A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Photo Equipment » 35mm Photo Equipment
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Serious question from a skeptic - practical realities of taking clearvideo/stills of UFO's?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old February 19th 08, 11:41 PM posted to alt.photography,rec.photo.equipment.35mm,sci.astro,rec.video.production
Doc
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 19
Default Serious question from a skeptic - practical realities of taking clearvideo/stills of UFO's?

I'm limiting this to what seem like technically oriented groups, not
including UFO forums in an attempt to avoid slobbering tirades from
the tinfoil hat brigade.

I'm wondering why it is, in all the incidents of "UFO" sightings,
including some that have made the news, any images that aren't obvious
hoaxes (and many that are) are always grainy, shaky, indistinct blobs
blurs, pinpoint lights etc.

Okay, the conspiracy buff's default is always going to be that
anything the gov't has is instantly going to be hidden and disavowed
by the MIB. Maybe my perception is incorrect, but it seems powerful
consumer photographic gear has been available for some time and there
are legions of skilled photography and videography enthusiasts amateur
and professional. How hard would it be to get that suped-up telephoto
or zoom lens trained on the objects in question to get something
resembling a clear shot in the case of something like this

http://youtube.com/watch?v=MAox0pcZZxo


where the objects are clearly visible for some time, seemingly plenty
of time for someone who's skilled to get their gear onto a tripod and
get a reasonably close-up shot.

Or do I have a mistaken notion of how powerful the available optics
are? The News stations show clear, distinct shots of the fast-moving
Space Shuttle when it's well into its trajectory on launch days, I
would guess from at least as far if not farther than these objects are
from the cameras. The above link is an incident that occurred over a
major city and apparently caused quite a buzz. *Nobody* there had good
gear they could whip out to take some pics?

I would think a major city has astronomy buffs and universities who
have fairly sophisticated gear already set up to photograph distant
objects. Wouldn't capturing something at airliner altitude be quite
possible?

Thanks
  #2  
Old February 19th 08, 11:46 PM posted to alt.photography,rec.photo.equipment.35mm,sci.astro,rec.video.production
nappy[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1
Default Serious question from a skeptic - practical realities of taking clear video/stills of UFO's?


"Doc" wrote in message
...
I'm limiting this to what seem like technically oriented groups, not
including UFO forums in an attempt to avoid slobbering tirades from
the tinfoil hat brigade.

I'm wondering why it is, in all the incidents of "UFO" sightings,
including some that have made the news, any images that aren't obvious
hoaxes (and many that are) are always grainy, shaky, indistinct blobs
blurs, pinpoint lights etc.

Okay, the conspiracy buff's default is always going to be that
anything the gov't has is instantly going to be hidden and disavowed
by the MIB. Maybe my perception is incorrect, but it seems powerful
consumer photographic gear has been available for some time and there
are legions of skilled photography and videography enthusiasts amateur
and professional. How hard would it be to get that suped-up telephoto
or zoom lens trained on the objects in question to get something
resembling a clear shot in the case of something like this

http://youtube.com/watch?v=MAox0pcZZxo



Damn.. when are people going to learn about aerial flares and missle
avoidance flares.. I am so friggin tired of this..


I would think a major city has astronomy buffs and universities who
have fairly sophisticated gear already set up to photograph distant
objects. Wouldn't capturing something at airliner altitude be quite
possible?


Yes. Everyone wonders this. And some set out to capture good photos of UFOs.
The best photos are debunked and the ones that can't be debunked or
explained become the stuff of legend.

We'll know the answer to your question as soon as good proof starts coming
in and people are no longer fascinated by Air Force training missions.

UFOs. That's what I do now. A new show every friggin week and $1000/month
electrical bills for the render farm.

They're real enough for me!


Thanks



  #3  
Old February 20th 08, 12:24 AM posted to alt.photography,rec.photo.equipment.35mm,sci.astro,rec.video.production
dlzc
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2
Default Serious question from a skeptic - practical realities of takingclear video/stills of UFO's?

On Feb 19, 3:41*pm, Doc wrote:
I'm limiting this to what seem like technically oriented
groups, not including UFO forums in an attempt to
avoid slobbering tirades from the tinfoil hat brigade.

I'm wondering why it is, in all the incidents of "UFO"
sightings, including some that have made the news,
any images that aren't obvious hoaxes (and many that
are) are always grainy, shaky, indistinct blobs
blurs, pinpoint lights etc.


Speed of object. Zooming in on something that is close to the "grain
size" of the recording medium.

...
Or do I have a mistaken notion of how powerful the
available optics are?


No. I suspect that much of the popular press "reports" seem to
immediately preceed a new SciFi movie, such as "Cloverfield".

The News stations show clear, distinct shots of the
fast-moving Space Shuttle when it's well into its
trajectory on launch days, I would guess from at least
as far if not farther than these objects are from the
cameras. The above link is an incident that occurred
over a major city and apparently caused quite a buzz.
*Nobody* there had good gear they could whip out to
take some pics?


