Can anyone tell me what in God's name this is?

Judging by pics alone I would say Saturn. Approx where was it in the sky? Your location would be helpful as well. The only thing that makes me wonder if it might not be Saturn is that through my scope the rings are pretty much edge on.

Originally posted by zombiemann
Judging by pics alone I would say Saturn. Approx where was it in the sky? Your location would be helpful as well. The only thing that makes me wonder if it might not be Saturn is that through my scope the rings are pretty much edge on.

I am in Northwest Indiana. At 2:30am as I face due south it would be approximately 30 degrees west of that at about the ten o'clock position in the sky. Or better yet, this is how I guided my son to it over the phone. Look at the handle of the little dipper and spread your hand apart as if palming a basketball and hold it up to the sky, place your pinkie finger on the last star of the little dipper's handle and your thumb will be right by the object.

Here is what I don't understand. If I can take a picture of Saturn which is that defined, why couldn't I get anywhere near the quality a few years ago when Mars was very close to Earth? I fully understand that Mars is much smaller than Saturn; however it is massively closer also which should more than balance that. For example, Mars is twice the size of the moon; therefore at twice the distance they would appear as equal sizes. Saturn is nearly 18 times the size of Mars (17.7). Saturn is approximately 750 million miles from Earth whereas Mars is only 36 million miles from Earth or 20.8 times closer to Earth than Saturn; therefore Mars should be more well defined in a photograph as it is 15% closer to us as per size ratio.

Also I do not believe Saturn has two moons which are very nearly the same size as the planet as is indicated by my picture; furthermore, I can see the two larger spheres in a very defined manner, yet cannot see the rings. From what I understand Titan is Saturn's largest satellite and is approximately 1/20 the size of Saturn, or slightly larger than Mercury.

I just do not think it is possible to have an image that well defined of something 750 million miles away using a 300mm zoom lens. If this is true why even bother with telescopes? My telescope provides no where near this clarity. Granted it is not an expensive telescope, but it's magnification is well beyond that of a 300mm zoom lens. Titan is the largest of Saturn's moons and is approximately 20 times smaller than Saturn, so what are the two large spheres in the picture?

Those are the reasons I did not believe this to be Saturn. I may be wrong, but the statistical facts would seem to be in correlation with my thoughts.

[edit on 5/23/2009 by DarrylGalasso]

Having taken a second look at the photo's in question and also using stellarium/your description of where it was in the sky, my best geuss is actually going to be Antares and the elongation/ image anomaly would be due to vibration in the camera. I know you said it was on a tripod but did you use a remote shutter button or press the shutter on the camera body? If you are physically touching the camera body it is virtually impossible to not get some vibration.

Also any kind of wind could also cause the tripod to sway slightly, causing an image like that. But that is the right color for Antares and in about the right spot. I set stellarium as being located in Valparasio since I don't know exactly what town you live in.

On a slightly off topic side note, I used to live just outside of Valparasio and I wish I was still there. I didn't have to drive as far to get to relatively light free skies as I do now.

Originally posted by zombiemann
Having taken a second look at the photo's in question and also using stellarium/your description of where it was in the sky, my best geuss is actually going to be Antares and the elongation/ image anomaly would be due to vibration in the camera. I know you said it was on a tripod but did you use a remote shutter button or press the shutter on the camera body? If you are physically touching the camera body it is virtually impossible to not get some vibration.

Also any kind of wind could also cause the tripod to sway slightly, causing an image like that. But that is the right color for Antares and in about the right spot. I set stellarium as being located in Valparasio since I don't know exactly what town you live in.

On a slightly off topic side note, I used to live just outside of Valparasio and I wish I was still there. I didn't have to drive as far to get to relatively light free skies as I do now.

You are absolutely right about the vibration. Although Nikon employs a very sophisticated anti vibration mechanism, at shutter speeds as low as I used, vibration is a definite possibility, but could the spheres be that defined under that pretense? Also some of the pictures I took has other stars in them and they remain in focus with no elongation, while that particular object does not. I am no professional photographer by any stretch of the imagination; however, I have been very avid for over 25 years and have a few very good cameras and supporting equipment. The biggest problem I have in trying to explain these pictures is the clarity and definition in them. I just cannot comprehend getting those results with something that far away. Like I said, I couldn't get nothing like this when photographing Mars. Even my moon shots are not this well defined. This is what caused me all of the confusion. And yes I do live in Valparaiso.

