Amazing Photo's of S.F UFO Seen Last Summer

reply to post by Palasheea


Is it possible that we are seeing the white light of a helo lighting up the exhaust fumes of the engine? The longer exposure may allow us to see that, whereas normal eyesight wouldnt. Just a guess...

Here's a close up of that one:



This one is at 1.8 sec. exposure.
But I'm amazed that, if it's a helicopter, any semblence of its shape has been totally obliterated and transformed into the shape we are seeing in this photo?? Yet, the crest of the waves are crisp and so everything else in this photo.
The marvels of technology... amazing.



[edit on 20-11-2007 by Palasheea]

It really is perplexing...

this hasn't even been discussed yet: but there is another craft in the last two shots...

It of course is likely another time exposure, and could easily be a plane, but is another reason why Grant and myself were really freaked out when examining the pics...

seems there is much interest regarding these that if any of you would like the high res versions for further examination, I can email them... you can then zoom in very far as well as see all light detail and the second "Object" in the top left of the screen

just an idea... may perplex us all a bit more: though I'd be happy thinking it was a helicopter and that my boyfriend wasn't abducted

Originally posted by Lost_Mind
reply to post by internos

 

Is it possible the the lighthouse or maybe barrier marker lights are providing the more intense light reflecting off of the water near the pier and the objects light is more represented by the dim shimmer creeping toward the photographers position on the water in his near foreground? For thes to be 1.8 to 3 sec. exposures the light from this thing would have been pretty dim, IMO. Maybe even hard to see?

The exposure is LONG, i'm worried about it.
You made another excellent point about the air traffic:
i've seen that website.
Here are the distance of two airports (there's another one which seems to have been dismissed, so i haven't included it).

Lauren, could you send us those photo's of that other craft you referred too?
Send it to [email protected]. I will put them in this thread...

reply to post by internos


I didnt want to bring up the two airports because of their distances from the photographer. I guess they could be taken into consideration though, especially Oakland. I would bet that there are some departure paths to the north from there that force traffic out over the bay for the sake of safety and noise. SF General hospital is right where the "og" in your "photographer" is on the image. North is to the right on your image, top of image being west and so on....

Edit to add: I noticed that there is a very large unnamed airport/military base on the Oakland side of the bay just to the south of the Oakland Army/Naval base, south of the bridge to Treasure Island on the Oakland side.

HEY! I know what these are! Those stinking Chinese lanterns! He took these pictures maybe not even a mile north of Chinatow... never mind, jes kidding...

[edit on 20-11-2007 by Lost_Mind]

They closed down that military base on Treasure Island.

But I have question.

Why do all of those objects in those photo's look the same in length yet the first one was at 3 sec exposure and the last two were at 1.8? Wouldn't you think that the one at 3 sec. exposure would be a lot longer in length?

edit: ok, it was at auto setting and those are the cam's low light adjustments....

[edit on 20-11-2007 by Palasheea]

I also had a question for photographers:

if this is an automatic setting on the camera for low light situations, why would hte first be 3 and the last be 1.8? What determines how long the shutter stays open?

I will mail the photos when i get out of work.

Originally posted by laurenrose
I also had a question for photographers:

if this is an automatic setting on the camera for low light situations, why would hte first be 3 and the last be 1.8? What determines how long the shutter stays open?

I will mail the photos when i get out of work.

Thanks Lauren!

I will post them as soon as I get them.

reply to post by Palasheea


Not ON Treasure Island, to the east of it, south of the bridge, on the mainland.

The length of the light streak in the image would be relative to the speed at which the light was moving through the field of view when the shutter opened and closed. 3 sec exposure object would be moving a bit slower than the 1.8 sec. exposure IF the light streaks are indeed equal in length. We have to throw perspective and zoom rate into the mix to get at these and sometimes they are not available. Ritzmann could lend his expertise in this area and swiftly school any of my noob experience on photography and graphics. I'll wait for his answers...

