From: Darren Sensi <mrsensi.nul> Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2004 19:45:03 +0100 (CET) Fwd Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2004 07:37:16 -0500 Subject: Re: The Beveridge UFO - Sensi >From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2004 01:22:02 -0400 >Subject: Re: The Beveridge UFO - Ledger >No Steve and Amy I don't see that same degree of Gibb's effect >in other parts of the photo or mosquitoing-or ringing if you >will as is surrounding the "object" and I'm betting no one else >does either. Hello Don, I originally posted because i saw the effect around the object as a typical noise/artifact that i see in almost any jpeg and i didn't want to see it become accepted as some kind of physical effect until someone had pointed that out. Try looking at the furthest left branch on the tree in the foreground directly below and to the right of the object it has almost the exact same combination of mosquito noise and tiling artifacts as those that keep getting pointed out around the object itself. >Many have been rushing in to show off their expertise re JPEG, >MPEG and their vast experience of dealing with it. and is >probably a satisfying way in which to stroke egos, but it >doesn't do much for the study of the image does it? I want to >see more and proof to boot. If this is an IFO, prove it. Don't >just throw words around. I tried to explain as clearly as possible using known terms to avoid any confusion on exactly what effects i was pointing out. I never claimed to be an expert and the only satisfaction gained was that of knowing i had brought to everyone's attention something which might have hindered a fair analysis of the photo. I agree this is far from being an IFO and i don't believe that this is a bird or insect either but i am open minded to both these things as possible explanations to. >Dan Bright's contrast and color enhancements seems to bring out >some detail and even suggests a wing, but it looks much to small >a surface area to sustain lift. A bee's wing area to body weight >ratio is bad enough but even its wings are larger proportionally >than what I see in the color enhancements. I agree the "wing" is definatly not in proportion with the size of what would have to be the body and if a semi translucent wing is held at the right angle to produce a glazing reflection then it would be highlighting the entire area of that wing because of it's flat surface. I can't see any legs or body segments either and if in flight a beetle has it's wing cases open .LOL so there would be no smooth areas on the object at all except perhaps the head?
[ Next Message | Previous Message | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |
UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp