How to Spot UFOs using Modern Technology

Great first post! Star and Flag for the effort you have put into this.

I was very temped to pick up a digital HD camera just to have one in case of my first encounter with a UFO, or at least my first encounter with what I want to believe is a Alien Spacecraft. I decided against it because I didn't have any knowledge of what cameras and technology I would need, as well as the fact where I live, there is too much light pollution to really get a good view of anything but clouds.

I really appreciate the effort, and I hope to read more discussion about the types of cameras other people use that seem to work well in situations like mine, with not so dark nights. Does anyone have any other offers for types of cameras? I am not very inclined to use Sony products... anymore.

The internal IR filter on most camcorders can be removed. This will greatly increase the sensitivity of the camera, at the expense of color balance. You can rig-up an external filter over the lens for normal shooting, and remove it for IR videography.

I recently modified an inexpensive HD camcorder by removing the cheap lens and replacing it with the lens assembly from an old sony camcorder with night-vision. The lens has a switch which moves the IR filter in and out of the light path for easy switching. The focus can be a little tricky, but now I have a decent optical zoom and IR capability!

One nice thing about these mini HD camcorders is that they record onto solid-state media. With no mechanical tape-drive or disk to spin, they are very energy efficient. This also makes transfer to computer a snap.

Another thing: Manual focus is a MUST! It irritates me to no end watching amateur video of nighttime objects with wonky autofocus. For gosh-sakes, people, learn to use manual focus! I am constantly amazed by the gullibility of people who think that the out-of-focus "bokeh" (google it) represent the actual shape of the object being photographed.

Oh, and for shooting the sky with a conventional "night-shot" camera, you should cover the IR illuminator with opaque tape or disable it, lest you illuminate all manner of dust and bugs close to the camera.

reply to post by zerotensor


Amatuer videos are very hard to understand. The picture quality is like some $15 camera from wal*mart would have!

Thanks for the info on camcorders.

holy crap that was some awesome night video of a flying formation. what the hell is it? did you take that video yourself?

How to spot ufo using modern technology , and your brain ?

Use a radar that show even stealth aircraft.

Use 360 hight speed camera, or a high speed camera mounted on an automatic turret.

And yes night vision could be usefull ( but it is expensive ) : but it could be really needed is some close encounters ( or worse ... ).

Why a high speed camera : because you need a lot of fps to record a ship flying at 30 000 Km/h ( or milles) or even more. Or you will see neething, or just a noise : a chemtrail.


[edit on 14-12-2009 by psychederic]

I've been an amateur researcher/investigator in the field of UFOlogy for 25+ years and have also been in the video broadcast medium since the 70's. I was a audio/video representative for a large national top-5 Electronics Distributor and had to learn the ends and outs of every piece of gear we handled. So video and audio for broadcast, prosumer and consumer markets would all flow to me at some point.

With regards to IR.. Many new cameras will not allow you to shoot in IR during the daylight without either modification and/or filtering added on. If you are not a qualified technician or have a lot of money to have the equipment properly modified, you are in for a wake-up call.

One workaround is to go with some of the earlier Sony Hi-8 cameras that are pre1998. Now obviously the quality will not be as good on analog Hi-8 videotape versus a digital, but there are some advantages to using the older models. Which I will go into below.

The older pre1998 model Sony's had superior Infrared capabilities compared to what they have had on the market for the past 8-9 years. Why so? Well back then, they found out that with the combination of filters and the right wavelength of Infrared, you could supposedly get what was dubbed as the "X-Ray" effect. This became extremely popular with those that walk a thin line in the sexual defiant department and were recording people with a sort-of "See-Thru" your clothes effect during the daytime. In actuality you couldn't see through clothes but you could make out edges of underlying apparel. Because of this, Sony (and Panasonic) stopped making the IR in the wavelengths necessary and went one step further in making it so you could only use the "NightShot" feature at night. But the earlier models can still be found on eBay and will record with an adjustable IR exposure manually and can be used during the daytime. All models since are automatic exposure and can only be used in very low to no light. To understand perhaps how IR works, I'll do a real brief explanation, (below is on the techy side)

