Lost photo of UFO found

reply to post by Blaine91555


Funny, I uploaded them and I am getting an error message too. Other people posted download links back in the thread as well, hold I'll link to them:

Page 14 of this thread is filled with alternate download links.

It looks like Megaupload is down.

reply to post by Gazrok


I've seen that movie many times.. one of my favourites..
IMO, this craft is nothing like the one in the movie.
This one here is not in the 'high speed mode' as you suggest.

It's actually exactly the same shape all the way around.. and yes, I do agree on the scalloping underneath. There does appear to be two more levels below the main body.

If you look at this picture I've done, (it is a mirror image of the right hand side) it will help you to see the edge of the body on the left hand side in the second image below...

1st image (mirrored)

i30.photobucket.com...

2nd image (negative enhanced)

i30.photobucket.com...

In the negative image, the left hand edge of the main body appears slightly shadowed. If you follow the upper edge of the right hand side across to the left, this will help you to see the left edge that exists.

The upper cone is as the rest of the craft, symetrical.

hope this helps

Originally posted by phantomjack
reply to post by phantomjack

 

Possible bad news folks. There appears to be a string/cable at the top of the "ship" as shown in this enhanced view in Photoshop.

I can see a vertical line, as well as some sort of mooring at the very center/top of the artifact. I have two BLUE lines pointing to it.

LINK

I have to say it looks like a Antenna to me.

Originally posted by NuminousCosmos
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.

No, that's normal degradation from age. If I recall correctly it was not until about 1976 they came up with more archive-able prints. That actually confirms the age of the print. I don't think any higher resolution will give anymore detail in this case.

Originally posted by phantomjack
reply to post by phantomjack

 

Possible bad news folks. There appears to be a string/cable at the top of the "ship" as shown in this enhanced view in Photoshop.

I can see a vertical line, as well as some sort of mooring at the very center/top of the artifact. I have two BLUE lines pointing to it.

LINK

I knew i've seen something similar before, here's a quick paste job to show what i mean, the ufo pic found on the net has very similar characteristics as the one on this pic, except for the right side where this one has some form of structure, other than that they look pretty much the same, including the antenna and bottom part, but the one on this thread is obscured, you can still see the outline and it is about the same, and both have that reflection on the left side of the photo.

imageshack.us...

Click here for more information.

reply to post by Kaifan


Wow that is nasty close, "antenna" and all. Except the rim doesn't end in such a point on one, it sort of squares off.

What is that pic from?

reply to post by Blaine91555


...site is fine now, although in the past few weeks whilst using Megaupload, the page has read 'temporarily unavailable'... a few refreshes of the page sorted this out for me.

Originally posted by RSF77
reply to post by Blaine91555

 

Funny, I uploaded them and I am getting an error message too. Other people posted download links back in the thread as well, hold I'll link to them:

Page 14 of this thread is filled with alternate download links.

It looks like Megaupload is down.

edit on 28-11-2011 by RSF77 because: (no reason given)

Thank you, that worked for me.

reply to post by phantomjack


I'll take and live in a house in the shape of a saucer any day. LOL

A wedge shape? .... Possible - But how can a wedge shape craft rotate and still be aerodynamic? Just shoot off one side of a wedge, or even a wing off a wing shape craft; and how can it still be aerodynamic?

A disc shape craft , can take a lot of hits, and still be aerodynamic.

reply to post by Six6Six


you can still show an interest in something without concluding belief

Originally posted by RSF77
reply to post by Kaifan

 

Wow that is nasty close, "antenna" and all. Except the rim doesn't end in such a point on one, it squares off.

What is that pic from?

edit on 28-11-2011 by RSF77 because: (no reason given)

Hi, don't know, found it on the net, i've seen it before long ago, didn't find any more info about it though, but it usually pops up on old UFO image galleries, probably from the 70's 80's or so.

I am wondering what kind of physical condition the original photo is in, there seems to be a crease on the lower left side judging from the picture posted of the back of the photo - there seems to be a light near the same place on the front. Has the photo been bent? Also, judging from the handwriting whoever wrote that must be either elderly or have a medical condition of some sort as it is somewhat shaky - though the "1970" looks much stronger, more assured. The whole picture is blurry to some extent, though there is obviously a mist; which combined with the yellowish-orangish tint makes me think it was an early morning fog/mist being burnt off .I also think it is a symetrical saucer shape.

reply to post by Blue Shift


Blue Shift - Some good points.

Which makes me figure - That the bottom parabolic curve plate of a flying saucer craft could possibly be also used as a large sending and recieving antenna.

Originally posted by Nightspore
I am wondering what kind of physical condition the original photo is in, there seems to be a crease on the lower left side judging from the picture posted of the back of the photo - there seems to be a light near the same place on the front. Has the photo been bent? Also, judging from the handwriting whoever wrote that must be either elderly or have a medical condition of some sort as it is somewhat shaky - though the "1970" looks much stronger, more assured. The whole picture is blurry to some extent, though there is obviously a mist; which combined with the yellowish-orangish tint makes me think it was an early morning fog/mist being burnt off .I also think it is a symetrical saucer shape.

The original photo has no folds or creases in it...but it does have quite a few small scratches or cracks on the glossy finish.

Originally posted by Six6Six
98 flags for this crap pic.
god everyone on this site is truly gullible and should be ridiculed for what they will believe!!

I don't know, man. All those flags and pages, and I'm not reading a whole lot of replies from people who are saying they buy the whole story and think the photo is truly a wrinkly flying saucer from Mars. People have an interest. Nothing wrong with that.

The entire UFO field has been so dull and uneventful lately people need something to focus on. Fake or not, it's an interesting old photo.

This is the most clearest UFO photo i have seen ... Is it possible that this is a very good man made flying saucer model ?

looks like an underwater scene.
it really does. look at the "trees", see the bubbles / dust rising up?

I've been reading this thread with keen interest but have held back any comment until I'd had time to review the high-res tiff (always an important step in such cases).

I've got to admit to being compelled by this one, as despite been baited, IAMTAT has patiently followed member instructions to the point where we have a nice scan of an original photograph to study.

At first I was disappointed with the 'string' theory and almost didn't look at the image but something TXRabbit posted got me thinking.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

I believe the line people are seeing is actually the capital K of 'TAKEN' that is visible on the image from the reverse. Hadn't seen anyone mention this so far so thought I'd bring it up.

Really enjoying the thread and wondered if anyone agrees with this line of thought

p.s I'll upload my photo analysis when I sort out my photobucket account (ats uploading is disabled atm).

reply to post by digitalf


Excellent point. This would explain why the line isn't continuous.