I filmed a red UFO but it looked just like a type of star?

a reply to: Zeus050

When the video is posted rember to post info on camera type/settings approx location direction facing etc

originally posted by: Blackhawk0044
I've seen many times these UFO's try to mask themselves as stars. Occasionally they also start to move, blinking like planes get to a certain spot then stop blinking, return to a solid light and sit.

So they have mastered interstellar travel but havent figured out that shiny things outside their ship make them shine like stars...okaaaaaay

these "aliens" you are all "seeing" sure are stupid!

As you guys may see from my past videos, such as the Green UFO report 65692 archive MUFON video which was analyzed by MUFON, I have had plenty of sightings over here so it seems to be a hotspot for UFOs.
I used to film my sightings with my iphone, and then I got a camcorder since I needed to have a more powerful zoom along with better quality image.
Before coming here, I lived in LA for 3 years were I never saw anything unusual.
Relating to the video, the first few seconds were the object appears to be green is because it's out of focus.
Also, it was hard to follow the object because of its speed, but nonetheless I was able to show it on screen up-close.
My youtube channel is Ocram050.
Here's the video:
www.youtube.com...

originally posted by: Zeus050
As you guys may see from my past videos, such as the Green UFO report 65692 archive MUFON video which was analyzed by MUFON, I have had plenty of sightings over here so it seems to be a hotspot for UFOs.
I used to film my sightings with my iphone, and then I got a camcorder since I needed to have a more powerful zoom along with better quality image.
Before coming here, I lived in LA for 3 years were I never saw anything unusual.
Relating to the video, the first few seconds were the object appears to be green is because it's out of focus.
Also, it was hard to follow the object because of its speed, but nonetheless I was able to show it on screen up-close.
My youtube channel is Ocram050.
Here's the video:
www.youtube.com...

Camera model details of zoom (optical/digital) approx location and direction you are facing would be useful .

a reply to: Zeus050

The only thing that looks like it's moving is your camera!

a reply to: wmd_2008
Camera model: Panasonic HC-V550
Details of zoom: 50x optical zoom, 90x intelligent zoom, 3000x digital zoom.
The video was filmed in AVCHD 1080p.
As mentioned on the video, the object was traveling from west to east.
My balcony is facing Northeast.

Without more information (as wmd_2008 has requested) my best guess would be Venus or Jupiter, disappearing behind a cloud.

Ok - you beat me with the info... but 3000x zoom? That's why it's so badly distorted.

a reply to: MarsIsRed
Unless planets move at high speed, but that's not the case.
There were no clouds that night as seen in the video. Completely visible sky.
And let me mention, when I was filming the object I wasn't using more than the optical zoom. You know how much 50x optical zoom is?
The object was closer from my balcony than it looks, the wide angle of the camera makes it seem otherwise.
Look at the buildings for reference when I show the city a few times by zooming out, you can see how the object had clearly moved based on the different position where the object is relative to the buildings the different times I zoomed out the camcorder.

originally posted by: Zeus050
a reply to: MarsIsRed
Unless planets move at high speed, but that's not the case.

At no point in your video does the 'object' move. Your hand does though.

You know how much 50x optical zoom is?

err... yeah, it's the ratio between the shortest and longest focal lengths. Beyond that it means nothing.

There are two types of lenses - primes (with a fixed focal length) and zooms (with a variable focal length). Zoom lenses by definition are a compromise when it comes to the optical path through the lens - they use moving elements (little lenses) inside the lens to provide the zoom capability. The bigger the zoom range, the bigger the compromise. 50x zoom is a very big compromise!

a reply to: MarsIsRed
Look at the buildings for reference when I show the city a few times by zooming out, you can see how the object had clearly moved based on the different position where the object is relative to the buildings the different times I zoomed out the camcorder.
I wanted to show the object as up-close as possible which I managed to, to prove that it wasn't anything conventional.
I film stars/planets almost everyday, they never move at the speed which this object was moving though as your theory tries to explain.

Just for the sake of completeness, could you post the similar image of a star you have?

So you film things every day, but you can't keep the camera still? In the one fleeting moment you zoom out to show the building, the object is clearly not moving relative to it. It's a star or planet, you're shaking the camera around, then filming the sky again with cloud cover or at a different time when the star/planet is no longer there.

a reply to: AshOnMyTomatoes
I want to see you keep your camera still while filming a moving object at high speed at night, and being able to show it as up-close as I did.
Did you the times were I zoom out and show the buildings?
Each time I zoomed out the object was on a different position relative to the buildings.
If you can't see that you are just lying to yourself.

If you wanted to show an object moving, you should have filmed a moving object.

This really belongs in the deliberate hoax bin!

a reply to: Zeus050

Okay, it's been almost 10 years since my audio-video class in high school but here is a simple trick for better filming in the future if you plan on continuing your investigations. GET A TRIPOD. The tiniest movement in your arm or hand that is holding the camera translates to extreme shakiness and instability of the shot. That means we can't decipher any true movement of the object you are trying to film because it is distorted by your own when the camera shakes. If you can't use or get a tripod, use your opposite hand. If your right hand is holding the camera, your left needs to be cupping your elbow to use as a stabilizer. It is not perfect but it will reduce the shakiness of your shots dramatically.

Second thing you need goes back to the days of Howard Hughes film making. When filming moving objects in the sky, you need a stationary object to act as a reference. Hughes used clouds when filming planes. Without that stationary object, the film cannot translate movement very well nor speed. You almost had it in your video when I could see the building across the way in the same shot but it was never steady nor in the shot long enough therefore negating our ability to detect true movement.

If you can get these two basic filming concepts down, your future filming will be greatly improved.

a reply to: MonkeyFishFrog
I was using a tripod and always use.
Problem is that sometimes with a slight movement the tripod also makes the camera move and this more often than not happens when an object is moving since you gotta keep following the object.
More than showing that the object was moving, I wanted to show it up close to see how it looked like.
Since otherwise, people would have said that the object was too far away to be able to identify it.
The times where I zoomed out of my camcorder and show the buildings as for reference, each of those times the object appeared on a different location which I see it as proof that it was moving.
Thanks for the advice.

a reply to: Zeus050

If you used a tripod, that is one crappy piece of equipment. Your camera is all over the place and shaky. You need to keep it steady and not move it until the object leaves the frame. Follow it, centre it and leave it alone again until it leaves the frame. Any other way and you are creating false movement.

ETA: Zoom is a pretty useless feature on camcorders because the more you zoom, the more distorted the image becomes. If you only partially zoom in so we can see the object it is not as bad as a full zoom.

There was a user on here earlier this month called ocram050, the same name as the youtube user of this video.

That user was apparently post banned it seems. coincidence?

a reply to: Jonjonj
Exactly, that's myself.
The post of the Green UFO video got banned and I had no idea why.
I even think my user got banned.
Does this often happen in this place?