UFO Photos Extremly Close Up, 2006

hi Amber,

Just checking in to say hi Amber. Glad to see the thread is still holding up and want to encourage your decision to provide as much evidence as you have at your disposal, regarding the sighting. It can seem counterproductive in the face of skeptical inquiry but believe me, it's still worth the hassle if it turns out its a legit sighting

It's interesting to me still, that it's so small. I wonder if there's sentient life in the universe, capable of that level of technology that might actually be small enough to fit into something that size

Let's say if its a drone. What's it doing here? A research mission? That it responded to your voices and hovered over your spot, seems very curious to me unless that was just sheer coincedence.

Hi Undo

Yes, I've thought long and hard about that also. Without going into my own theories to much ( for fear of riddicule) I'm not certain if it was extraterrestrial that an occupant would require a physical body. Maybe it just requires a very strong magnetic field around its energy source.

The fact that it stopped over our heads twice has also bugged me a lot, I still can see no reason for doing that. When it first came towards us, as we were kneeling on the path, it was almost at eye level ahead of us, roughly 3-4 feet above the ground, up the hill a bit, that was the only time I felt any sort of fear. It was very easy to see then, and I remember thinking, this is so clear I wont ever forget anything about it, but now it seems a little harder to remember the exact look of it at that point. The main thing I have is the yellow lights, with this pulsing tube between them, sort of scanning back and forth, really very beautiful.

Now if it was a hoax on us, it would make more sense as to why it stopped over us. Or if it was military.

Every night before I go to sleep, I find myself thinking about it, running through it again, actually its quite annoying My partner is quite different from me, he has his ideas, he's much more accepting that it was a non terrestrial craft, I on the other hand am not so confident, he says thats because I'm scared, I mean no one wants to be made to look foolish, I have decided however, If it was a hoax, i'd have to congratulate them, as they had me totally fooled

I hope to have a final from Jeff Ritzmann on this by the end of the week.

Springer...

Brilliant, thanks a lot Springer

Just wanna say that your pictures are very interesting. I would be goin back to that area as much as possible during the day and night just trying to capture more pics. I haven't had time to read all the replys on this thread but were you able to talk to the people that took video that night?

Hi camwar

I have talked to the people that took the video, i've not got a copy yet, I will get it though, I'm really curious about it myself.



[edit on 27-3-2007 by Ambergambler]

Hope everything works out in the end for you and your partner....

Hey Amber dropped in to say hello.Hope everything is well with you and your family.I'm well, as is my family.Just waiting patiently for the photo analysis.What ever the outcome I truly believe you saw something very strange,keep looking up!

Well since the triumphant deductions of hoaxery have died down, I won't get into my personal thoughts on that.

To the OP, thanks for providing these pics. Personally, I think you are genuine and that you caught something strange, flying, and unidentifiable to your own eyes ... a UFO (let's think for a second about what that acronym really stands for).

Now with the image qualities, the camera used (read some reviews ... search for "sony w50 poor night" in google), and the time of day ... I really believe you could have photographed anything from a model airplane to a full-blown ET craft. As with most of these lower quality images, even if Jeff can prove it's not a hoax that doesn't necessarily imply alien craft.

Granted that may have all been just jibberish, but the real reason I posted is that your post randomly triggered an intensely vivid memory I have of seeing some wierd lights in northern Wisconsin when I was very young (3 years old). I remembered them to be VERY similar to your renderings and that my parents were freaking out and we sped away from the lights.

Well after calling them it turns out there was simply a horrible wreck and I was half-asleep. The lights I saw were actually an ambulance and a tow truck I guess it just ties into my previous statement ... there is one thing that we can ALL be 100% sure on.

And that's that there will never be a 100% consensus on any of these lower quality images and accounts

Btw welcome (back) to ATS to Amber and (for the first time) family. Carry on.

[edit on 4/1/2007 by Fiverz]

Originally posted by Springer
I hope to have a final from Jeff Ritzmann on this by the end of the week.

Springer...

So whats the skinny on this. Did you get anything from Ritzmann? Everyone is waiting on you!

Originally posted by John Nada
Amazing. You say you have light trails because the UFO's are moving at speed, yet amazingly they're always in the dead centre of the frame! Everything else could go so wrong yet you frame something that is apparantly moving all over the show spot on everytime? Not buying it.

It doesn't look at all like you have put your camera on a low shutter speed then waved it around really fast whilst taking pictures of some lights. And when I say it doesn't, I mean that's exactly what it looks like.

