ALASKA 1960 - DD (Daylight Disc) near a lake in alaska , Photograph by Richard Beaulieu

Anyone familiar with this photograph ? supposedly taken in Alaska 1960 by mr Richard Beaulieu , about a landed UFO in day light situation (silver/metallic disc) , situated near a lake.

Anyone got more info on this photo and the narrative that came with it ?



files.abovetopsecret.com...

fotocat.blogspot.com...

a reply to: milomilo

Come on man help us out, run the text through a translate program

a reply to: milomilo

looks like there's trees coming through the disk, and it's upside down like a upright bowl. Odd photo, even odder story.

originally posted by: canucks555
a reply to: milomilo

looks like there's trees coming through the disk, and it's upside down like a upright bowl. Odd photo, even odder story.

Yes, the trees show through. Looks like somebody spilt something on the negative to me, rather than it being a real object. In fact I'm pretty certain that's what it is. Anybody who has done darkroom developing will recognise the splash mark.



ETA rough translation:

"UFO hovering over the edge of a small lake near Anchorage, in Alaska. Photographed by Richard Beaulieu, who was alerted by the barking of his pack of 18 huskies. At the same time you can see the white vapours of mist above the lake. Photo was taken in the mid 1960s"

Looks like a painting or a drawing...

How did it ever take off again with all those trees sticking through it?

originally posted by: Rob48

originally posted by: canucks555
a reply to: milomilo

looks like there's trees coming through the disk, and it's upside down like a upright bowl. Odd photo, even odder story.

Yes, the trees show through. Looks like somebody spilt something on the negative to me, rather than it being a real object. In fact I'm pretty certain that's what it is. Anybody who has done darkroom developing will recognise the splash mark.



ETA rough translation:

"UFO hovering over the edge of a small lake near Anchorage, in Alaska. Photographed by Richard Beaulieu, who was alerted by the barking of his pack of 18 huskies. At the same time you can see the white vapours of mist above the lake. Photo was taken in the mid 1960s"

assuming this richard beaulieu lied or misquoted , then i have to agree your explanation about something on the negative processing seem most plausible one..

for one, the UFO shape is hardly symetrical and seem out of place.. almost like the UFO is not physical but a transparent floating thing that used to be called 'ghost'

What is that picture?

Having lived in close proximity to Alaskan lakes most my life I can honestly say that image bares no resemblance to any physical environment I have ever encountered.

How will this photo survive within the severe scrutiny of ATS? Only time will tell.

Eta: I can see it is AK but where was this photo supposedly taken from?

There's some discussion of this image on this page: fotocat.blogspot.co.uk... (about a quarter of the way down the long page - do a CTRL-F search for "Beaulieu").

Max B. Miller was a young editor of a UFO journal quite properly named Saucers (1953-1960). In 1957 he published the paperback Flying Saucers: Fact or Fiction? (Trend, Los Angeles) and by 1967 he edited the illustrated, folio-sized book Flying Saucers Pictorial (Arizil Realty & Publishing, Tucson), where this image saw the light for the first time. Somehow, an associate to this last publication was August Roberts, a UFO fanatic who produced and helped to produce several photographic UFO hoaxes and fakes. My impression is that he is the clue behind this photograph,

Considering the zero credibility of Roberts and the notorious fact that no one else knows it as an actual UFO event, I believe I am not misguided in thinking that the image is either a fabrication or a mundane object that has been attempted to be passed off as a UFO.

I disagree with the explanation of it as a photo of a small dish, given that the background appears to be visible through it. The alternative explanation that it was an aerial photo of a forest fire that was later found to have an anomaly" makes more sense. That site suggests the anomaly could have been a reflection, but it still looks to me more like a developer/fixer splash, or perhaps a lens flare. It certainly doesn't look like a physical object.

Better quality version of the photo:

Here's the original in original colour



fotocat.blogspot.com...

