The Black Vault – UFO Detector Software release

Well, ever since I and several others "saw [8] somethings" back on May 4, 2018 I reached out to those on ATS for help and guidance as to what type of telescopes or cameras are the best for astrophotography and near earth objects such as a UFO, I filed our sighting to NUFORC and just kept plugging away to learn as much as I can about this subject. Some on ATS were helpful and led me to a website called The Black Vault.

I was again looking on the web today and this UFO Detector Software release came up via Google. I have no idea if this software will work but at least someone is trying to help the cause in this effort to discern what some of these objects are. I hope it works and hope it helps others who are seriously determined in finding the truth. I hope it helps and good luck.

www.theblackvault.com...

Background The Black Vault is excited to be a part of an open-source project that provides a UFO Detector – a software tool that will let you utilize your computer and camera to scan the skies for possible UFOs. The software is powered by UFOID.net, and the programmer has created a computer algorithm to scan a video feed from your computer’s camera. Once a light emitting object is detected, the program will analyze whether it’s a bird, a plane, a helicopter, a bug, or quite possibly… a UFO! It’s smart enough to omit video capture when it can identify the object, while capturing the true unknowns in a lossless video compression format — the best format your computer can output! That’s right, this software continuously analyses the sky for movement and will omit the obvious and explainable objects. When it sees, what it believes, can be a UFO; it will record the video in the best available quality, and save the clip for you to review later. The software is not meant to be a 100% accurate filter, however, it will save HOURS of time sifting through video, and produce a short list of results of probable UFO candidates for you to look at. The software is fully open source. This means that anyone can read the code that runs the software and help add new features and improvements.” Want to take part? Download the FREE software, and get started today! What cameras should I use? To use this software, you need a good web camera.

a reply to: Waterglass

Look at it this way? You want to verify it's an unidentified....and flying...object or ob-jects? Oh! What could it be?

There would be no way to affirm it's correct, options for sure, possibilities etc.

Like the "ghost hunting" apps and software....no....just, NO.

a reply to: mysterioustranger

Whatever. So you surrendered without trying?

There would be no way to affirm it's correct

Sooo why is it that no one ever talks about the "countermeasures" UFO's use? Never. That's why all the pictures are crappy, fuzzy, unclear and whatever.

Hey so your into explosives. look up Yehudi lights.

originally posted by: Waterglass
a reply to: mysterioustranger

Whatever. So you surrendered without trying?

There would be no way to affirm it's correct

Sooo why is it that no one ever talks about the "countermeasures" UFO's use? Never. That's why all the pictures are crappy, fuzzy, unclear and whatever.

Hey so your into explosives. look up Yehudi lights.

Give up? No...and I do believe if say 50% is identifiable...30% misidentified, 15% maybes...it's the remaining 5% that's pretty conclusively positive as being something else.

That 5% assurance is enough for me. And don't waste $$ on "ghost finding" apps either...just aquire the necessary equipment yourself...even then...it proves nothing.

Short answer - no.
Long answer - the quality of your laptops’s camera isn’t a high enough resolution for an algorithm to determine if something is a plane/bird/heli.

There’s a good chance the light emitted by one of those will show up as a single pixel.
Goodluck to whatever software is trying to identify a single white pixel...

Even if using an external hi-res camera attached to the computer, or if one is able to input a video file of some kind.
My mind is telling me that the algorithm for something of this nature would be way to complicated.

Misidentified objects would be common.
There is no ‘enhance’ in real life...

a reply to: Waterglass

You would need a real good 4k 144hz external cam, fast upload, a 24hours running computer and tons of space for this to work.

I like the idea.. but for it to produce anything you would need to invest in good gear.

Sounds like fun to me, why not have a crack youve got nothing to lose. Perhaps you could post some resulting photos if you get around to it... a reply to: Waterglass

a reply to: mysterioustranger


I am still looking at plucking $3500 for a Takahashi Telescope or other and connecting to it to the PC. If it doesn't work out I can still look at the stars.

a reply to: Spacespider

Thanks

a reply to: kingparrot

Agree and thanks

a reply to: Waterglass

I'm surprised it took this long for something like this to happen.

I use Machine Learning every day for satellite data.

I tell the program what I'm looking for in the Sat. images.
Then every day, new sat images get uploaded, and when I open the software, all the objects I want to see are highlighted.

The same process will work with cameras pointed up.

