UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2004 > Feb > Feb 21

Re: BLURFOs - Taylor

From: Barry Taylor <stingray.nul>
Date: Sat, 21 Feb 2004 13:34:53 +1100
Fwd Date: Sat, 21 Feb 2004 11:15:35 -0500
Subject: Re: BLURFOs - Taylor


>From: Bill Hamilton <skyman22.nul>
>To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 05:29:14 -0800
>Subject: BLURFOs

>We have a real problem. Lately, anything that streaks across a
>digital camera lens or video cam is being hailed as a flying
>saucer or UFO photo....

>Read more about it and see the illustrations at:

>http://www.rense.com/general49/blurfo.htm


Thank you, Bill, for making us aware of the Rense article.

This has been a 'pet subject' of mine for some years now. Ever
since the "Rod" Phenomena started.

I have done controlled experiments in an attempt to capture
"Rods". All I have been able to capture is "Motion blur of fast
flying insects". (Which is what Rods really are!)

I have seen some of George Ritter's images and they sure look
like motion blur of insects and birds to me.

When experimenting with such activities with a video camera, it
is *essential* that the focus is set to manual focus, and
adjusted to infinity. Auto focus is totally useless. There is
no_way auto focus can adjust to a small close object moving at
just moderate speeds, let alone hundreds or thousands of mile
per hour. If using auto focus, you are *guaranteed* to get false
readings. Auto focus on small or fast moving objects, day or
night is also useless. You can not base true research and
analysis using these camera settings.

Shutter speed is the second most important setting to consider.
When setting up a fixed video camera in an attempt to capture
UFO's or 'Rods', you *must* use at least 1/10,000th shutter
speed setting. Anything, especially the standard 1/50th shutter
speed will also guarantee false results.

These are the first questioned to be asked when analysing other
persons footage of stills grabbed from video. If they did_not
use these settings, then you are wasting your time, and the
images tell you nothing substantial.

As for the article by James Neff on "The BLURFO trouble with
'Orbs', well that is another story. I have done enough
controlled experimentation to find that the Orb phenomena is
real. Close duplication using dust or flour, does not prove the
Orb phenomena does not exist. Anything can be duplicated, even
UFO's as we know. But that does not make them not a real
phenomena does it?

When experimenting to capture Orbs, I use 35mm colour film plus
digital camera. Always take 3 quick photos of the one scene. How
do you explain Orbs appearing on only one of the series of
photos and not the others? Sometimes take 100 35mm photos and if
lucky may get one only with Orb in it. This is an interesting
and real mystery, and should not be scoffed at. True
experimentation will eventually yield positive results. Why not
continue your research James and Bruce, you will be pleasantly
surprised.


Regards,

Barry Taylor





[ Next Message | Previous Message | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |

UFO UpDates Main Index

UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp


Archive programming by Glenn Campbell at Glenn-Campbell.com