Launch photographers were probably not available. The youtube video
shows a nighttime shot, that blooms badly from the adjacent "garage".
Such "string of pearls" lighting is normal here in Arridzona, where
approaching flights are directed along I-17.

I would think a major city has astronomy buffs and
universities who have fairly sophisticated gear already
set up to photograph distant objects.


10-60 miles is not distant. Many such devices you would call to serve
cannot focus that close, nor can they ncecssarily be aimed close to
the horizon, track high speed objects, etc.

Wouldn't capturing something at airliner altitude be quite
possible?


Graininess results.

I've seen UFOs. But I don't care if I convince someone of that, nor
whether or not they were of extra-terrestial origin. Not my job. I
got 15-20 seconds of amazement, and a friend right next to me that
could not see it. I consider it a gift.

Heckling welcomed. No aluminum foil hats here.

David A. Smith
  #4  
Old February 20th 08, 12:43 AM posted to alt.photography,rec.photo.equipment.35mm,sci.astro,rec.video.production
Doc
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 19
Default Serious question from a skeptic - practical realities of takingclear video/stills of UFO's?

On Feb 19, 6:24*pm, dlzc wrote:

I've seen UFOs. *But I don't care if I convince someone of that, nor
whether or not they were of extra-terrestial origin. *Not my job. *I
got 15-20 seconds of amazement, and a friend right next to me that
could not see it. *I consider it a gift.

Heckling welcomed. *No aluminum foil hats here.




I believe you've seen objects you've been unable to identify, by
default making it a "UFO" from your vantage point whether it was a
cloud or the Goodyear blimp. Not so easily convinced that it had
anything to do with visitors from another planet.
  #5  
Old February 20th 08, 12:55 AM posted to alt.photography,rec.photo.equipment.35mm,sci.astro,rec.video.production
Androcles
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1
Default Serious question from a skeptic - practical realities of taking clear video/stills of UFO's?


"Doc" wrote in message
...
| I'm limiting this to what seem like technically oriented groups, not
| including UFO forums in an attempt to avoid slobbering tirades from
| the tinfoil hat brigade.
|
| I'm wondering why it is, in all the incidents of "UFO" sightings,
| including some that have made the news, any images that aren't obvious
| hoaxes (and many that are) are always grainy, shaky, indistinct blobs
| blurs, pinpoint lights etc.
|
| Okay, the conspiracy buff's default is always going to be that
| anything the gov't has is instantly going to be hidden and disavowed
| by the MIB. Maybe my perception is incorrect, but it seems powerful
| consumer photographic gear has been available for some time and there
| are legions of skilled photography and videography enthusiasts amateur
| and professional. How hard would it be to get that suped-up telephoto
| or zoom lens trained on the objects in question to get something
| resembling a clear shot in the case of something like this
|
| http://youtube.com/watch?v=MAox0pcZZxo
|
|
| where the objects are clearly visible for some time, seemingly plenty
| of time for someone who's skilled to get their gear onto a tripod and
| get a reasonably close-up shot.
|
| Or do I have a mistaken notion of how powerful the available optics
| are? The News stations show clear, distinct shots of the fast-moving
| Space Shuttle when it's well into its trajectory on launch days, I
| would guess from at least as far if not farther than these objects are
| from the cameras. The above link is an incident that occurred over a
| major city and apparently caused quite a buzz. *Nobody* there had good
| gear they could whip out to take some pics?
|
| I would think a major city has astronomy buffs and universities who
| have fairly sophisticated gear already set up to photograph distant
| objects. Wouldn't capturing something at airliner altitude be quite
| possible?
|
| Thanks

1) Most UFO sightings are over the Continental USA
2) These were excitable college kids
3) One is heard to say "anti-missile missiles".
4) The Newscaster was prepared for the helicopter explanation
and
5) (last and very least) if the lights WERE identified by the
method you suggest it would not be an unidentified flying
object, but an identified flying object. IFOs are not newsworthy.


  #6  
Old February 20th 08, 02:45 AM posted to alt.photography,rec.photo.equipment.35mm,sci.astro,rec.video.production
David McCall[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2
Default Serious question from a skeptic - practical realities of taking clear video/stills of UFO's?


"Larry L [in Honolulu]" wrote in message
...

Actually no one I know with good video or even still equipment keeps it
ready, unprotected, and sitting on his car seat, as that would be an
invitation to have it stolen. My gear is always in a case, at best in the
trunk, and if I saw a UFO I'd have to consider the time I'd spend not
looking at it in order to get the camera out and ready. Considering that
most of these events don't last too long, that might be a tough call.

Larry [in Honolulu]

I had an SLR at the ready sitting on an open glovebox door.
The damn thing got up and hit me in the head.

