Lost photo of UFO found

Originally posted by gambon
reply to post by gortex

 

already have chap, konica did not exist as a brand untill 87, read my previous post in this thread , includes link to the history of konica... and what it was previously called

Konishiroku celebrated its 100th anniversary in 1973 and began to use the Konica name on more of the products it sold in the European and North American markets.
www.fundinguniverse.com...

In 1975, a year of growth and change for Konishiroku, the company introduced the Konica C35 EF, the first of a new generation of compact cameras with a built-in electronic flash. U-Bix copiers were well received, with sales reaching the 50,000-unit mark by 1975. That same year, the company exported its first photographic-paper-making plant to the Soviet Union.
www.fundinguniverse.com...

Maybe they did chap

Neat photo, it looks framiliar laying flat as displayed, and more so as it was held up. It looks to me like 'period' experimental craft of the day. The photo seems to give the definition of a circular craft, though the central structure seems to be shaped like a cockpit. To the right side of the pictured craft it appears to be the propulsion end, much like that of a jet. I believe it well could have been an experimental aircraft rather than a extraterrestrial craft. UFO in the 'strictest' sense yes, ET, not so likely. But a neat pic just the same.

Originally posted by IAMTAT
My son used our HP DESKTOP 1055 for the first actual scan...But the others were done for me at Kinkos on their scanner at their highest resolution.

No problem, only said what I did since all id seen by the time id posted was the first scan you did which was pretty small and even with an real old scanner you could get much bigger. Ill whisk through and find your newer larger scans... want a good look at those reflections.

Edit:- Damn even with a higher res the reflections are to blurry to make out.

reply to post by gortex


hi , i understand that they names cameras named konica in seventies , but the complete brand name konica (applied to all products as a brand name inc paper ) was in 87

www.konicaminolta.com...

The area in red is to me looks like the area that had the best focus, putting both the saucer and the foreground tree clearly center stage. I also feel that the edges of the image show some kind of double negative or layering-leaving ghosting or fogging behind.

reply to post by phantomjack


I tend to disagree with you - Even about the shape of a starship that travels in space. My assumption.... Is that a starship needs a perfect disc shape, for large interstellar missions; such as the ones that travel to our Earth.

The disc shape is a perfect shape for deflecting missiles, and micro-meteoroid impacts, without the luxury of a force shield protecting the starship. It would have to be small enough to negotiate thru larger meteoriod fields.

For example: A disc thrower in the Olympic's, uses a perfect metal disc for easy travel thru our atmosphere.

A flying saucer has to perform with or without a defense shield, but preferably with a defense shield that could make it almost invincible.

reply to post by IAMTAT


Wow, what a treasure. Your very lucky.

reply to post by NuminousCosmos


It does look like the UFO is fairly close with regard to focus.

Pretend the object is a hat. Now imagine a person is underneath it. Everything about the image in terms of definition and focus makes sense. It is, I am certain, a smallish (~18 inch) object maybe 10 feet from the camera.

Wow i have followed this post from start to finish and i must commend the op. This is what i joined ATS for. Like minded people showing respect for each other. Good job OP and everyone else involved.

Sorry for your loss.

Originally posted by NuminousCosmos
The area in red is to me looks like the area that had the best focus, putting both the saucer and the foreground tree clearly center stage. I also feel that the edges of the image show some kind of double negative or layering-leaving ghosting or fogging behind.

I agree with you on the focus issue.

Though I also think the ghosting is a result of scanning a picture.

Originally posted by IAMTAT
body

What's this body refer to?

Did you copy/paste?

I haven't read the thread...

Seems suspect to me, like it was copied from a guide or something..

Can't imagine what a gov agency would stand to gain by such post's

If no, apologies..

Heh heh! Upside-down chicken pot pie. That's a good one.

Of course, even if the image was crystal clear, it's still just an image. At the end of the day, all it can be is a curiosity.

Originally posted by Erno86
reply to post by phantomjack

 

I tend to disagree with you - Even about the shape of a starship that travels in space. My assumption.... Is that a starship needs a perfect disc shape, for large interstellar missions; such as the ones that travel to our Earth.

