Mysteries, Chemtrails, Aerosols :: Mysterious NZ

[Crakka]

I just viewed some photos that a friend took (today I'm assuming) out at Huia. Quite by chance I spotted on one of them a series of faint grey oval shapes in the sky. I haven't discussed it with him yet to see if it was anything to do with his camera or anything else but the few other photos I just looked at taken around the same time don't appear to have these shapes on them at all (zoomed them all to check). I'm pretty damn sure he's not exactly into any paranormal stuff so I'm a little reluctant to broach the subject with him but I have an idea how to handle it if need be :)

The photo in question is below. Please study it yourselves and anybody with experience at this sort of thing please give feedback. If you save the image and zoom it up you can clearly see several oval shapes with the one just under the left side of the little cloud being the clearest. He uses a Canon EOS 30D as you can see if you check the image properties. Should I persue this and maybe ask for a copy of a raw image if still available? John, Melody or anyone else with photographic and/or UFO experience? Or am I just seeing some kind of marks on the image caused by the hardware or something on the lens?

As far as those shapes go I can see 7 on the lefthand side and a couple to the right of the middle just by zooming in & without any kind of enhancement or mucking about with the image. There may be more detectable by other means that I, with my limited skills, am unable to see :)

[Crakka]

What could be either totally unrelated or a little spooky (depending also on whether or not those shapes turn out to be just some kind of photographic blemish or natural effect!) is that the trail I took photos of on the same day would have been laid right about in that general area! People who know the region will be able to tell that from the photos & the locations from which they were taken in my other post here - http://www.mysteriousnewzealand.co.nz/forums/viewtopic.php?t=1319. Judging by the rest of his photos I'd say he was there just a little earlier in the afternoon from when I spotted that trail. Note also that that trail appears to be following a descending path [b]towards[/] the west ie. towards the Tasman Sea rather than an ascending one as you'd expect. Total coincidence?

[Crakka]

EDIT: Sorry, in the above post I said "...the trail I took photos of on the same day..."

That should have read "...the trail I took photos of yesterday..."

It's late and I'm assuming he took the photos today as he only posted tonight - sky looks clearer in his shots than it was on Saturday ie. looks much more like it was today out this way.

[Crakka]

Ok, just viewed it as a negative and zoomed right up (in Irfanview only) and there's more of those things on there than I first saw. Also, the ones on the lefthand side appear to be forming a perfect triangle. I'm sure someone with decent photographic knowledge & better software will see it better than me though and hopefully come up with some ideas/explanation.

[Crakka]

Man, immediate hindsight is terrible when you can't edit your posts! Here's just another thought that popped into my head - that's all directly over a massive water catchment area which has very limited access if any to the public. These dams also supply the bulk of drinking water for the greater part of this side of Auckland (not me though with my deep bore balanced pH stuff!). Don't wanna just add unnecessary speculation-fuel to the fire but.....

[Niksta]

Hey Crakka, I am not an "expert" but with my super flash video card and lovely big monitor. I saved the pic and enlarged it and saw the top left of the pic has a discoloration on an angle from the top in the middle to just above the trees on the left - and those circular anomalies are of the same shade, so I would be inclined to say it's the camera or some part of the digital process rather than something else.
Having said that your right about the water supply.
What better place to zombify the sheeple - the drinking water :shock:

[Crakka]

Yeah my immediate thought was something like that but the more I looked at it the more I thought it'd be good to get some other opinions from (hopefully) people with a little more photography skill/experience. As I said, all the other shots showed nothing of the sort and weren't pointed in that direction. Not that that means anything really - you can often get one shot out of a batch with a f***up in it I guess!

The most visible "shape" is the most interesting when you blow it up as to me it looks to have some lighter shading in the middle and around the outside. Again this could totally be the nature of the glitch but then again it looks to be a similar pinky shading as seen around that little cloud above it. I'm clueless from here on :D

[John Anderson]

Hi Crakka,

At first glance the anomalies appear to be sensor dust. If you are accustomed to using cameras with fixed lenses you will not be familiar with a problem that assails all digital cameras with changeable lenses, such as the Canon EOS 30D. When we got our first such camera we discovered with initial excitement that we'd managed to capture a whole host of UFOs in the blue Marlborough skies. However we soon noticed that every photo had the same group of 'UFOs' in exactly the same part of the frame no matter where the camera had been pointed. Not to say we didn't actually capture some some very anomalous sky objects (many of which appear in the Photo Gallery), however we soon learned to recognise and dismiss dust spots. These spots are generally seen on pics of sky and in fact it is a normal procedure to take pics of clear blue sky with the lens stopped down to a small aperture in order to check for dust before and after sensor cleaning.

So, to be able to say for sure that the anomalies in your examples are dust, the preceding and following files would have to be examined. If the spots do not exist in the same location relative to the frame rectangle, or are located in another part of the frame, then they would be most likely be something else as dust does not tend to move around the sensor to any degree once attracted to and 'stuck' to the sensor due to it's static charge.

I can relate to feeling somewhat disappointed when exciting anomalies turn out to be something prosaic like sensor dust, insects, birds, or even thistledown. :roll: However, it's all part of the 'sorting the wheat from the chaff' process...

Hope this has been helpful.

[ruapaka]

The image I posted on Crakka's 28th topic (plane, PT, and two orbs) was a crop of an image where I spotted something similar ... I thought it looked like a hole in the clouds, but it's shape is even/symmetrical - not so natural. I took 2 photos - the other 7 secs earlier - same settings, slightly different angle - no spot .... so, not the camera - right?

This is the original image - darkened so 'spot' clearer - bottom, right corner.



... crop 100% ...