If this is a solid craft of the length pictured, and not a time exposure of a helicopter or something of the identifiable type, then why in every picture do the lines of light seem to waver from start to finish. They (red and white light) appear to overlap in some instances in the middle or at the end of the object which would lend itself to this being a time exposure of a smaller object that has an irregular flight pattern created by something as simple as wind, which it appears from the water that there was wind at the time?

As for the aforementioned question of the light at the end appearing to be "beaming" in a diagonal downward direction......are these series of pics in the correct order, as in is the objects flight path to the left or the right. From the order they have been posted here it appears the object is flying towards the left in a slightly upward fashion. Are the pics correctly ordered? If not, then cold this object be flying in a slightly downward pattern to the right and the beam of light with a diagonal downward patter could be the spotlight on the front of the object and it is approaching the area rather than leaving the area.

-B

Vasa Crowe,

www.wben.com...

The first 3 photo's on the above link look to be in order, but we need to ask Lauren what is the order of those other larger photo's on that page.



[edit on 20-11-2007 by Palasheea]

the picture order goes from the right to the left, starting over the land and moving outward.

so it appears that the light is flying upwards in the last pic.

Originally posted by Palasheea
Vasa Crowe,

www.wben.com...

The first 3 photo's on the above link look to be in order, but we need to ask Lauren what is the order of those other larger photo's on that page.

As for that object being nothing but the wind... is that what you're saying? Will read it over again. lol

As to the order on that page, that is just the order they have been posted in. It may not be the order in which they were taken. Just being the devil's advocate........I think it would be a good think if Lauren could clear that up.

And no...I am not saying it is the wind I am saying that whatever the object is seems to be "reacting" to the wind, as in oscillating with windy conditions since the red and white streaks of light seem to overlap at various points on their path. I know there is an object in the picture, just not sure if is a solid object as it appears or a smaller object with lights and the time exposure seems to be elongating it. If it is indeed a solid elongated object then why do the lights appear to overlap at ANY point in the pics?

-B

Wow! I just love this cam Grant is using. It actually has a mind of its own and picks and choose which lights on that object to stream where other lights.. like that blue beam at the end, it leaves totally intact!

PS.. Vasa... lol, only skimmed it the first time but then read your post over so I understand what you're saying now. Great observations!


Lost Mind -- thanks for clarifying that for me!

[edit on 20-11-2007 by Palasheea]

Originally posted by laurenrose
the picture order goes from the right to the left, starting over the land and moving outward.

so it appears that the light is flying upwards in the last pic.

Any chance you can email the actual full size shots to me? I would like to look close at them.

[email protected]

Thanks!

Hopefully this will make sense as well. If the first pic is a 3 sec exposure and there are 3 solid red lights on that one then we can safely assume that it is a blinking light I would think as the following pics are 1.8 sec exposures and the light only appears once, right in the middle. If this is the case can anyone determine the amount of time between flashes of this red solid light on the top of the object?

If so, is there any corresponding data as to known flying objects and their lighting? As in is there a specific time in which the lights on a craft built on earth are supposed to flash, or how much time in between flashes? If so then does this flash pattern in the picture with 3 red lights on top match that pattern?

Anyone get that because I just thoroughly confused myself.....

-B

reply to post by Vasa Croe


Seems like after some very intense brain things going on in my head, a rate of 1 flash per second seems to be about right? 3 sec. exposure with three points from the red strobe?

Edit: Ahh! I get what you are saying...I would say that the steady red streak would either indicate a steady on light or a very slow (compared to the strobe) all broadcast rotator style light.



[edit on 20-11-2007 by Lost_Mind]

reply to post by laurenrose


Agreed. I should go out and take some photos.

Regrettably, I'm nowhere near San Fran, otherwise I would have set up a 24 hour camera recorder with huge IR light attached to it so that I could capture anything and everything happening in the bay area.

I see a lot of aircraft at night and I've seen other photos myself of this effect, that's why I can be so certain of what we're seeing.

Be that as it may, I wish us all good research!

A google search turned up these examples of long exposure photography of ordinary aircraft.