During a few decades of UFO research, I accumulated hundreds of stills and slides pertaining to possible UFOs in foreign countries. Up until the start of the FOTOCAT project in year 2000, I devoted little attention to UFO photographs. It explains why I did not properly record the origin of some slides in my large collection. One of these transparencies of unknown provenance was marked October 15, 1954, Anchorage, Alaska and it depicted the same scenery, with three differences: the general tone was a brownish color (instead of greenish), the shown landscape was larger , and the image was turned 180 degrees (UFO was in the right side of the slide.)

in 2008, Nick Balaskas, from the Physics and Astronomy department of York University (Canada), commented the following on this photo:
Having taken many quick snapshots of the terrain through the closed windows of cars and airplanes, I think the suspected forest fire and flying saucer is simply a reflection of objects from inside. The fact that the flying saucer is transparent is in support of this view. As for the four very distinct dots on the flying saucer, they are much better resolved than the branches of the trees and all other objects in the picture.

Since there is uncertainty of the orientation of this picture slide, and there are other similar such very distinct dots on the image, I suspect that they are simply dust/dirt particles–something very common, even on properly stored and little used picture slides. Balaskas continued his disquisition with a clever point: Although I do not suspect that this picture was an intentional hoax…the fact that there are no comments at all about this alleged very close-up image of a flying saucer by the photographer or actual witnesses leads me to suspect that it was not even considered as depicting a UFO or some other unknown real object at the time the picture was taken until afterwards by others who later viewed this unusual picture (UFO Updates, September 3, 2008.)

Sorry, it looks more like a drawing than a photo. That's why the artist's rendering drew trees coming out of the disc.

It sure is at an odd angle. Like he was shooting down from the side of a mountain into a valley, perhaps? Or out of an airplane through the window, which could account for all the odd reflections. Here's a version where the blue color of the "disc" is replaced with red, to get a better look at it and other color splotches in the photo the same color:

originally posted by: Rob48

So that's were my contact lens landed

originally posted by: GoShredAK
What is that picture?

Having lived in close proximity to Alaskan lakes most my life I can honestly say that image bares no resemblance to any physical environment I have ever encountered.

How will this photo survive within the severe scrutiny of ATS? Only time will tell.

Eta: I can see it is AK but where was this photo supposedly taken from?

100% agree with you Shred, I don buy it at all. And the only mushers was the Iditarod. The first week of March is the he start. In the winter of the 60s mushing in anchorage was damn near non existent except for the fur rendezvous city event

1925 was the start of dog mushing with the serum to nome from anch, the iditirod didn't begin till the 70's. The story to this pic doesn't fit with Alaskan history, I smell BS

It's something splashed on the negative. As another poster said, anyone who has spent any amount of time in a darkroom will recognize it.

From one of the above links...

A second assessment came from Chilean chemist and photographic expert Andrés Duarte, who provided this report: Just by watching at the picture, it is evident it is a dish. The image shows stems and leaves of small plants, located a few centimeters from the edge of a swamp or pond. The object is not transparent, it just has a metallic shine, and the apparent transparency effects are reflections and shadows of the plants on the shiny surface of the object. The object (UFO) seems to be a dish like the one I have added in the enclosed picture, where the two Anchorage images are compared with a plate.
Odds are that the picture shows a plain plate resting on the ground. As a conclusion, the date, location, witnesses, story, etc. are unconvincing and unproved and a fake, under the baton of “Augie” Roberts, is more than probable. (Thanks to Nick Balaskas, John English and Andrés Duarte.)

I can see where it is possible to be a dish. The plants are not large trees. With nothing to give perspective, it is easy to think it is large even if it is not.

originally posted by: AdmireTheDistance
It's something splashed on the negative. As another poster said, anyone who has spent any amount of time in a darkroom will recognize it.

I spent many years working with film development.

The article mentioned it might be a color slide which means that spot is nearly transparent.

My thought on the spot as a splash or air bubble is that the quarter missing from the object is a bit odd. Usually those effects show as an complete oval or round shape. If it is slide film then there was only negative processing, no print involved.

There is also the chance of machine induced damage as it passed through the processing equipment.

Of course there is the possibility of damaging the slide later, accidently or purposely.

a reply to: AdmireTheDistance

The more I look at it enlarged I tend to also go with the development processing error. It just didn't destroy all the emulsion under the spot.

a reply to: milomilo

Looks like a light reflected off the cockpit window. That's a terrible picture.