Thanks for your ideas, you are probably right as I can make no logical conclusion myself exactly what I have photographed. There are just a lot of unexplained variables that confuse me to a great degree. My friend is insistent that this is Nibiru; but like I told him, in order for it to be that well defined with a camera shot, it would have to be extremely close and would probably hit us in less than a week. So I can almost assuredly rule that out. It is now 2:25 am and I am going to take both the film and Digital SLR's out and see what I can get tonight. I tried last night but there was an overcast and although I believe I saw the object popping in and out of the cloud cover, I could not get a good enough view to photograph it again. Hopefully tonight will be better. It is incredibly difficult to find things in the night sky with a 2000m telephoto and 2 doublers on the film camera as it does not have a spotting scope like a telescope does and has just as narrow a view, but I am going to try anyway because that is the most magnification I personally can use.

Thanks for the response bro.

Now I really wish I still lived up there, i would tell you to meet me somewhere and I would bring my scope out and we could zoom in on said object. But alas I had to move back to Illinois. Good luck with the pictures. I would be kind of interested in seeing some of the other shots, with stars in them.

Well i enlarged the picture and it looks kind of boxed shape to me. I would say its not a star or planet. Very interesting picture. Would like to see some more pics. S+F from me.

I could not find the object in the sky tonight. I did however track and locate Saturn via stellarium and took a picture of it to demonstrate the difference in image quality. This is Saturn using the same equipment and the same settings. It is enlarged to the limit of the program without becoming distorted to the degree it is nondescript. You can see that this is enlarged to the point of becoming grainy. Saturn is nowhere as defined as the other object. This would lead me to believe that the other object is substantially closer than Saturn or else exponentially larger.


[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/acc4682f146d.jpg[/atsimg]

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/d83a7692cfb0.jpg[/atsimg]

[edit on 5/23/2009 by DarrylGalasso]

Wow, I didn't realize how dirty my screen was until I zoomed up to get a closer look at the pics, Thanks for the OP!

My comment is, I think we're imagining the "spheres". If they were spheres illuminated by a source, the light/shade angles would likely be more similar. It does seem like something, though, I wanted to think streaking from movement, but the spots are so differentiated, especially in the "non" zoomed in pic.

I hope you get more shots of it/them!

reply to post by DarrylGalasso


Its got a V-shape to it, although very pixelated.
I wouldn't have a clue what it is though- can you tell us any more about it?

reply to post by KRISKALI777


That's really all I know. I was taking out some trash before going to bed and saw what looked like a red star. I had never seen anything like that before, so I went inside and got my camera, zoom, and a tripod and took some pictures. Most of the pictures have some blurring due to the slow shutter speed and the vibration from me depressing the shutter release. I certainly wish I had a remote shutter release, I will get one now; unfortunately, that does no good right now. I don't have the option to set the timer like on my film cameras unless the camera is in auto focus mode and that doesn't work for these shots (I tried it already).

I had no clue what was in the picture until I enlarged it. My first thought was that I caught a picture of the galactic center because of the way it seemed to be spread out; however, that thought went right out the window after I enlarged the image. Looking with the naked eye it looks like a medium sized star that is butterscotch to rust colored. I couldn't even see the expansion aspect until I uploaded it to the computer. At that point I realized it wasn't a star. There are a few stars in the picture, but for some reason, they don't show up here. I will upload another picture that shows some other stars in the picture so you can see that it is not camera vibration as I believe they would be distorted as well if it was.

Here is a picture of the object with other stars in the picture.



[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/0ce8c129ddd4.jpg[/atsimg]

[edit on 5/23/2009 by DarrylGalasso]

reply to post by DarrylGalasso


Looks like a flying saucer.
How else do you get a ring of lights and a core bright spot and
an electrostatic flare.

Good combination.

reply to post by KRISKALI777


V shape would make the craft similar to the Upstate New York
sighting of a flying wing with a central light and either nodes
of electrostatic flares or Tesla bulb (hemispherical terminals)
that pick up electrostatic glow.

Also the original Arnold 1947 sighting 'flying saucer' that he
said later looked like a Horton flying wing with a central
bright spot. The Tesla coil set in the center of a craft gives it
anti gravity and hemispherical terminals point into the direction
of flight.

reply to post by TeslaandLyne

V shape would make the craft similar to the Upstate New York sighting of a flying wing with a central light and either nodes of electrostatic flares or Tesla bulb (hemispherical terminals) that pick up electrostatic glow.

Hi tesla,
not saying that thats how it is: just stating how the photo looked to me on my computer.
There is a distinct pixelated V shape (when I view it), dont know if thats a result from my graphics card (Nvidia)- but thats how it appears on my Comp.
Unless we were able to get a clearer photo source, we are only assuming.
Am I the only one to see this ?

