UFO's hiding directly in the sun, "The Bro Method"

reply to post by KAKUSA

Well one of us doen't know what they're talking about...My guess is it's YOU ..!!

I said to correct me if I was wrong, people turn me in the right direction, and I was right, its not actually Xrays, but a more plausible heat infrared sensor.

And please, can you tell where I am incorrect, on how you can control aperture and contrast on any prosumer camera from sony, including mine and not how you stated where newer sony cameras dont have this "feature".

Contrast IS the latitud of blacks and whites on a pictures. and Aperture IS the control of the amount of light that the sensor receives. I was just correcting what you said. Which as WRONG.

YOUR sensor is RGB, thanks to the Infrared and Nightvision you can actually see things that a low small quality old sony sensor CANT see.

Birds, bugs, dust, reflects light, add that small quality, and it seems like anything.

I didnt discredit your statement, and asked to correct if wrong. Your rudeness makes you seem like a overexcited person you will not hear another voice and think its only right.

Originally posted by jkrog08
reply to post by KAKUSA

 

You said that the UFO Hunters producer contacted you for your video. Did you give it to them?

Yes, I sent them the original Hi8 tape to copy, also sent the same tape to Glow films...

reply to post by KAKUSA


Have you heard anything back from them? Also, even though I only saw maybe a handful of genuine UFOs at one glance of the video, I am interested as to if you forwarded this to MUFON?

[edit on 9/12/2009 by jkrog08]

Originally posted by Jskun
reply to post by KAKUSA

 

Well one of us doen't know what they're talking about...My guess is it's YOU ..!!

I said to correct me if I was wrong, people turn me in the right direction, and I was right, its not actually Xrays, but a more plausible heat infrared sensor.

And please, can you tell where I am incorrect, on how you can control aperture and contrast on any prosumer camera from sony, including mine and not how you stated where newer sony cameras dont have this "feature".

Contrast IS the latitud of blacks and whites on a pictures. and Aperture IS the control of the amount of light that the sensor receives. I was just correcting what you said. Which as WRONG.

YOUR sensor is RGB, thanks to the Infrared and Nightvision you can actually see things that a low small quality old sony sensor CANT see.

Birds, bugs, dust, reflects light, add that small quality, and it seems like anything.

I didnt discredit your statement, and asked to correct if wrong. Your rudeness makes you seem like a overexcited person you will not hear another voice and think its only right.

I don't like doing other peoples homework but I guess to shut you up I will do yours for you now... here's a direct quote from a company that does modifications to newer Sony cameras in order to have the IR capabilities I described...As you can read after Sony discovered the "See Through Clothes" capabilities of the camera they discontinued them and all camera models after had limited controls when shooting in "NightShot" mode....
www.maxmax.com...

Camcorders - NTSC/PAL, Hi-8, D-8, MiniDV, Hard Drive, DVD

We have specially modified Brand New Sony Camcorders that have full NiteShot capability with all shutter speed and aperture modes working. In an effort to stop people from using the Niteshot feature in daylight situations, Sony limits the minimum size of the aperture when in Niteshot mode on every currently produced Handicams camcorder to prevent voyeurs.

On some camcorders, Sony sets the aperture to full open. On some recently tested models, Sony just limits the minimum aperture size. Our testing has revealed that you can now use IR filters on most new camcorders in Niteshot mode in many situations. In addition to selectively passing mostly infrared light, our filters reduce the normal viewable light so that the camera thinks it is filming at night and the Niteshot mode can be used during the day! For some example pictures showing our filters with a normal Sony camcorder, Click Here.

Without using an IR filter, Sony has also limited the legitimate use by experimenter, photographers, law enforcement personnel, surveillance and even the functionality of the camera during low light situations. We also have modified cameras that restore all functions. Not only do you get all-mode Niteshot (enabling the X-Ray effect), but you can also use the camera as a regular camcorder. In normal mode, the picture is normal. All normal functionality is retained. Our cameras, except for the Digital Still DSC-S30, do not need a color correction filter for correct color balance of normal photography (like those with the ICF/IR Blocking filter removed) and the IR LED's work in Niteshot mode. Our cameras do not lose any functionality!

All of our cameras and camcorders are NTSC except for the Sony DSC-S30 which can be switched to NTSC or PAL internally. NTSC is the USA, Canada, Mexico, South America and some other countries. PAL is most of Europe. There is also a SECAM format used in eastern-block countries, but we don't have any SECAM equipment.

Originally posted by jkrog08
reply to post by KAKUSA

 

Have you heard anything back from them? Also, even though I only saw maybe a handful of genuine UFOs at one glance of the video, I am interested as to if you forwarded this to MUFON?