It might not have done that if I hadn't fallen asleep and rolled the car.

40 years ago

David


  #7  
Old February 20th 08, 03:54 AM posted to alt.photography,rec.photo.equipment.35mm,sci.astro,rec.video.production
Doc
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 19
Default Serious question from a skeptic - practical realities of takingclear video/stills of UFO's?

On Feb 19, 8:35*pm, "Larry L [in Honolulu]"
wrote:


Actually no one I know with good video or even still equipment keeps it
ready, unprotected, and sitting on his car seat, as that would be an
invitation to have it stolen. My gear is always in a case, at best in the
trunk, and if I saw a UFO I'd have to consider the time I'd spend not
looking at it in order to get the camera out and ready. Considering that
most of these events don't last too long, that might be a tough call.



I was thinking of gear kept in a house too, but anyway.

I hear the points you're making, but it just seems that by sheer
numbers, over the years - the circumstance of an event and someone
with gear ready would converge. Someone already doing a shoot at the
beach or other outdoor circumstances, someone videotaping from their
balcony, rooftop, wherever, you would think that by now someone would
have gotten a good shot of one of these "unexplained" objects, showing
it to be either a recognizeable craft or object or not.
  #8  
Old February 20th 08, 04:22 AM posted to alt.photography,rec.photo.equipment.35mm,sci.astro,rec.video.production
ushere
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1
Default Serious question from a skeptic - practical realities of takingclear video/stills of UFO's?

Doc wrote:
On Feb 19, 8:35 pm, "Larry L [in Honolulu]"
wrote:

Actually no one I know with good video or even still equipment
keeps it ready, unprotected, and sitting on his car seat, as that
would be an invitation to have it stolen. My gear is always in a
case, at best in the trunk, and if I saw a UFO I'd have to consider
the time I'd spend not looking at it in order to get the camera out
and ready. Considering that most of these events don't last too
long, that might be a tough call.



I was thinking of gear kept in a house too, but anyway.

I hear the points you're making, but it just seems that by sheer
numbers, over the years - the circumstance of an event and someone
with gear ready would converge. Someone already doing a shoot at the
beach or other outdoor circumstances, someone videotaping from their
balcony, rooftop, wherever, you would think that by now someone would
have gotten a good shot of one of these "unexplained" objects,
showing it to be either a recognizeable craft or object or not.


after many years as a news cameraman, i always travelled with a cheap
instamatic in the glove compartment - now with an equally cheap digital
camera. over the years i have made a bit of money from snapping
the odd incident, scene, curiosity, whatever. and my motivation wasn't
financial, rather, there's many a strange thing you see on the road
you'd like to show your partner....

lesle
  #9  
Old February 20th 08, 07:05 AM posted to alt.photography,rec.photo.equipment.35mm,sci.astro,rec.video.production
William Graham
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,361
Default Serious question from a skeptic - practical realities of taking clear video/stills of UFO's?


"Doc" wrote in message
...
On Feb 19, 6:24 pm, dlzc wrote:

I've seen UFOs. But I don't care if I convince someone of that, nor
whether or not they were of extra-terrestial origin. Not my job. I
got 15-20 seconds of amazement, and a friend right next to me that
could not see it. I consider it a gift.

Heckling welcomed. No aluminum foil hats here.




I believe you've seen objects you've been unable to identify, by
default making it a "UFO" from your vantage point whether it was a
cloud or the Goodyear blimp. Not so easily convinced that it had
anything to do with visitors from another planet.

Yeah.....With my knowledge of aircraft, almost everything in the sky is a,
"UFO" to me.......But the last thing I would assume is that any of it is
from some other planet......The closest "other planet" is over 4 light years
away from us, so this is a no brainer.......


  #10  
Old February 20th 08, 07:09 AM posted to alt.photography,rec.photo.equipment.35mm,sci.astro,rec.video.production,alt.ufo.reports
William Graham
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,361
Default UFO Photography and Videography (was: from a skeptic)


"Neo" wrote in message
.. .
"Doc" wrote:
I'm limiting this to what seem like technically oriented groups


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

Simply apply the George Carlin rule of government, which is
the "Everything the government tells me is a lie" rule, and
you'll know the truth of the matter. Works every time!

But this is like saying that once Adolf Hitler was balancing his checkbook
and added two plus two, and got four, so today every
mathematician/accountant has to assume that two plus two can't equal
four.......


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Lens picture taking quality comparison question Allan Digital Photography 8 March 17th 06 01:44 AM
Print stills question Cathy Digital Photography 60 November 23rd 05 06:18 PM
Taking pictures in a nightclub (newbie question) KB Digital Photography 10 March 26th 05 06:28 AM
Taking pictures in a nightclub (newbie question) KB Digital Photography 0 March 25th 05 08:27 PM
QUESTION:taking concert photos? Korana General Photography Techniques 1 February 27th 04 04:31 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:39 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.