From: Amy Hebert <vanguard.nul> Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2004 10:33:38 -0600 Fwd Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2004 15:03:41 -0500 Subject: Re: The Beveridge UFO - Hebert >From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Sun, 08 Feb 2004 16:05:22 -0400 >Subject: Re: The Beveridge UFO >>From: Frank Warren <frank-warren.nul> >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >>Date: Sun, 08 Feb 2004 06:06:42 -0800 >>Subject: Re: The Beveridge UFO <snip> >I'm assuming that you decided for yourself and to your own >satisfaction that the Beveridge or Whittlesea object was a bug. >I on the other hand have not, as yet, been satisfied that this >is indeed a bug or a bird. One of the reasons I don't like to >blow this shot off is due to the very nature of the "gaseous >appearing" envelope surrounding the object. Much can be learned >from ordinary jet's exhausts of the aircraft's performance and I >believe that there is something to the aura surrounding some UFO >photos. Rather than being out of focus perhaps this is some by- >product of it's power source. I made mention of this to Errol on >SDI Saturday evening. I'm sure there are some out there that can >make much of that aura by measuring light intensity, spectrum >and what have you. What does it look like in infrared for >example? How is the envelope refracting or filtering light >passing through it? <snip> Hi, Don: Well, let's just keep beating this poor dead horse some more. Nothing better to do with my time...not! What you are calling the "gaseous appearing envelope" surrounding the object appears to be due to the Gibb's effect - as pointed out by Steve Sensi back in the begining of this discussion about the Whittlesea UFO photo (as well as possible blurring due to the motion of the object), See: http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/2004/jan/m25-016.shtml I have observed this effect in almost every photograph (most often in digital photographs) and video still I have in the old IFO Database as well as in the new IFO Database not to mention the hundreds of images I've studied but did not include in these databases. Don, how do you plan to separate the UFO's "aura" or "envelope" from the distortion caused by the Gibbs effect in order to analyze the potential power source of this object? How will you know you are _not_ analyzing the distortion rather than the "power source", exhaust, gaseous envelope, etc.? This image is, afterall, a jpg. I have placed a few images from the old and new IFO Database on a web page for your review. I increased the contrast so the Gibbs effect would be more visible. The first 4 images are of IFO's. See if you can identify them then tell me which ones might have a "gaseous envelope" or exhaust that might be analyzed to determine it's 'power source' and how you plan to separate the distortion from the original pixels in a jpg. See: http://a-realitycheck.com/whittleseaufo/atmosphere.htm I will be posting more IFO information related to the Whittlesea UFO in the near future. To learn more about the Gibbs effect and other photographic artifact common in digital photography go to: http://www.michaeldvd.com.au/Articles/VideoArtefacts/VideoArtefactsGibbsEffect.html http://www.adamwilt.com/pix-artifacts.html A. Hebert PS - Sorry for the sloppy job I did on this web page. I only had just enough time to throw it together.
[ Next Message | Previous Message | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |
UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp