UFO’s over West Bloomfield, Michigan. Oct 1, 2023

originally posted by: ArMaP

originally posted by: DaydreamerX
I would be one of those among a very few skeptics.
Are there a video of this sighting or just stills?
I saw stills in OP. Why no video? Taking snap shots would take much longer than slide a finger to video mode and start recording.

If that had happened to me and if I had to chose I would choose photos over video, as photos have a better image quality, with more detail.
.

Photos over video? Were you kidding?

a reply to: FullHeathen

I think to attempt that, the starting point is the raw video as it was recorded. YouTube is notorious for compressing video, ie: dropping frames, already making any analysis more difficult from the get go.

@JJ, perhaps you can upload the original video with all the WTFs on some cloud storage anyone here can access (www.multcloud.com...) or privately on request of any member who is practiced in that kind of forensic work.

a reply to: Encia22

The funny thing is I only use my phone. Never been on ATS on my laptop lol😂

a reply to: Encia22

I sent the original to your discord. Plug your ears! Ok it’s posted in my YouTube channel. Go above to the video watch it click on my name and it’s the first video. It has the original sound.

I have the link but I don’t think I it can be posted here. Can we post a link to a video that is not embedded?

a reply to: JJproductions

Thanks JJ! Sorry, I've been AWOL since yesterday. I'll check out the Discord video a little later.

I'm not really an expert in video analysis, but I'll analysis it on Monday when I have access to my work PC; I'm stuck with my phone until then.

I believe it's ok to link to a video without it embedding here. The important thing for any forensic experts will be to access the original file from the phone, without it going through compression algorithms social media platforms adopt.

a reply to: Encia22

Ok great and thank you kindly! Here is the original video with sound. Please no one post this as a video here because bad words came out of my mouth.

Just to add there were 4. It was hard to tell while filming. Compared to airplanes moving at 600 mph plus whatever I saw was moving at a much greater speed. Even though they look slow the moved from East to West pretty quick and were out of the horizon

youtube.com...

a reply to: JJproductions

Wow great video , my verbal amazement would probably be te same lol

a reply to: 0bserver1

lol!!! I normally do not talk like that. Lucky for me I that it was filmed. I was in awe. After reading UFO threads here and your amazing threads I picked up my phone!

a reply to: DaydreamerX

No. As I said, image quality is worse than photo quality and, in many cases, resolutions are lower, which makes videos have even less quality.

Yes, videos are good to get an idea of movement, but if we want to try to identify something we need the best image quality possible.

a reply to: JJproductions

Ok, I've only been able to watch the video on my phone and zoom in slighty.

My first impression is that all four objecta appeared to have the same tilted orientation. I would estimate 45 degrees from the horizontal, belly-forward in the direction of travel.

I'll run it through Photoshop next week and see if my suspicion is correct.

BTW, JJ, the narration is perfect, swearing and all, LOL.

a reply to: Encia22

Lolololol you are funny! Thank you for going thru this on photoshop! It will be amazing what you find.

a reply to: ArMaP

Exactly. My video had poor quality but you can see the movement against the trees!

a reply to: JJproductions
You know that this experience will let you watch the skies more often now dont you?

You're are now officially hooked to the phenomena

a reply to: 0bserver1

I know right? You have me addicted to the sky. I have a really nice Cannon I might load it with film.
Thank you!

originally posted by: ArMaP
a reply to: DaydreamerX

No. As I said, image quality is worse than photo quality and, in many cases, resolutions are lower, which makes videos have even less quality.

Yes, videos are good to get an idea of movement, but if we want to try to identify something we need the best image quality possible.

I do not agree. UFOs events are usually brief, distance away, self-illuminating. Stills from video should be good enough. It's like taking a picture of a light bulb - how much detail you would see? Unless aliens are posing for your photo session from close distance.

I inclined to believe this video is fake. First reason.. Few month ago I already have mentioned that the problem with most videos is when we do not see UFO depart out of sight. I mean when the UFO gets behind some visual obstacle like the tree branches, walls, roof tops, etc. These are most difficult to fake form video fakery point of view....Say, it is difficult to make realistically UFO picking though tree branches. At least for me it's a red flag. Now look at OP's video...before UFO gets behind the trees, camera moves away to the right. Why? For that very reason I just mentioned.

My piece of advice, if you happen to see a UFO in the sky, take a video and hold the camera as steady as you can. Otherwise, you are risking getting useless light dots missing the sighting as the whole.

a reply to: DaydreamerX

Ok so you are saying my video is fake!

Here is the original

youtube.com...

I did the best I could for being in shock!
Here is the meta data!

Thank you for your post!

originally posted by: JJproductions
a reply to: DaydreamerX

Ok so you are saying my video is fake!

Here is the original

youtube.com...

I did the best I could for being in shock!

Thank you for your post!

Hi JJ, my first impression was looking at the video of lanterns or drones with flares...there no unusual movement or else strange. I still have that impression but not seeing UFOs leaving the scene only reinforced my sentiment. Hey, but that's me. Majority seems to be in shock just as you are.

Thank you for posting this encounter. Hope you are not getting too upset with my rant. I want to be wrong on this one.

a reply to: DaydreamerX

I am not upset, It’s the first time this happened to me. I took photos and a quick video fast before whatever I was seeing was gone!

They could have been lanterns or bugs but I took a video of bugs lol! Next time can I call you before I film or take photos? Lol

originally posted by: DaydreamerX
I do not agree. UFOs events are usually brief, distance away, self-illuminating. Stills from video should be good enough. It's like taking a picture of a light bulb - how much detail you would see? Unless aliens are posing for your photo session from close distance.

Video is supposed to be seen as a sequence of frames, so when we look at the individual frames we can see that the image quality of those is lower than the perceived quality of the video, as the motion smooths the compression artefacts and lower number of colours used by video (after compression and chroma sampling).

You can see that the photos show better detail than the video frames.

PS: just because something can be faked doesn't mean it is.

originally posted by: ArMaP

originally posted by: DaydreamerX
I do not agree. UFOs events are usually brief, distance away, self-illuminating. Stills from video should be good enough. It's like taking a picture of a light bulb - how much detail you would see? Unless aliens are posing for your photo session from close distance.

Video is supposed to be seen as a sequence of frames, so when we look at the individual frames we can see that the image quality of those is lower than the perceived quality of the video, as the motion smooths the compression artefacts and lower number of colours used by video (after compression and chroma sampling).

You can see that the photos show better detail than the video frames.

PS: just because something can be faked doesn't mean it is.

You seems to forget that those objects are not stationary. Picture quality you are talking about is greatly overestimated. Take a picture of a light bulb in motion and tell me what details you would see. You would have an exposure issue to say the least. In OP those object are somewhat fast. Given zoom used, it would be even more problematic to see details of an object in motion which is a light source of it's own.

I personally would prefer a video of the scene.