They're watching!


UFO ZOOM 09/25 DIRECT TV LIVE Launch Shenzhou MUST SEE !!!

http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=sYG1z879qPs

Any credible explanations?

well i'm convinced.
i, for one, welcome our new alien overlords.

__________________
"blacker than the blackest black... times infinity."- Nathan Explosion
The.. Best.. Thread..Ever...

There are several similar videos at this site. Some have very inspirational music.

If I had to bet my last dollar on it, I'd guess fighter jet exhaust. Either that or a space invader (like in the game).

http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=jLuxwL...eature=related
this one shows an exhaust plume in outer space. is that a 1st for UFOs?

Just about everything tends to be a first with UFO's since it's pareidolia and what is seen is what the viewer wants to think it is.

Or is it a loose thread on the space suit?

Is that guy actually recording with his camera pointed at the television? Why isn't he just using the actual quality footage?

__________________
Spread the Love!

Like one of the comments says: internal reflections.

The lights mirror the motion of the bright rocket exhaust.

No F in this UFO.

__________________
0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 ...

They're quite obviously catadioptric effects (i.e. reflections off internal lens elements). No question.

__________________
"Facts are stubborn things." --John Adams
Clavius Moon Base

There's a Capt. D video suitable, but sadly, the lens flare in the video is a potty mouth.

People really need to learn optical artifacts. Also I'm baffled, as others, by the camcorder-pointed-at-a-tv... thing. Not even on a tripod. I mean honestly.

__________________
---"Why do things have to suck so bad?" a friend once asked me.
"Because space is a vacuum and that's a lot of suck." I replied.
(Actual quote)---

It's not absolutely required to learn about optical artifacts. One can go through life quite happy without learning the many ways light can go wrong through a lens. But if one plans to interpret photography and make public statements based on those interpretations, then one does owe it to his audience to know what he's talking about.

People who see spots in photos and then talk about Area 51 and UFOs and how our government is lying to us ought to be taken to task for their irresponsibility.

As for the penchant at YouTube to post camera-phone videos shot from their TV screens and then purport to "expertly" analyze them -- well I can't say anything about the legitimacy of that without violating forum rules against decorum.

__________________
"Facts are stubborn things." --John Adams
Clavius Moon Base

Reminds me of the camera equivalent of "floaters"

I have some good low-dispersion lenses for my Canon digital, and they're pretty susceptible to catadioptrics. (Good anti-glare coatings can sometimes increase dispersion.) After some of my artistic shots involving models wrapping rope lights around their faces, I have to go back and edit out all the radial interreflections.

Same thing here. Even the best anti-glare coatings will produce that kind of catadioptric effect when photographing rocket exhausts against a dark background.

__________________
"Facts are stubborn things." --John Adams
Clavius Moon Base

I haven't encountered that effect with my lenses (not Canon and not at all modern) but my camcorder's lens is just awful for lens artifacts. I have a video showing an internal lens reflection make right angles. Quite neat.

Anyway the point is that the source video is so far beyond acceptable quality that it can't really be discussed beyond "wow that's bad".

__________________
---"Why do things have to suck so bad?" a friend once asked me.
"Because space is a vacuum and that's a lot of suck." I replied.
(Actual quote)---

Humorous, educational YouTube video, about 3 minutes, from my hero: Captain Disillusion introduces his friend Mr. Flare who's been at all the space launches.

"A camera lens is an imperfect device." --Captain Disillusion

__________________
0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 ...

Oh, frak!

__________________
Angel of the Abyss
-------------
"I am Ripper...Tearer...Slasher...Gouger. I am the Teeth in the Darkness, the Talons in the Night. Mine is Strength...and Lust...and Power! I AM BEOWULF!"

Thanks for the info on catadioptrics.

I've played with video feedback FX, but thats a new one for me.

Now I want to reproduce it.

I once did an optical conversion of VHS to DVD as the VHS was so badly damaged it would not allow the MPEG2 converter to lock to the sync signal. I could however watch the video on my TV set. However, unlike the "professionals" on Youtube I incorporated a highly complex method of pulling down the blinds, switching off all internal lights, and covering the red LED tally light on the camera prior to shooting of the screen. Of course I also checked the video to see if any other artifacts were happening. Oh, of course I locked the camera down on a tripod. I'd explain exactly how I did that, but it is a tightly held government secret. The results were pretty darned good considering.

__________________
"TV online! Goldstone TV online! Honeysuckle video online!!"

If photographing your TV screen is the best you can do, then there you are. But you have to own the suitability of that reproduction for later photographic analysis. If you want to analyze Renoir's brush strokes, you can only do that defensibly while looking at the originals. If all you have is a second-generation Xerox copy of Moulin de la Galette, you simply can't do the research you want.

__________________
"Facts are stubborn things." --John Adams
Clavius Moon Base

And Jay, the fact that Percy et al. think a coke bottle can be resolved on a scan converted B&W 320 line resolution kinescope is absurd beyond reason.

__________________
"TV online! Goldstone TV online! Honeysuckle video online!!"

Seen in BA Blog Captain Disillusion: there's a new Captain Disillusion video (YouTube video, about 7 minutes), about his TAM 6 visit, mentioning the Bad Astronomer -- one of several pasty, bespectacled bald guys -- and featuring the fabulous Mr. Flare.

There's nothing there relating to this particular topic; I only mention it for fans of CD.

__________________
0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 ...