Strange Object in Bat Photo

Originally posted by Comatose
Why is everyone ignoring the suggestion that the "shadow" is a damp patch of ground?

That's what it looks like to me, too. It's not a shadow. It's brown. It's also not the same shape as the part of the object that can be seen.

I think the damp patch and the reflective object seem to have to do with each other because of an optical illusion. The vegetation is lined up in such a way underneath the reflective thing that it appears to point at the damp patch.

As to what the reflective object is, I couldn't say.

Originally posted by goosdawg
What about the orbs!!

We definitely need more background information on this one.

Like where it was taken, the photographer's impressions, sounds, ambient temperature, season, time of day?

What kind of equipment were they using, what was the distance from the camera lens to the flash?

I know bugs can look like "orbs" but what the heck looks like a flying flame that casts a shadow but doesn't cause other objects within it's glow to throw their own?

This is a one weird Unidentified Flaming Object!

The 'orbs' are probably just specks of dust that were close to the camera and lit up by the flash...


Jimbo

Thanks, librasleep, starred and flagged!

[edit on 29-10-2007 by goosdawg]

reply to post by sandman441




*****chiming in with agreement******

After a bit of testing, I am revising my opinion more in line with Malfunction, et al, in that it is not a shadow. I believe the flash would manage to fill in behind the object.

Blurred bird/bat and spot on ground. If so, interesting coincidence, so strange photo things do happen.

reply to post by librasleep

You can go to this french site "Col de vence"and have a look at the "photographies", many resemble yours. "Col de Vence" is a french place where many strange things are spotted, among them a lot of lights or orbs or whatever in the photographs.

I haven't posted on ATS in a long while, and seeing this topic on the main page reminded me of why I left. This website is one of the largest distractions from issues that competent citizens should be spending their research time on... of course here i am... responding. Because I'd like to bury this one personally, and my opinion on this issue happens to be based on KNOWLEDGE. remember that word kids, it will save you time and energy.

The reason I'm responding (without reading more than a few replies mind you) is to give my opinion as a professional photographer.

THAT IS A MOTH THAT THE BATS ARE TRYING TO CATCH. (much like this article's readers and distractionists)

Nothing else. the "fire" is a result of it being close to the flash.. I'm not sure how many people haven't figured this out yet but the closer something is to a light source the more light it reflects. Over exposing it. This one bit of understanding could probablly saved hundreds of thousands of man hours into the examination of "orbs". The blurring is caused by the light the moth is reflecting as it zipps by. This kind of blurring is confusing i'll admit because some people think of a flash occurring at the speed of light or some nonsense like that, but really the flash has a duration long enough for this to occur. My personal thought is that the bug is flying in the opposite direction it appears to be, going down and to the right. As the flash "cools" the bug reflects a slight amount of light, and with no other ambient light, it leaves an impression of speed lines, so to speak.

The shadow... come on guys. This is a classic example of people seeing what they want to see. The location of the damp soil is unfortunate, and indeed the sole cause of this thread, but it is just that. a drying puddle. As many people have pointed out I'm sure, there is one light source in this photo, this is not a faked moon landing, that is a drying puddle. If you can't figure that out you really need to buy a book on photography/lighting.


So now that we're done here lets all give our selves a pat on the back for not having to waste anymore time. Seriously guys, this is how American power centers can just take away your country without you doing anything about it.


PS: To the photographer; Not the greatest picture but it's cool you got a bat. That doesn't happen everyday. I would suggest you clean your equipment every once and a while, not only because it will make you pictures less gross, but that it will lengthen the life of your camera.

Cheers.

So I consulted with my wife concerning this photo since she photography has been a hobby of hers for about ten years. She says that the dark spot does in fact appear to be an area of moisture on the road. As far as the object itself.....well first of all you wouldn't get that much illumination from a typical flash. Generally that type of illumination would come from a stand alone professional flash. The question remains, how would you take a picture of a bat, on a completely dark road unless you already had lit light source that was not camera related. With out a pre-existing light source, how would you know that a bat was there to snap a photo? The theory is that the person in question was driving in a car down the road (which would be why there is more illumination, and a good majority of the light is lower as opposed around the level of the bat), saw the bat, and took a picture from inside the vehicle, and the flaming object is nothing more than distorted light reflecting off of the windshield from the flash. Anyhow, I think it's worth considering.

[edit on 30-10-2007 by Osiris1953]

reply to post by VaporTrail


How kind of you to grace the threads with your wisdom and insight. While we mere mortals had pretty much narrowed it down to just what you judged it to be, we were not half so good at doing so with the contempt you showed for the intelligence of the rest of the board.