... 300%

[John Anderson]

Hi Ruapaka,

The most important point is does this spot appear on other pics in the sequence. You have ascertained that it doesn't, so not dust. Remember also that dust is only an issue with interchangeable-lens cameras that allow dust to enter when a lens is removed.Other options for your spot are something floating, flying or wind-blown or indeed something truly anomalous. In my opinion you have little chance of certainty of any of these options. It often occurs to me that a high definition video camera may be a more effective recorder of anomalous stuff than a still camera if proof of genuine anomaly is your aim. Either way, it's not easy...

[Crakka]

Thanks for the feedback John.

The only other photos I can get at this stage ie. without broaching the subject and asking for more or showing full facials, are the following. The original one in the first post above is huia15.jpg. The first 2 here are numbered huia14.jpg & huia17.jpg so if they're numbered properly in sequence then you have one right next to it and one very close. There is no huia16.jpg in the photos I viewed at all so this "may" have been a crap shot and deleted as there are heaps of numbers missing in the bunch I saw. This also however leads me to believe the numbering is sequence-correct.





These next 2 are numbered huia21.jpg & huia32.jpg -

[John Anderson]

Hi Crakka,

I've saved and enlarged the images, examined them closely and see no sign of dust spots. It has to be said though that they are not the type of pics to easily reveal dust. We usually photograph a dark blue area of sky at around f22, the small aperture brings the dust more into focus and can even reveal the shape of it. Nonetheless, I would have expected to perhaps have seen some faint indications on Huia.21 and didn't. So if not dust, what then? As I Stated in my previous post:

[Crakka]

Thanks for all that John, much appreciated. What you've said is true enough too especially the last part there. Oh to have all the gear required and more importantly the time to use it ay?!

[secondfield]

Well, it is well known fact that digital cameras can resolve things in the near infrared range. To test if your camera has this capability point a TV remote at the lens while veiwing the LCD screen on the the camera. You should see the otherwise invisible remote LED light up when observed through the camera.
Some high end digital cameras have a 'hot mirror' filter that removes this part of the spectrum. Generally only found in digi SLR's though.

The expat kiwi Trevor James Constable pioneered IR photography of amphorous, biological entities out of our visible range in the 50's. His book 'the cosmic pulse of life' is essential reading.

Here is a you tube video of another researcher using a handycam with IR filter.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ii_7HL7f-3Q&NR=1

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GjZGlsWT9y0&feature=related

Im not saying that these are what is represented in the images posted by crakka, but another angle to investigate. You can get a full IR conversion done for some digital cam's in aussie for a few hundred dollars. They replace any optical filters with a IR passband filter so all you get is the raw IR image. Quite stunning images can be taken in the IR range.

Its interesting to note (posted elsewhere on this forum) that the dept of homeland security and Kodak has stopped making IR film avalible to the public and are restricitng the purchase of IR sensitive equipment.

[Crakka]

Thanks for those comments secondfield. I was hoping someone would add something exactly like that actually :wink:

I'm very interested by comments I've seen & heard over time regarding things that have been seen & even recorded using infrared and this stuff is obviously always in the back of my mind whenever I see anything like the above photos. One of the more interesting comments I heard was from a caller to one of the online radio shows a while back (can't remember which now) who said he & a few close friends had purchased some fairly expensive military nightvision goggles a few years back before the screws went on. He said they had regular get-togethers at one of their places where they just do nighttime sky watches. Main comment was - there's "a lot" going on up there that you don't see in the normal light spectrum that would completely freak out the majority of the population. Now, all I need is a spare $20,000! Quick google search...

These guys appear to have the "cheap" models - http://www.nightvision.com.au/

And this is quite funny - Make your own infrared goggles for under $10 - http://www.metacafe.com/watch/746423/infrared_goggle_hack_for_under_10/

For more hardcore stuff see these 2 -

http://www.militaryinfrared.com/

http://www.7b.org/

Heaps more out there...

[Crakka]

Btw, Boards Of Canada is GREEAAAT backing music! :wink:

And just another thought - everyone's seen the odd flash in the sky that when you look back there again or think about it you just go "Nah, it was just my eyes" right? It's quite common. Quite out of the blue and not connected with any discussion or thought about anything paranormal I've heard many kids say similar things swearing blind they saw flashes of light up in the sky or out the corner of their eyes. What's the usual pre-programmed adult/parent response? "Don't be silly!". Think they're gonna continue commenting on anything they see with their own eyes like that again? I'm pretty certain our own eyes have the capacity to pick up at the very least "minute" amounts of information - snippets or remnants of activity if you like. It's just nowhere near enough information though and so the experience is most likely to be completely discarded due to the almost total inconclusiveness of it and in most cases supported psychologically with comments of ridicule such as above. Human nature? Conditioning!

[Crakka]

Thought I'd just go back and check other videos by the same Youtube uploader secondfield. He only had 4 on his channel, all being clips from the same load of footage. I checked the first one and got this message - "We're sorry, this video is no longer available." Hmmm...

However, quite by coincidence there was a comment on this page that mentions the same subject matter as I touched on above earlier today. It reads -

Several years ago I was lost in thought, staring into space - and noticed exactly what you have filmed here. It freaked me out and I started looking for it and realized I can always see them using my soft vision. Now I can't not notice them. I've seen them refered to as Sky Sparklies. You can see them really well on an overcast day. I believe they are alive - I've watched groups of them follow airplanes as if they were attracted to the movement.

Now I find that very interesting given what I said above and have often discussed with people over the years :)

[secondfield]

I have noticed that flash effect as well, sometimes indoors even. Quite rarely though. Maybe most have experieinced this? The 'flash's duration probably hovers around a 1/30th of a seconds or less. Possibly the projector needs a squirt of crc as its lagging.... :P