The disc shape is a perfect shape for deflecting missiles, and micro-meteoroid impacts, without the luxury of a force shield protecting the starship. It would have to be small enough to negotiate thru larger meteoriod fields.

For example: A disc thrower in the Olympic's, uses a perfect metal disc for easy travel thru our atmosphere.

A flying saucer has to perform with or without a defense shield, but preferably with a defense shield that could make it almost invincible.

edit on 28-11-2011 by Erno86 because: typo

But, we build houses in the shape rectangles and squares for the reason it is cheaper to do so, and maximize the amount of space inside the shape.

The shape in this case has nothing to do with it size and ability to navigate. Size is relative.

I will agree that there may be some advantage for deflection purposes, however, again, a ship travelling this far would have advanced capabilities beyond normal reflective physics requirements. Having said that, a circle in this case is less effective than say, a wedge shaped / winged shaped vehicle, so why build a round saucer to begin with?

Look beyond what you know and have seen on TV. UFO's do not need to be saucer shaped for travel or defense.

Darn thing could look like a duck and still fly well in interstellar space LOL

Look's like it could be a blimp. Not saying it is because it's interesting. However, that is another possibility. ~SheopleNation

Yes, the fogging could be a scanner issue as well. I wish we could know the exact era this was taken in...the protrusions on the side of the saucer look similar to ones from Close Encounters of the Third Kind.

reply to post by franspeakfree
is there any way of contacting this friend or the family members to find out more information on the photo?

sorry if this has been asked already,I haven't read through the whole thread..

reply to post by phantomjack


Oh.... and another thing - I believe that the engineering in the design of a propulsion unit, that is cabable of FTL speeds, depends on a disc shape; in order for it to travel at many times the speed of light. This is almost a given, since other-worlder saucer craft's, have been sighted by Earthling's as disc shaped craft's.

Originally posted by IAMTAT

Originally posted by RSF77
Okay, OP sent me 4 files (one each of .bmp, .jpg, .pdf and .tif uncompressed) through email, I compressed them with 7zip and uploaded them here:

LostUFO.7z on Megaupload

Quite impressive resolution and detail on that UFO, have at it guys, do your magic!

This is getting interesting!

Pause for edit of this post I will upload them individually and uncompressed if anyone wants that to avoid compression errors...

HERE THEY ARE!

That size is what I'd expect for a good scan. They should not have been compressed however. That was a mistake. They use terms like lossless compression but it's not true. All compression is lossy and they play word games. I'll try the link later as it appears the site is down.

I'm getting an error message off that link however and cannot download.

Originally posted by phantomjack
The disc shape is a perfect shape for deflecting missiles, and micro-meteoroid impacts, without the luxury of a force shield protecting the starship. It would have to be small enough to negotiate thru larger meteoriod fields.

I will agree that there may be some advantage for deflection purposes, however, again, a ship travelling this far would have advanced capabilities beyond normal reflective physics requirements. Having said that, a circle in this case is less effective than say, a wedge shaped / winged shaped vehicle, so why build a round saucer to begin with?

The thing you have to ask yourself is why do we build and use parabolic dishes? That's all a real saucer is, after all. A couple of parabolic dishes arranged rim-to-rim. The answer is that for the most part, we use them for either broadcasting or gathering EM waves. Yeah, they have an added advantage of being relatively aero or hydrodynamic in an air or fluid environment.

But for the most part, if you had a deelybobber that generated gravity waves or something of the like, you could maybe use a parabola to focus them on a particular point in space. You focus the gravity waves at a particular point away from the ship, and maybe you can create a kind of spacetime warp like you get from mass, but there wouldn't be any actual mass there. More like phantom mass. And what's your ship going to do? It's going to "fall" toward it. But as it falls, the point of phantom mass moves away from it, and pretty soon you're still falling toward the phantom mass but at a speed rapidly approaching the speed of light, but without the need to expend additional fuel or energy to do it. If you were smart enough, you might be able to do it in a dimension we can't even detect, so we wouldn't even be able to see the warp.

And if you needed to "fly" in an atmosphere, all you'd have to do is project a little point up above you so you can balance out the forces between the Earth's gravity and your ship. Hold it in a neutral position.

Just a thought. And yeah, the saucer shape also looks good.