See you in a few more years.

I respectfully submit a photo that I took a few years ago.
There are some similarities in the way it was taken, and there are plenty of objects, near and far from the flash.
You can probably guess what the objects are. If not, I'll let you know in a short while.

reply to post by NGC2736


Yeah sorry about that. I guess I'm capable of a rather demeaning attitude. I'm just blown away with certain degrees of ignorance I have trouble understanding, which is of course my own ignorance. I apologize any harshness that was felt.

My only wish is that this thread could rest in peace and not take anymore time from other, perhaps more mysterious mysteries.

My tone was wrong, my meaning is sound. Photographic analysis is a step to take before speculation on the subject of the photo. Before questions like time of year, temp., wind direction, lunar phase, and the like can be asked one should use a razor to remove branches that show little hope of fruiting. My contempt was not for your intellegence, it was a reflection of contempt for my own impatience.

reply to post by spacedoubt


Is it ... moths?

What's the grand prize, anyway?

I think Osiris's wife nailed it as to the reflection.

Mystery solved to my satisfaction.

reply to post by spacedoubt


I think the one thing we can be sure of is that the mystery object caught reflecting the flash in the original picture is not a snowflake.

...but those above surely are, (and suitably demonstrate a very similar effect).

reply to post by MajorMalfunction


Ok. you win the prize. the prize is, you get to be to one to go into a car, point your camera out the front window, and upload us your result. Though the idea is nice (i didn't want to say anything to O and his wife) it just doesn't hold up. Your going to get an oddly shaped picture of yourself taking a picture.


•••

ah tone again, ok.

assume the windscreen is roughly a 45 degree angle to the lights path from the camera. By way of diffraction the flash will be sent in a few directions. now you know what it's like when your driving at night with a map light on, imagine that but brighter, so much so that the subjects out side the car will receive only a tiny portion of the light while the reflected image of your legs and map will consume the frame.

As you were.

[edit on 10/30/2007 by VaporTrail]

reply to post by VaporTrail


Sir/Madam, I accept your apology on behalf of all present on this thread. I am not the OP. and scarcely even more than a faint voice in the controversy of what the picture shows.

But I am one that stands up for civility, and so I thank you for your grace in adversity. I do really hope that you will post here more often, as you seem to have a very decisive viewpoint, and conviction is a welcome thing.

I cannot disagree with your "take" on the picture. While it is quite a "rare" photo, it is still not a smoking gun of much of anything. Yet, it is a rare photo in it's own right, and something to be proud to own.

Very cool shot of snow there, spacedoubt!

[edit on 30-10-2007 by HomeBrew]

[edit on 30-10-2007 by HomeBrew]

Originally posted by HomeBrew
Very sool shot of snow there!

OK, I'm old. is the word "sool" one I just didn't get the memo on? When you're young and sure that you know what's "hip", you don't "sweat it". But once you reach "The Golden Years", you wonder.

Not that the pics on this thread aren't all "sool", I just wonder if I'm "sool"?

reply to post by Osiris1953


For having shot down your conclusion, and the conclusions of others here, I feel I owe something more than my own talk

Cambridge in Color

Although the information is centered around digital photography the tutorials on light and color are the same. This is a great place to better understand commonly overlooked concepts of photography. The explanations are succinct and a joy to read. My I suggest additive and subtractive color as well as image noise. If you're interested in Digital the tutorial on the workings of a image sensor is really amazing.

cheers

Originally posted by NGC2736

Originally posted by HomeBrew
Very sool shot of snow there!

OK, I'm old. is the word "sool" one I just didn't get the memo on? When you're young and sure that you know what's "hip", you don't "sweat it". But once you reach "The Golden Years", you wonder.

Not that the pics on this thread aren't all "sool", I just wonder if I'm "sool"?

Lol, I thought I edited it before it was cought. I was trying to spell "cool". Sorry for inadvertantly stumbling you up. I sometimes type a bit too fast.

Very funnt post though!

reply to post by VaporTrail


I appreciate the gesture... but you don't owe me or my wife anything. Like I said it was worth considering, that's all. We sought to present a viewpoint that hadn't really been discussed, if you don't agree, it's all good. You were polite in reference to my post, but thanks again.

Yes, those are Big hefty snowflakes.
Biggest I had ever seen. Hence, I took a photo. The big ones were casting shadows as you can see. The chair, on the right is about 10 feet away. Some of those flakes were close to fist size..Anyway, I thought it might add to the conversation.

At least these are known objects (by me, anyway)