People will argue that all cameras can record in Infrared, and will use the old trick that every Video salesman used which is pointing the IR remote at the camera lens. The signal emitted by an IR remote control contains two parts, the control pulses and a modulated carrier wave. The control pulses are used to modulate the carrier, a popular modulation frequency being 36 and 42KHz. The signal is radiated by an IR diode, typical wavelengths in the 850 and 950 nm region of the electromagnetic spectrum. Although this light is invisible to the human eye, it can be seen as a bright spot with a camcorder or digital camera. But in the case of capturing "UnKnowns", what we are discussing is utilizing a filter in addition to the camcorder to block out and record only within a narrow wavelength of 700nm to 850nm. There are other filters available, but beyond the 850nm range I've not experienced any success... This could all be a coincidence though and just not my having anything to capture in the areas I was visiting with other researchers... There are no set standards, and I'm only relating my own personal experience after 8 years use with Infrared filtering with Camcorders. I have used "IR" before that initial time period with still and digital cameras and had always wanted to try it with the video medium since Videography has been my forte' for 30+ years.

One thing I'd like to add is that the quality of your recording will be quite "noisy" and pixelated as it blocks out the other wavelength of light being captured. But it's a trade off of course to get something on tape that you normally might not be able to capture. In the 8 years of using additional filters, I've been very pleased with my results. Examples below are of captures being investigated that were shot in IR.

Comparisons of particulates/unknowns of IR Captures


Plan on spending many.. many.. many hours of neck-straining boredom when your out hoping to catch something... In many cases we are are at the mercy of whatever time-frame and/or schedule of these events even happening, and it's all a gamble of luck and educated guesses, and we spend 100's of more hours searching than we actually get in capturing an event.

In my attempts to better isolate an event for recording/capturing purposes, I made a a platform that holds two camcorders and one pair of hi-powered binoculars on the same stand which is attached to a heavy-duty 'fluid-head' tripod. One camcorder is set in a wider focal range, and the other is equiped with a multiplied optical converter that extends my telephoto range (without having to go into digital mode). The below photo shows this simple setup with just one camcorder and one pair of binoculars. The hardest thing with this kind of setup is collimating the camcorder to be sighted in conjunction with the binoculars view. But once done, no matter where I look through the binoculars, the camcorder will be "spot-on" and I can hit the record button without ever removing my eyes from the binoculars and the object I'm tracking. Below is one of my first homemade setups (I have several now that are made out of Aircraft aluminum and hold up to 4 cameras/devices)

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/69a8d63d4038.jpg[/atsimg]


I've been able to record a number of strange audio on videotape that for reasons unknown would not get picked up on a digital camera nor a handheld digital audio recorder. There is a flurry of theories and conjecture as to why that is, but I wont go into those. But suffice it to say that the more backup and 'tools' at ones disposal, the better the chance to capturing an event. So if one device does not pick something up, perhaps the other did. So I run both analog and digital side by side. For an example of these strange sounds, the links below are of our ATS investigation at James Gillilands ECETI ranch.

Strange Sounds Captured On IR Camera

And we had to record some control sounds to compare it against then try rule out a number of other factors which are located here:

Ambient Control factors and My Thoughts

I dont know if this link still works (I think it does), but this is a daytime IR capture of an object back in 2006 (I think) of an object I first saw hovering near a cloud while the wind was blowing against it (Cloud movements confirmed that too from my POV). But as I was getting ready to record, it went behind the clouds.. So the first portion of the video is my scanning the edge of the cloud several times hoping to catch it again.

May 27th Daytime Capture of a UnKnown in IR

By the way.. if you decide to move up to the category of infrared shooting using Generation 3 or 4 optics.. Since your already going to be spending anywhere from $3500.00-$10,000.00 dollars on a unit.. for the love of all that surrounds us, go with a monocular that has a camera adapter hookup. Why anyone would want to go with goggles is beyond me.. Sure, they are great for looking at 'things' personally.. but for capturing on video, they will not work well at all.. And really what is the point of trying to capture something if you cant record it properly..?

Johnny

Didn't Sony officially get rid of its nightvision line of camcorders? I remember them getting in a heap of trouble by irate women because men were using them in the daytime for seeing through women's clothes. I'm almost certain of it.

reply to post by JohnnyAnonymous
Thanks for the great post with all the detailed information, that's really informative. That sounds consistent with what I remember about Sony's changes to the nightshot system.

Nethawk I think that post should answer your question too.

It looks like a great idea to mount the binoculars and camera to the same tripod mount. Very cool

Wow! JohnnyAnonymous auctually posted on my first thread!

Anyway, thanks for all the information everyone, this is really helpful.

And no, I didn't make the video, but I know the person who did.

