Originally posted by PhoenixOD
Any artist will tell you that objects get lighter as they get further away from the viewer. Dark colors and more importantly shadows get more washed out and lose their intensity. So objects of similar distances from the viewer will have shadows of similar intensity or darkness.

With this in mind i zoomed in on the object and picked what i decided was one of the darkest pixels.

I then did a search in the entire picture for pixels of the same darkness or intensity of shadows. If this object was far away then you should find pixels of a similar darkness on the ground in the distance. But I only found the same pixel shade in the branches of the trees in the foreground.

Ive colored these pixels in red to make them easier to see :

There was not a single pixel of the same intensity of shadow found anywhere other than in the branches of the trees which are just a few feet away. So i would have to conclude that the object in the sky is not any further away than those branches. This would be a simple perceptive trick that we have seen a lot from that era where someone throws an object just above the tree line and then claims its further away from the camera than it actually is.

This sort of analysis is much easier to do with black and white pictures than it is with color ones.

edit on 17-3-2013 by PhoenixOD because: (no reason given)

A couple problems with this analysis:

First, your sample size is basically non-existent. Comparing the pixels on the object to "everything else in the photograph" - what else? The only other object in the photograph was the tree. So, of course, if you're looking for comparisons, you're probably gonna find them in the tree!

Second, intensity of shadow is just as related to the angular size of an object as it is to the literal distance of that object to the camera. So an object that is 1 cubic foot at a distance of 20 feet, will have a comparable shadow profile to an object that is 10 cubic feet at a distance of 200 feet. Shadow alone is not an indicator of distance.

ETA - Does it *really* matter though? Every competent researcher in UFOlogy knows that the phenomenon is real. That part of the controversy ended decades ago. Nowadays the questions are more like "what exactly is going on?" and, "who exactly is piloting these crafts, assuming they are crafts and assuming they are piloted?" And examining these old photographs doesn't seem very likely to bring us any closer to an answer to those questions.

No I think there are many real photos of unidentified flying objects. This is definately one. There is no evidence to indicate its from an intelligent being from some other planet or dimension. It looks like a pie pan.

This is old now. Can it be removed from homepage. It's another he said she said she a ufo way back when where no one else could see it