Yeah... I gotta go with that one too... noone... I repeat noone can make a steady picture at shutter 1/8, being a photographer I should know. I looks like an attempt to make a steady picture but then the trails are formed from the stationary lights because of the slight shaking of the hands.
Give me a Canon Ixus, a mount of stationary disco lights, a cloudy summer night and I can make the same photo.

The image has to my knowledge not been altered in photoshop, but unfortunately the image contains no information what so ever besides the lights. Only darkness and the noise from underexposure.

That's just my take on it ofc...

Originally posted by flice

Originally posted by John Nada
Amazing. You say you have light trails because the UFO's are moving at speed, yet amazingly they're always in the dead centre of the frame! Everything else could go so wrong yet you frame something that is apparantly moving all over the show spot on everytime? Not buying it.

It doesn't look at all like you have put your camera on a low shutter speed then waved it around really fast whilst taking pictures of some lights. And when I say it doesn't, I mean that's exactly what it looks like.

Yeah... I gotta go with that one too...

noone... I repeat noone can make a steady picture at shutter 1/8, being a photographer I should know. I looks like an attempt to make a steady picture but then the trails are formed from the stationary lights because of the slight shaking of the hands.
Give me a Canon Ixus, a mount of stationary disco lights, a cloudy summer night and I can make the same photo.

The image has to my knowledge not been altered in photoshop, but unfortunately the image contains no information what so ever besides the lights. Only darkness and the noise from underexposure.

That's just my take on it ofc...

I fully agree, no one can make a steady picture at shutter 1/8. I am not a professional photographer, but amature, and even an amature knows this.

I have been checking in on this thread since it started, I still remain a bit confused on the facts of these pics.. I know the story, but Amber said before that these pics are Artistic replications of what happened not the pictures taken? Or am I wrong.. Im confused now... Amber or someone please confirm if these are the real pics taken, or artistic pictures redone in photo shop to show what you where seeing that night?

Amber writes: hi pantha
yes, these are my artists impressions.





[edit on 3-4-2007 by zysin5]

Hi flice and zysin5

I do see what you are saying about the photos, but, even with trails, they are still what we saw. I have done this picture, in sequence, maybe it will make it a bit clearer. I dont really know how else to explain it

Hi Fiverz, thanks for the welcome.

I'm also eagerly awaiting the photo-analysis though I agree that it may reveal nothing more than that these photos have indeed not been doctored. However, still living in hopes that something more specific will come out of the examination...

sorry if any1 else has posted this but, those are 100% ms paint


i made an account just to say that lol. well i have 2 others but forgot passwords.

i did also post on anonymous but idk if other ppl will see it and i wanted to get the message accross that they have been made on ms paint, a very feeble attempt aswell.

once again sorry if any1 else posted this cos i aint reading 9 pages just to see if some1 has

hello zyphex

nice to hear your thoughts, maybe you should read the other 9 pages, then you might see we have already been through that

But, they aren't done in photoshop, or any other computer program, they are photos I took on the night. What would be the point of me posting made up pictures on ATS?

But thanks for your opinion, and good to see it got you to join ATS

Originally posted by Ambergambler
hello zyphex

nice to hear your thoughts, maybe you should read the other 9 pages, then you might see we have already been through that

But, they aren't done in photoshop, or any other computer program, they are photos I took on the night. What would be the point of me posting made up pictures on ATS?

But thanks for your opinion, and good to see it got you to join ATS

OK, that clears up some of my confusion, but I'm not sure why some of the EXIF data is missing from the images. I don't see any of the exposure details.

Could you post the raw image, straight from the camera?

Originally posted by disownedsky

Could you post the raw image, straight from the camera?

hi disownedsky

here is the link for the full rez photos, straight from the menory card:


uksoundlabs.com...

Originally posted by Ambergambler



hi disownedsky

here is the link for the full rez photos, straight from the menory card:


uksoundlabs.com...

Excellent.

I see it was a Sony DSC-w50, which was announced in February 2006, so that's consistent.

Exposure was 1/8 of a second. At least some of the movement would have to be attributed to camera shake, but the camera is only 157 grams.

It looks like this is a wide angle shot? the focal length multiplier is about 6 fo r this camera, and the focal length is 6.3 mm, which puts it at 38 mm, which is the wide zoom limit for this camera.

Springer:

Any word on the Photo Analysis???