[edit on 9/12/2009 by jkrog08]

The History channel will contact me and let me know when it will air but haven't heard from them yet, it's only been a couple months... Glow Films are going to provide me with 2 copies of the film upon it's release and I will be recieving credit on the film run at the end

I don't like doing other peoples homework but I guess to shut you up I will do yours for you now...

The rudeness still there, and you still seem like someone who will not listen.

I was not talking about the Infrared "X-ray" case, as I said above you: People (Not you) turn me in the right direction and it is possible.

What I did say is, contrast and aperture just change the amount of light and black and whites latitude, THAT IS A FACT and you will not teach me in that topic sir. The sensor you are using in the old, or even the newest 2/3" Sensor, is too small to distinguish a pixalated bird from dust, that both do reflect light that the sensor captures.

About the Bro Method, and someone said, how is the UFO you are seeing there on thesun, not visible for someone miles away? (And it shouldt be on thesun)

Or you are telling me the UFO is actually hiding close to the sun and from any point on earth we cant see them? Thats not what it looks like on the video (And the camera wouldnt be able to catch that.

You can do this.

Buy a Redone or any 4k camera, modify it, put the Infrared sensor, and buy a 300mm lense.

There we will se the UFO, the bird, the dust, and the ugly.

I dont like you attitude. You are rude, insulting. That never seems like you are trying to teach something, but like you are forcing someone and attacking anyone who say you are wrong. If not, ignoring them (Armap post, stated with the most common sense logic that the Bro Method is incorrect).

Keep believing what you believe, keep being rude, live in your world. Anyway, life is short!

reply to post by ignorant_ape

The first time I thought of two cameras and posted about it was in 2006, the first time I heard of this method, in a thread with the participation of John Bro.

What matters is that this supposed technique is useless for finding high altitude objects and very efficient at finding low altitude objects, creating many false positives.

PS: Reading those older posts I think my English was even worse back then.

reply to post by Jskun

I don't think that the "X-ray" properties were a result of the sensor detecting the heat, we can see in the examples provided that there is no difference between hotter and colder parts, and it looks like the "X-ray" only worked with some materials.


KAKUSA

You should put the text from other sources inside the [ex] and [/ex] tags, as you put it we do not see the difference between your text and the text you copied from the other site. Those tags will show that what you did is not plagiarism and that you were just quoting them.

This is 'John Bro' - original author of 'Solar Obliteration' - or what some have dubbed 'the John Bro Technique' - first published back in 1995.

I appreciated finding this thread... but knowing full-well that the majority of folks here would simply cut it to shreds. That is their decision. It was never offered up for sale - nor was there an accompanying video release. It was just an observation - forwarded as a beginner's method - hopefully to expedite the amatuer enthusiast's venture to actually see 'something' for themselves.

Originally, this item garnered some national and international attention. And I did 'the rounds' - appearing on shows like 'Art Bell Coast to Coast' - 'SIGHTINGS' - and even 'Hardcopy.'

The original tapes were sent to Jim Delatossa at Village Labs in Phoenix, Arizona - and in the end - the determination was that what we captured were solid objects - at some distance up in the sky - traveling at a high rate of speed. The most interesting objects were very fast - sometimes only appearing on a frame or two ( fields ) of the video tapes.

Actually, this story went much farther than the public was ever informed of. Almost as if 'necessary' - a fairly large campain was initiated - and public opinion was deemed 'proof' - that all that was being recorded were insects. Then I somehow mistakenly got linked with Jose Escamillia - and that was the true coup de gras. If that man told me that the sky was blue - I would insist upon getting a second opinion.

The things that I witnessed using 'Solar Obliteration/Johnbro Technique' - I will not even dredge up again. Honestly, the hell with it. It was provided free-of-charge; and most don't even have the capacity to even consider any possible legitamate application. I did my part. My conscience is clear.

Where there mis-identifications?? Absolutely. Did some incorrectly identify insects or other common airborne objects as being UFO's?? Absolutely. Was each and every recorded object a mis-identification? Absolutely not.

Again... there was never any attempt from me to charge for this information. My conscience and kharma are clear. On the other hand - after a decade of insult and ridicule - I really don't care whether or not people believe what I witnessed. But I also add... some very high-level organizations looked into it seriously.

The premise is very simple - SOMETIMES - it is direct light itself - ( intentional or not ) - that conceals objects from the limited range of human sight. So, we went about the business of reducing that effect.

To those that aren't scoffing - take this kind of experiment extremely seriously. Directly looking at the sun can absolutely cause great harm to your eyesight. Hence the reason why 'John Bro Technique' was devised in the first place. We look 'next to the sun' - and not right at it.

Some of the personal experiences that I had all those years ago - were sometimes devastating. Logic dictates that; if you open up a window - whatever is on the other side of it could potentially feel a draft. Just becareful what you ask for - because you might get it.

For those that have an interest - check out the following links.

