impossible from a single camera lens viewpoint.



Not always when the first post were done the height of the pole was given as 190 ft the camera is a Samsung PL210
From the exif data aperture 5.6 focal length 36mm pole height was first given as 190 ft
Go to online depth of field calculator here DOF calculator

Put the info in Samsung PL210 F5.6 36mm focal length focused on tower height given first as 190ft.

Result

Focal length (mm) 36
Selected f-stop 5.6
Subject distance 190



Subject distance 190 ft

Depth of field
Near limit 84 ft
Far limit Infinity
Total Infinite

In front of subject 106 ft
Behind subject Infinite

Hyperfocal distance 150.4 ft
Circle of confusion 0.005 mm

So if the object was closer than 84ft its out of focus further than that it will be in acceptable focus to infinity.

So if the object is less than 84 ft away it's small !!!

Now the OP got his facts wrong its now looking back 80 ft tall so re calculate for that object is now less than 52ft from the camera or more than 171 ft.

That's why we need as much data on the equipment used to take a picture.



posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 02:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by intrptr
Those who say they can determine the size of the object or its distance from the camera are forgetting that in order to determine those things you need two lenses set some distance apart, not one camera lens.

Stereoscopic vision provides depth perception and allows humans (with two eyeballs) to determine size and range.

This is impossible from a single camera lens viewpoint.



Oh and this is just one method. PS3 has the ability to do it within the program and one can also use something like Google Sketchup to do it as well.

How do I calculate the distance of an object in a photo?

So if we know the distance to the pole and the diameter of the pole, which is probably 20", then we can start to use some assumptions to get an idea of the size of the object. The object certainly looks to be beyond the pole. WE can use modest assumptions as to how far beyond the pole the object is. However if you connsider the pole is 20" in diameter, that is one large ass bird.





new topics
top topics
 
35
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join