The difficulty of capturing fast moving objects at night.

What is this culture of doubt that we presently find ourselves in regarding eye witness accounts that are not accompanied by pictures .
Have any of you doubters got the slightest idea of the difficulties involved with capturing high speed objects at night , with nothing more than a cellphone camera to hand ?


Ok , try this simple experiment at night .

1) leave your cellphone in your pocket .
2) choose an approaching car to photograph
3) remove your cellphone from your pocket and set it up to take a picture.
4) Focus on the car and take your pic .

I wager the following will happen .
1) the car passed before you could get a single exposure .
2) The image is so poor that if you showed it to friends and ask them what the picture is of , they won't be able to tell you .
Now Imagine doing the same exercise with a fast moving object in the night sky ???? .

If you manage to successfully capture a clear image , I would be really interested to see your results .

Maybe in future , before you are tempted to post the usual reply " pics , or it didn't happen " . You will appreciate the difficulties involved with capturing even a POOR image .

"Maybe in future , before you are tempted to post the usual reply " pics , or it didn't happen " . You will appreciate the difficulties involved with capturing even a POOR image ."

Poor images result in porr critisim and conclusions.


You want better conclusions and better appreciation for it ?


Then buy your self a decent camera , stop the car get out . Zoom properly make sure shes in HD .


Post for us to analyize and we will take it from there!


Till then pics or it didn't happen still applies...

but when it comes to ufo's

its clear pics or it didn't happen Good luck champ!

reply to post by yourboycal2


In an Ideal world it would be lovely if we could all carry a state of the art DSLR with us at all times , but alas in the real world , people usually carry no more than a cellphone camera .

I know for a fact that if you attempt take a shot at night with a hend held camera , regardless of how state of the art it may be , the exposure time needed would be too long to obtain a blur free shot .

Nice try

reply to post by tpg65

What is this culture of doubt that we presently find ourselves in regarding eye witness accounts that are not accompanied by pictures .

As difficult as it may be, until people quit lying, I am afraid that some of us are going to continue to doubt and require that their cameras capture those fast moving objects.

Originally posted by VeniVidi
reply to post by tpg65

 

What is this culture of doubt that we presently find ourselves in regarding eye witness accounts that are not accompanied by pictures .

As difficult as it may be, until people quit lying, I am afraid that some of us are going to continue to doubt and require that their cameras capture those fast moving objects.

So you think that all unaccompanied accounts are ficticious and that a crappy , blurred image will give an account credance ?

reply to post by tpg65


Good Post OP and a very valid point.



The Pics or it Didn't Happen is simply another example of the accepted sheeple herd derailing of threads that are of a controversial nature very similar coincidentally to the purpose of Operation Bluebook.

Where most observations of supposed UFOs were explained to the Sheeple as being caused by Swamp Gas or other natural occurring phenomenon

I have learned here at ATS (Americans Talking Smack) is that there is an over abundance of conjecture based Smack Talk purposely used to obfuscate demean and ridicule the point of these controversial as in (conspiracy related) threads and the Pics or it didn't happen is another small part of that mechanism and agenda.

And also apparently as to why the Ignore feature was disabled here long ago....because if these users were ignored, their ability to derail threads would be diminished.

Not that many of these doubters have a remote idea conceptually of your original point and/or knowledge of photography or care to learn.

For The intended purpose is merely to promote doubt and to gain a following by the masses in supporting their agenda of doubt and to further discredit the validity of the presented information.


Since we can no longer ignore such meaningless contributors any longer....all that I can say is ...Thank goodness for the scroll button ....





Peace

I think the problem is that mos people (including myself) have no idea what their looking at and aren't qualified to tell you whether or not that was a UFO or just some human piece of tech flying around.

At night , well that's even wrose..

The other problem is when confronted with proper data which could explain what these things are, and that point in the direction of it not being "alien" or unidentified in nature, the people who asked for help in the first place get all butt hurt.

It's a vicious cycle.

~Keeper

reply to post by nh_ee


Great reply .
Thank you very much for your contribution

Originally posted by tpg65
What is this culture of doubt that we presently find ourselves in regarding eye witness accounts that are not accompanied by pictures .
Have any of you doubters got the slightest idea of the difficulties involved with capturing high speed objects at night , with nothing more than a cellphone camera to hand ?


Ok , try this simple experiment at night .

1) leave your cellphone in your pocket .
2) choose an approaching car to photograph
3) remove your cellphone from your pocket and set it up to take a picture.
4) Focus on the car and take your pic .

I wager the following will happen .
1) the car passed before you could get a single exposure .
2) The image is so poor that if you showed it to friends and ask them what the picture is of , they won't be able to tell you .
Now Imagine doing the same exercise with a fast moving object in the night sky ???? .

If you manage to successfully capture a clear image , I would be really interested to see your results .

Maybe in future , before you are tempted to post the usual reply " pics , or it didn't happen " . You will appreciate the difficulties involved with capturing even a POOR image .

edit on 29/05/2011 by tpg65 because: (no reason given)

edit on 29/05/2011 by tpg65 because: (no reason given)

OP.... Your experiment does not apply. A fast moving object crossing the night sky will appear much slower than a fast moving object close to you. An airplane in the distance going 500mph can be easily photographed, while a car passing you at 500mph could not. Go to a car race.... When you watch the cars at a distance like the opposite side of the oval, you have all the time in the world to take a pic... Look up and watch an airplane, even a fighter jet going faster than Mach1 can be observed and photographed even if I have to get out my camera first....

Also, I believe that the "pics or..." remark is often just a request for more information. most sightings are so poorly described with no real information such as estimated altitude, speed, direction, weather conditions etc etc... so it might also be just a comment of frustration with the OP making a sensational claim with very little real info

reply to post by nv4711


Sorry . I have to disagree .
For a start , you are already assuming the height of the object . You are also assuming the object is on a straight path . Last of all , what about the prolonged exposure that is needed to capture an image at night . Do you carry a tripod with you everywhere ?

Nice try