Solar Obliteration participants from around the globe

The story and development of 'Solar Obliteration'

For the rest of you - have a good laugh - and bore me for the 12th-billionith time with 'why not.'

Johnbro

Sam, contact me through my website, if you will. The links to do so are there. 'Johnbro'

why not ...?

no need for exactly "solar obliteration", but it works, there is some "contre-jour" angle ( en.wikipedia.org... )





[edit on 16/9/09 by depthoffield]

reply to post by Johnbro

Did you (or anyone else) ever tried to use two cameras to know the altitude at which the objects were?

Originally posted by Arbitrageur
They call it "X-ray" but it doesn't involve any X-rays, it's actually a type of "see-through clothing" photography. It's actually based on infrared and not X-ray wavelengths.

Yes.

The infrared captures body heat that emanates through some thinner clothing materials. You can do a Google search to find out more about it.

Not really, near infrared is not able to detect variations of heat near room temperature. Some, not all, clothes (with thin material, like those used for swimsuits) are more transparent in the IR than in the visible spectrum.

Does this meen they are LIGHT SHIPS??????? And are light ships good or bad?

Originally posted by KAKUSA
I normally film using my Sony Hi8 video camera using a 950nm IR filter and in "Nightshot" mode only. I then tried filming using a UV filter over the 950nm IR filter, plus using the edge of the roof to block the suns rays. You can see in the video that this allows so much more to be seen in the sky. The sky was filled with 100's of strange objects....

[edit on 9/12/2009 by KAKUSA]

yeah...right...these "strange" objects are called....BUGS!!!!.....yeah, it's incredible, absolutely astonishing!!! 100's of them...actually flying!!!...and you can see them... IN THE SUNLIGHT!!!!! WOW!!!

Still looking for bananasam. Please contact us. jb

reply to post by Johnbro


Hi, I sent an email to a yahoo address.

Hi guys i just stumbled upon bro method years back, but when i saw your forum few days back i thought i would try this method and guess what from 4 days of taking random shots i got something showing up in these images,i have also included links to original raw pictures directly loaded from my dsc-h7 camera, i dont claim they are alien or whatever. yes one thing i am sure of they are not chromatic abbration, nor any plane which was in site, and in no way anything near the camera, the vertical alignment simply proves its not a plane , to me it looked too similar to that so called rods. This image is from punjab ,india. I have complete knowledge of photoshop , i tried to show them on separate images. I have simply reduced brightnest to minimum and contrast to more then normal.it will reveal this rod. shutter speed was 1/4000
Look near sun.

check out here original images are 8.1 megapixel, if i get time i can try to get pics but its matter of simplicity anyone can do it, just depends if something comes or not, i got these after wasting half hour everyday for 3 days.
N yeah nothing on camera lens either i made sure i am clear about those basic points which are mentioned as an explanation, all images are in sequence mode.

[edit on 22-9-2009 by curiousindian]

[edit on 22-9-2009 by curiousindian]

Originally posted by Johnbro
This is 'John Bro' - original author of 'Solar Obliteration' - or what some have dubbed 'the John Bro Technique' - first published back in 1995.

Hello if you are mr john bro , i am happy to see your msg. I know in america people and specially scientific community is in habbit of rediculing anything they dont know about.

So as you have said its been a decade of humiliation. I want to tell you, i am from state of punjab, in India. So far awat from your location. I had read your methods back in 1997 , that time i didnt own a camera. But i knew your name and your technique back then.

And i respect you simply didnt sell anything which you could have made into big event and not disclose the method , that was time when anything like that could be sold .

Now in 2009 just 4 days back i shot for first time for last 4 days and see the image that showed up. It was then i smiled and i said dude this guy was right. You need patience, this image could have been better if i had foolllowed your procedure , but i just increased shutter speed, and shot directly, damn!. But you can see there is completely something in the distance, and its no freakin plain or firefly.

So mr. john bro, i am saying is you contributed the best way, there is no other way to even have 10% chance of seeing something. What a great discovery, and i believe you, may be not in alien abduction or anyother stuff but i believe you.And i believe you from last 10 years, dont let those govt bastds get you down.

While John Bro has been given credit for "inventing" his method of videotaping UFOs and rods, he didn't invent the method as it's as old as the hills. Anytime you are outside on a bright, sunny day you'll shield your eyes or you'll step out of the sun to look up. He got famous because his footage was aired.

I shot video of an unusual aerial display here in NYC and while not UFO-oriented it was unbelievable. It looked like someone released millions of feathers high in the sky and they were almost obliterating the sun. I shot video of it and stayed "hidden" by the skyscrapers while the edge of the buildings allowed me to shoot almost directly at the sun so I got brightness plus protection.

It's just common sense to use a shield if you are just looking up or videotaping.