Originally posted by TimothyMartin
reply to post by The Shrike

 

I'm looking up the Panasonic SDR-H80K. It looks like a good deal, thanks.

Can you show me the link to your thread?

I'm so happy right now because at 11:40pm I saw a UFO so close under the clouds heading south. I was driving home when I saw it and sadly had no camera. I stopped to watch it through my binoculars. It was the closest UFO I ever saw.

It appeared to be two very dim giant lights in the sky ziggzagging everywere. I never saw something like it.

Instead of providing the link to my (bare) thread, here is the URL that I put in my thread as it is a link to the webpage where my article and photos are located: www.ufocasebook.com...

I'm sure you'll find out but that particular camcorder doesn't use tape or DVD. It records to a hard drive, 60GB.

I read about a machine... see the RexResearch website, there was a man who made a machine for the army which looked into objects far away and near, but when he learned it would kill people he looked into, he destroyed it. He could look into his own hand and see all the blood vessels, etc... as if the device was putting light into his hand on a specific plane.
What made this thing even more interesting, is that it was able to see 'stealth' technology like a thermal camera sees heat., it really stands out I guess.
From learning more about what stealth is I've uncovered 2 facts;
1. Comsumertronix in Albuquerque NM will make it for you as a "special project".
2. I don't know if they make it with element 140, but evidently a man on youtube showed the stuff in rock form, it weighs a lot more than gold for the space it occupies, it is the heaviest known element. Yes, I said element 140.
See the Phil Schneider video on youtube about the war on grays under nevada\\\\www.youtube.com...

reply to post by mrmrmikee


I didn't know most of that info, very interesting, keep us informed if you find more details or any proof.

UPDATE:
Do NOT report to MUFON. Try and follow this thread: www.abovetopsecret.com...

MUFON is probably working with or for the MIB.

New information leads me to believe this. Read my thread here:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

reply to post by TimothyMartin


Excellent thread, particularly for your first! Welcome to ATS Timothy!

The only thing I would add to your equipment/systems is an account at www.heavens-above.com or similar website, so you can either anticipate known satellites, or having captured a sighting, check to make certain what you saw isn't a satellite.

Also, sometimes the ISS can be seen in the daytime. From Heavens Above:

See the ISS in daylight!
Some observers have reported that as the ISS approaches completion, it can now be seen
in daylight. It is unlikely to be visible when the Sun is high, but when the Sun is low in
the sky, you may well be able to see a high pass of the ISS.

I look forward to your offerings

reply to post by argentus


Wow, I didn't know that! Still, most of the UFOs I see aren't just little dots in the sky or something, but rather a craft around 100-500ft above.

But I'll definently do some research on what you just mentioned! Thanks so much!

reply to post by TimothyMartin


Well, do you actually have convincing videos of UFO's then considering you have invested so much time and money in hunting UFOs and write as if you frequently detect them?

reply to post by Indigo_Child


Afraid not, Indigo_child (I like your usersername by the way,) I only saw three UFOs that were so low, and the first two times I was 24 and wasn't as interested in filming them.

Last one I saw was last week and didn't even think of videotaping it because I was in such awe!

But my group and I UFO hunt constantly, yet our videos are never impresive. We get many videos of star like-UFOs zigzagging around, but none are worth posting.

I auctually don't have the night vision equipment yet, my friend does and he often lets me use it.

As for the binoculars, they cost only $70!

Also, I'm not constantly working and sitting at my laptop; I have a night job (11PM-6AM) I get up at noon and write until 5PM. Then I go UFO hunting.

reply to post by argentus


Good call on "Heavens Above".

For sky charts, I recommend Stellarium:
www.stellarium.org...

In the U.S. you can track civilian air traffic live at,
flightaware.com...

Another piece of equipment that could be quite useful for UFO hunting is an all-sky camera. Coupled with a DVR or slaved to an old PC, you can archive images and make time-lapse movies of the sky. While a proper, domed setup with fisheye lens would be ideal, you can always cobble-together a workable setup with a bit of DIY know-how. For example,
www.instructables.com...

There's a quite interesting paper published by the "Italian Committee for Project Hessdalen" called "Physics from UFO data" about processing UFO data here:

www.itacomm.net...

I suspect it's a bit wacky, not having time to review it in depth or having seen if there were any follow-ups/if it's cited elsewhere, but there's loads of really interesting stuff about CCDs and photometry, also relevant to DSLRs (although buried in there) and CCD type sensors in general.