Debunkers wanted---Something next to the Sun

a reply to: snalesnot

why are you asking for " debunkers " ? this trend disturbs me

I don't mean to impune you motives but we have a lot of this behavious - which leads to " if it hasn't been debunked then it must be < insert woo woo > "

but I digress

as for " what is it " ? the question you should have asked

insufficient information -

Well taking the info you gave us about your location, time of day and date, looking at Stellarium shows this:



Screen shot from your video:



Jupiter's magnitude at that time was -1.34 which is pretty good, but the sun's glare would be much brighter, and due to the closeness of the sun in that position in the sky would have made it impossible to see with just your eyes.

However, you were using a Sony CX550 Handycam, which is a HD digital video cam (I own the less powerful Sony SX85), with a Infrared filter, with nightvison mode, zoomed in. So it might be possible that you were able to capture Jupiter with your camera.

There is a way to sort of verify this. If you can, weather permitting and time, go out again today at about the same time, and take another video with the same set up. Today both Jupiter and Mercury will be close by. See if you get the same thing or both of them:

I think the Jupiter explanation makes sense and then that is maybe what I have occasionally on some of my sun photos too. Always wondered what the tiny light beside the sun was, and Jupiter makes sense. Guess it bleeds through daylight sometimes.

A planet perhaps, Mercury? Venus? possibly not mercury thinking about it, that poor little hot enough to melt lead planet is closer to the sun than that?

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: snalesnot

It's a refraction & reflection within the lens system.

Notice how it moves around slightly, inversely to the movement of the larger lens flares. This is because it is coming from the other side of the lens (and is smaller due to being at a different focal length).

Had a look on Stellarium no really bright object at that position for that time date location, you can just make out the primary lens flares at an angle on the left of the video so it is most likely a secondary flare/reflection.

Just saw eriks post above but Jupiter was not at the location of the object in your video.

I am extremely sceptical of the Jupiter explaination , heres why

while Jupiter CAN be seen during daylight under optimal conditions - it is not while its only a few degrees drom the sun - the " best " daytime sightings of Jupiter are just after dawn looking west

further - according to the OPs follow up he is using a " night vision " camera - this is infact a CCD device with an IR filter - typically 720nm , translation - a 720nm " IR filter " only allows wavelegths above 720nm to pass through it - the exact performance is variable - difernent claimed specs and filter quality

but to detect Jupiter with such a device would require one of 2 possibilities :

a - direct detection of IR wavelegths from Jupiter [ the planet is a net IR emitter ]

b - detection of solar energy reflected from Jupiter

c - a combo of a + b

now the problem is actually detecting jupiters IR emission // reflection through the atmosphere

at the rick of stating the obvious - the atmospete is hot [ relative to Jupiter ]

thus - its my opinion that a clear blue sky would " mask " any IR return from Jupiter - infact at only a few degrees from the sun - all emissions from Jupiter would be lost in the background

a reply to: eriktheawful
i was thinking same thing try recreate it. its very overcast today but ill try. if not tomorrow

a reply to: snalesnot

Honestly can't see how you don't see the movement of the object when the camera moves.

It's lens flare. Simple explanation. I would love for it to be a UFO or Nibiru but no. It clearly moves when the camera moves = lens flare.

Sorry man.

Are we sure it's not lens flare?

a reply to: Springheel Jack
watch at 7 seconds you'll see flare swing up n down that dot never moves once n im swinging camera every direction trying to stand it up. if its flare it be moving crazy too. you think its jumping just cause two balls of flare are getting near it in the shot. it doesnt move im prove it too. i got a flare recorded when i was testing other film that was a flare

today was overcast but i still filmed ill keep trying

originally posted by: snalesnot
a reply to: eriktheawful
i was thinking same thing try recreate it. its very overcast today but ill try. if not tomorrow

Never hurts to try and duplicate something like this. Doing so can actually help get answers many times.

The sky at the same time tomorrow will have 3 planets in it: Jupiter, Mercury and Venus:



If you are able to do it, try to orientate your camera like I have in this picture, which is East is at the bottom of the picture, North is to the right, South to the left and West is at the top.

Maybe it is a lens flare, maybe it is a flare caused by your filter, maybe it is planets, or maybe it's a giant mothership watching Earth.....we don't know right now, and that can be the fun part, trying to figure it out.

I said early in the thread that I believe this is Nibiru & refuse to accept any other explanation.

The Jupiter theory just makes me wonder how close this object is.

a reply to: Springheel Jack
ok i made this lens flare awhile ago same cam just no nightvision or ir lens everything moves nothing stays in one spot


this has many orbs ufo looking balls in it all lens flares but they all move when i move cam none ever stay in one spot like sun video.

a reply to: eriktheawful
i forgot to say im using polaroid multi layer uv filter with zykkor ir950 black filter lens on top. i get how people can say lens flare right away but thing is with any camera movement it would have moved as well never just stay one spot. is it ok to use uv and ir on top im not very camera techy? does it mess up things or no

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: snalesnot

It's a refraction & reflection within the lens system.

Notice how it moves around slightly, inversely to the movement of the larger lens flares. This is because it is coming from the other side of the lens (and is smaller due to being at a different focal length).

As a fellow photog, I have to agree.

a reply to: eriktheawful
video today same spot but overcast just wanted show i tried, i have watch more still that i shot today but here lil vid

a reply to: lovebeck
ufo's do move in sky right? they dont stop for photographers to get a perfect photo do they? both those large flare swing up n down away from ball that ball would of been all over the place as well. maybe those flares are just reflecting off an object ever think of that one?

a reply to: snalesnot

I'm afraid there's too many clouds. Try again tomorrow if the weather is clearer. You can take them earlier or later (by a couple of hours) if need be with clearer weather.

It would also be best if you could stabilize the camera on a tripod or a stable surface if possible.

What we are trying to do is recreate what you shot the first time. If the dot shows up again, is not moving with the camera, but has moved the same amount of distance as Jupiter has moved since the 14th of July, they would cinch it.

Or......if it hasn't but is still there and in a completely new place.....it will beg more questions, hehehe.

But again, try to orientate the camera so that East is in the bottom of your frame.

originally posted by: snalesnot
a reply to: lovebeck
ufo's do move in sky right? they dont stop for photographers to get a perfect photo do they? both those large flare swing up n down away from ball that ball would of been all over the place as well. maybe those flares are just reflecting off an object ever think that one?

No. Because I understand how cameras, both digital and film, operate. I also understand how a camera lens operates and understand how the light going into said lens effects everything (the camera, the image, the video, etc).

It's too complicated to explain, and I am way too tired to try and do it. But, since I am not a total brat, I will provide you with a link. LINK

Also, it isn't very smart to point a camera, regardless of what type of filter you have on it, directly AT the Sun.
Here's another link about that. It also, sort of, explains how shooting into the Sun turns a camera into a sort of magnifying glass. Ever kill ants or catch wood on fire with that LITTLE beam of light? LINK 2

Lastly, here are some tips from MCP that teach budding photogs HOW to shoot into the sun, to get that super trendy lens flare effect that's ALL the rage. Pay attention to the last image...see all those little points of light IN THE FLARE?
MCP Actions: Five Killer Tips For Shooting Into The Sun...

There ya go! I have provided MORE than enough in those three links to debunk your video. That is what you were asking for, right?

What was this thread title again?

a reply to: lovebeck
show me a video that one lens flare ball stays in place while everything else moves when a camera is moved up down side to side