Sorry folks, I have not been able to find this thing in the sky again to photograph it. I thought I saw it again the following night but it was overcast and it was popping in and out of the clouds and I couldn't get a clear shot. I have been out looking for it every night since and cannot see it anymore, so I cannot get any more pictures. I really wanted to get some shots of it with the Pentax film camera and the 2000mm telephoto, unfortunately that does not look like it is going to happen. I have both cameras mounted on tripods and on standby just in case and I will keep checking every night for a week or two but it is not looking very promising right now. Someone asked me to photograph it in raw format which is by far the best my camera can offer and I will if I get the opportunity, but raw cannot be viewed by most programs and in order for me to make it small enough to upload I will have to convert it to jpeg and that will make it much smaller of a file. Just by making the large jpeg files I shot to begin with to make it up-loadable, it loses some of the detail.

I am also going to say it is a planet i am thinking maybe jupiter with its rings or what was mentioned earlier saturn.

the zoomed in picture is see an object which is caught with a cam with a little bit of shaken hands or not a really fixed cam so the vibration will cause it to be like it is on the picture .. same happend when i tried to take picture with cam on a fixed stand .. you have to adjust for the motion of the earh keep tracking against the rotation of our planet...

reply to post by MarkLuitzen


I totally agree. Look carefully at the OP photos, and you can definately see the Disk of Saturn with rings, if somewhat small.
the pixelations an swirls around the bright spot have probably been created when the tripod was bumped or even moved minutely by a breeze at the time of the exposure.
Well spotted Mark. I'm totally going with Saturn

Originally posted by KRISKALI777
reply to post by MarkLuitzen

 

I totally agree. Look carefully at the OP photos, and you can definately see the Disk of Saturn with rings, if somewhat small.
the pixelations an swirls around the bright spot have probably been created when the tripod was bumped or even moved minutely by a breeze at the time of the exposure.
Well spotted Mark. I'm totally going with Saturn

I too would totally go with Saturn if it were in that spot of the sky. If you look above a few posts you will see that I took pictures of Saturn as well. If it were that easy to figure out I wouldn't have needed to ask for your help here.

Also, I took almost 30 shots of this thing, yes some were distorted from when I depressed the shutter release, if you would like to see what those look like just ask. They are nothing like this. There was no wind that night whatsoever so that is out of the question and do you really think I could have bumped the tripod all 30 times? Swirls around the bright spot, perhaps, 2 clearly defined spheres though? And completely different colors at that? Lets use some common sense here. Also it would be nice if I was not presumed to be a complete idiot and bumped the tripod 30 times in a row. I did not come here asking anyone to believe this is anything so my motive is obvious as I asked to begin with. Can anyone tell me what this is?

I can see it was probably not a good idea to ask anyone here anything and expect to be treated as anything other than a moron. Actually I am a moron for expecting anyone here to even try to help with this. This site is really only here so people can make fun of each other and try to belittle anyone they get the chance to. I would have gotten better ideas from the 1st grade class at the local elementary school.

I can assure you of one thing for certain, if I ever photograph anything unusual again in my life, this will be the last place I come looking for help identifying it, unless I have some innate desire to be made to look foolish.

[edit on 5/25/2009 by DarrylGalasso]

Originally posted by DarrylGalasso
There was no wind that night whatsoever so that is out of the question and do you really think I could have bumped the tripod all 30 times?

Basically, you didn't need to bump it. If you weren't using the mirror lockup function, the action of the camera itself is enough to cause brighter stars to streak into interesting shapes in a somewhat-unpredictable fashion - I've made the same mistake countless times. Dimmer stars don't appear to streak as badly because they're too dim to leave "high frequency" streaks showing in the image. If the exposures were longer we'd have more stars to compare it to and nail down what the coordinates were with ease. I'd love to give an astrometry program a shot at measuring the images to determine what the coordinates are and if it matches a known star. For that I would need 2 things; the full size original images of the best frames and your permission. If you're willing then give me a u2u and I'll give you an email address to email them to. It's not my idea to make you look foolish, I just want to help identify the object. I hope you're willing to give me a shot.

[edit on 25-5-2009 by ngchunter]

reply to post by DarrylGalasso

I can assure you of one thing for certain, if I ever photograph anything unusual again in my life, this will be the last place I come looking for help identifying it, unless I have some innate desire to be made to look foolish.

Easy tiger! Remember this is actually a chat forum; we try to be more informed than other places, but we are human here also.
Sorry if my comments made you feel that way, it was not my intention.
I guess when you gain more points in the future, you will be able to speak with people of your own intellectual calibre.
I've heard this is the lower annals of ATS, once points are gain to a cretain level you will be able to enter a more exclusive forum, of more seasoned members; not a mere lower level bufoon, like me.
If I didn't have time to read every single line of all your posts I appologise, my life is quite busy outside of this forum.