From: Bruce <Maccabee <brumac.nul> Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2011 13:39:23 -0500 (EST) Archived: Thu, 24 Nov 2011 07:37:22 -0500 Subject: Re: Photographer Captures Stunning Images Of UFOs >From: Viktor Golubic <diverge247.nul> >To: post.nul >Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2011 13:06:34 -0500 (EST) >Subject: Re: Photographer Captures Stunning Images Of UFOs >>From: Bruce <Maccabee <brumac.nul> >>To: post.nul >>Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2011 14:16:45 -0500 (EST) >>Subject: Re: Photographer Captures Stunning Images Of UFOs >>>Source: WelwynHatfield24.Co.UK>>http://tinyurl.com/6rgjgrh >>>Friday, November 18, 2011 >>>Photographer Captures Stunning Images Of UFOs Above Hatfield >>>By Paul Christian >>>After our story about the Welwyn Garden City man who couldn?t >>>stop seeing UFOs, a Hatfield resident has sent us a series of >>>snaps which show unexplained lights in the sky. >>>Photographer Jason Reeve took the dazzling pictures from outside >>>his north-west-facing bedroom window, in Chantry Court, with a >>>20-minute exposure.he images showed mysterious mushroom-shaped >>>craft set against the starry night sky. . >>According to the news article he took a series of photos. >>Wonder what they show. >>I don't know what made the bright light but the images look like >>classic type of lens flare or internal reflection of bright >>light within the camera. The light may have been a UFO but its >>shape may well have been different from the shapes of the >>images. >It mentions a 20 minute exposure but the stars still appear as >point sources. No movement or streaking is evident from the >earth's rotation. Therefore, these images do not appear to have >lengthy exposure times. Tests with the camera and interviews >with the witness appear as the first line to this investigation. >My guess is that these are indeed lens flares... perhaps, street >lights or some other light sources are near the camera and >diffracting into the lens from outside the field of view. The >lens coating creates a thin film that can allow light scattering >from obtuse angles well outside the regular field of view. I know the report says it was a 20 minute exposure but as I recall the original newspaper article said he _waited_ twenty minutes which I interpret as meaning that he took a picture at a normal shutter duration (fraction of a second to a few seconds) and waited twenty minutes before looking at it. This does not appear to me to be a 20 minute exposure. Listen to 'Strange Days... Indeed' - The PodCast At: http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/sdi/program/ These contents above are copyright of the author and UFO UpDates - Toronto. They may not be reproduced without the express permission of both parties and are intended for educational use only.
[ Next Message | Previous Message | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |
UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp