Burnt State
Paranormal Adept
I've tried to capture all manner of weirdness and non weirdness in the sky with my cell phone and other hand held digital video recorders and cameras with absolutely pathetic success...a few years ago there was a fantastic piece of space junk reentry that was flaming across the sky just above me taking its time kissing the atmosphere. I left friends to watch while I ran in to test the capacity to grab a digital device and capture this great piece of sky visuals and by the time I came back outside and trained it on the object all I got was a very dim orange speck.
While I've had a lengthy history of shooting video and still images I routinely find it very difficult to capture much of use whenever I want to record a sky object. Shooting at night is ridiculous even with good equipment. Without a proper tripod the capacity to even get a nice shot of a plane flying overhead requires a lot of fast effort. Daytime shots are a lot easier to set up, but again, if you don't have a proper lens, even in the world of fully automatic recording equipment, it's not an easy task to capture a functional shot.
As a consequence I've looked at a lot of the historic multiple sequence daytime shots where people are supposedly able to capture two or three good shots of a daytime nuts and bolts ufo and I find them to be total bunk. At least imho these are all forgeries or suspicious at best.
I'm much more interested in the strange one off blurry shots of light blobs with ground radar and visual reports to accompany them - those strike me as being more likely to be a true anomalous object. But then what good is a blob of light? It's not going to make a very good Billy Meier coffee table book is it?
As Vallée has said on a number of occasions, to date we have no single photo that can be collectively agreed upon as an image of a "flying saucer". I also feel there is a huge discrepancy between what a camera can capture vs. what the mind constructs inside as a perceived image.