You identify planes and other known phenomena in a few control samples, the AI learns the characteristics and soon will be identifying them on its own.

a reply to: GreenGunther

It's not as bad as you think.
There are ways to identify a single white pixel via an algorithm in that setup. If it performs manuevers that match other white pixels that were already identified as planes/helicopters/birds etc...

The motion is tracked, not just a flat image. That motion is probably the most important part of the algorithm. While I must admit you do raise an interesting point about the possible accuracy and precision of such an algorithm. It is bound to be littered with false positives from lens flares... Unless those are fed in as confirmed negatives, and it learns from those patterns as well.

These types of projects only become effective with mass distribution and a large user base, so if it doesn't get used by a few thousand, the sample size will probably be a bit smaller than necessary. I can imagine lots of false positives if this is scarcely used. On the other hand, I don't think any other approaches to "finding UFO's" are very fruitful. So... Why the hell not, if you've got the equipment?

a reply to: Macenroe82

I have been watching a five color flashing object for two weeks. A star? Well I also have Stellarium and I can't find it on their site. Its between Jupiter and a double star over the Western sky. I forgot that stars name but I will look again tomorrow. So this guy isn't the brightest star at night but at sunrise its the only "star" visible In the Western sky with binoculars in alignment with Atlanta from Columbia, SC. Hmm. I don't think its a star as its too close to earth. Geo positional satellite? Possibly. But I have seen these suckers move at the speed of light like a cursor and zig zag along with several others. Nah.

a reply to: Archivalist

From what I read about the software it does not analyse the path taken by the objects, only the shape and relative colour (it looks for objects brighter than the background, assuming UFOs have lights).

But it's a start.

a reply to: Waterglass

Quite possible that it’s a satellite in geosynchronous orbit.

Take a couple pics of it and post em here.

a reply to: [post=24340306]Macenroe82[/pos


Could be but........... May 2019; our one year anniversary date is approaching is May 4, 2019 from 8:45PM to 10:00PM. That's when "we saw something" in 2018. Yes, all [8] somethings. Drones? nah, Stars, nah, other stuff maybe. Several [3] appeared from just over the South West horizon in alignment with New Orleans from Columbia, South Carolina. They then went West and then disappeared over the West horizon at 10:00PM . You got that? Three objects came up from the South West horizon. The earth rotates counterclockwise and that's why I think what we saw was weird. Yes I hope they return and yes I will post pics and video this time. No more NUFORC reports.

a reply to: Waterglass

Forget what I said about it possibly being a geosynchronous satellite.
They orbit at 35,786 kilometers above the earth and do not have any large enough reflective parts for us to see with the
naked eye.

a reply to: Waterglass

I don't think one needs such devices or software. You will be precognitively notified of the event and snap a picture while you're on it..

a reply to: 0bserver1

With my eyes I can differentiate in seconds between aircraft, meteor [shooting star], planet, star, satellite. Then there are these flashing objects that have a flash like a strobe light that is way quicker than aircraft strobes. Some have multiple colors and others are orange. Also we have seen them at 85, 75, 60, 45 and 30 degrees up in space. I also have seen the flashing stars as identified via Stellarium. Seems to me based on my eyes the colors of an actual flashing star are much dimmer and dull in color as compared to these other objects. I have not seen any since the end of February.

A system capable of doing this would require large-scale multiband search and track sensors integrated with a vast series of tracking algorithms that could eliminate things within any known bounds of terrestrial phenomena. In other words, a very very expensive setup including RF, IR etc. to both track and verify correlation between observations to prove it is the same object.

Algorithms that could detect impossible maneuvers are not difficult, but determining 3-D location and a variety of other measurements (cross-secion, IR signal, etc.) necessary to stuff into those algorithms is costly and will not happen with handheld or even quite substantial hardware.

To put it bluntly, even the best single point camera couldn't differentiate insect maneuvering from a UFO with any reliability.

I am not sure what SETI does, but if there were a vast array of open source feeds from various sensors (never going to happen), you could then probably code up some decent filters and maybe develop some "UFO detection software". It would take a lot of database training and verification to make any convincing discoveries.

As a fun experiment though, a single person could probably set up a vis/IR-only array made up of some expensive cameras on fully gimbaled control platforms spread over a large piece of property and code up decent software to cover a small piece of the sky. At that point though, you should consider your priorities in life. If you have a family or spouse, I would consider other hobbies.