Please look at this photo and tell me what you think

reply to post by larphillips


I think it's a frisbee. Or a hubcap/wheel cover.

Originally posted by sweord
reply to post by Dutcheagle

 

He's just pointing out that you can't make something else of something that isn't.There's some evidence to conclude it is a bird though.

none of that changes the fact that there are people who WANT to see a bird just as there are people who want to see a UFO.

NO there people who have worked out it's most likely a bird ,and there are people on here that ALWAYS say it's a ufo can you see the difference.

Originally posted by LightOrange

Originally posted by JesusChristwins
reply to post by LightOrange

 

Man the photographer who took the picture of the bird manage to make it look so clear because it was moving with a low speed. How can a bird of this size fly so fast that a camera cant catch it?

You're joking, right? Chickadees are very fast little buggers. A shorter shutter speed on a camera is used to take pictures of moving objects. A company that takes photos of still-standing objects would set their camera to a rather long shutter speed.

Be realistic, please. You honestly think it is more likely that it's an alien spacecraft than a bird? Come on.

Sorry but exposure is dictated by lighting conditions film speed shutter and aperture settings many still life or advertising shots are taken in a studio with studio flash systems , the flash can be a short as 1/35,000 of a second that is effectively the shutter speed.

That's beside the point probably the most compelling evidence here that this object is close in fact very close to the camera is that fact that with a shutter speed of 1/500th of a second its blurred.

To back this up say a small bird can fly at say 35mph past the camera lets have a look at how far it would travel in 1/500th of a second.

35mph is 51.3 feet per second divided by 500= one tenth of an inch, if that was at the distance of the top of the tower 1/10th of an inch would hardly show. If the object was very far in the distance even if traveling at hundreds of miles per our it wouldn't show blur.

This object must be close to the camera because it shows motion blur and out of focus blur its probably less than 50 ft from the camera looking at the camera specs and checking with the online depth of field calculator.

If its flying slower than above then it's even closer to the camera!!!

Sorry fig above would be 1/10 of a foot in 1/500th of a second or 1.2 inches.

reply to post by wmd_2008

NO there people who have worked out it's most likely a bird ,and there are people on here that ALWAYS say it's a ufo can you see the difference.

yes. there are people here who ALWAYS say it is a bird too. thats my point.

Originally posted by sweord
reply to post by wmd_2008

 

NO there people who have worked out it's most likely a bird ,and there are people on here that ALWAYS say it's a ufo can you see the difference.

yes. there are people here who ALWAYS say it is a bird too. thats my point.

I will admit I am a sceptic, I joined here because I was told I would see some real interesting pictures & videos.
I would like nothing better than to see some real evidence and to be honest it's more likely someone like myself would find it because we don't except every blurry picture or lights in a video at night on youtube is a ufo.

Now if I did find something I thought was the real deal I would back it to the hilt but I look at every picture and video on here with an open mind I then use my 30+ years as an amateur photographer to judge what I am seeing.

My first camera was an all manual 35mm SLR film camera, manual exposure and focus,I now have a modern 16mp Sony SLT DSLR. I have a VERY good understanding of what to look for in a picture/video as I have said gained over 30+ years of taking and looking at photographs.

We have many people on here like me and also semi-pro and even professional photographers many of whom post in threads like this.

The evidence of this picture using the exif data stored with the photo points to a small object very close to the camera and the reason I think that are given in the my posts above.

That's why people think its a bird and not MOG from ZOG visiting Earth!!!

reply to post by larphillips


Looks like someone was frisbee golfing and hooked hard!

My first thought is a bird but then you would be able to see it better.

not sure what it is now

Originally posted by Edgar806
My first thought is a bird but then you would be able to see it better.

not sure what it is now

Don't you think motion blur would be a factor if the bird was flying at a relatively fast speed?

Granted, when I see bird, some just flitter about relatively slowly, but some can zip by me very quickly. I think the speed often depends on the type of bird: some birds (such as crows) often lumber along, while some birds (such as sparrows and swallows) zip around.

Quality of object is bad so not possible to say.

I believe it is a ship.

Possibly Bryygliann.

Definitely not human.

Crap. Already I've said too much.

Please, Don't ask me why I believe this.

In fact, please ignore my post.

OK, OK! I Give up!


In the interest of compromise, however, and befitting the good intent and motivations behind the ATS community brotherhood (and sisterhood, as the case may be), I offer a solution that should make everyone happy:

reply to post by gortex


I agree with the OP that it is not a bird, definitely. If we consider the photo non adulterated, the level of grain in the focus of the object shows that it is more distant that the column that provides a size reference. It would take a huge bird to get represented like that, and large birds tend not to be very fast, it would also have over-proportioned characteristics that would be easy to identify (it wouldn't look like a disk, a small bird going very fast can seem like almost a bell or ball but to seem like a disk you would have to get the image in exactly the time the wings would be directly extended toward the observer).

Originally posted by Panic2k11
reply to post by gortex

 

I agree with the OP that it is not a bird, definitely. If we consider the photo non adulterated, the level of grain in the focus of the object shows that it is more distant that the column that provides a size reference. .It would take a huge bird to get represented like that, and large birds tend not to be very fast...

The OP has softened his stance (a little) on that, and has also made a correction as to the size of the pole.

The OP now says the pole is only 80 feet high instead of being 190 feet high. You can tell by the steel hand and foot-holds used by utility workers to climb the pole that the pole is not that large at all...

...So it's basically a little taller than an average telephone pole.

If those hand and foot brackets are about 1 foot long, and the object is only slightly behind the pole, then the object may only be about 10 inches to a foot long.

reply to post by Soylent Green Is People


Going by the exif info and model of camera that object is most likely closer to the camera than the pole that's why we can see some motion blur during the 1/500 th second exposure and also why the object is out of focus.

Info from the online Depth of Filed calculator. DOF Calculator

Samsung PL210 aperture f5.6 focal length 36mm all from exif data distance to subject approx 80ft.

Near limit of focus 52.2 feet far limit 171 ft

For that object to be out of focus it's either closer than 52 feet or further than 171 anywhere in between it would be in reasonable focus.

If its further than 171 ft the motion blur would probably not show its very slight.

I would say it looks like this object is closer than 50 ft to the camera that's why it's out of focus and we can see motion blur.

reply to post by wmd_2008

Now if I did find something I thought was the real deal I would back it to the hilt

IF u did, people would tell you its a bird.

Originally posted by sweord
reply to post by wmd_2008

 

Now if I did find something I thought was the real deal I would back it to the hilt

IF u did, people would tell you its a bird.

I've only said it "could be" a bird.
A lot of other people seemed to have inexplicably ruled out the possibility that it could be a bird.

reply to post by polarwarrior


Yes for sure its bird. I am wondering why theres no real good quality and big pictures of ufo so far ?
Isint it technology age then some mobile phones have over 10 mpx cameras and photographers good tools to catch it ?

Then i going over forums all the time see only crapy pictures of birds planes etc. Is gov deleting good looking pictures or what ?

I can't imagine that being a bird. If it was, it would be flying diagonally upwards without flapping it's wings at an awful high speed. It just doesn't seem right.