ChrisJohnsen
Paranormal Adept
Goggs, we'll need a complete follow up on this unidentified orange object sited in Glasgow on Friday night...
‘UFO’ spotted in skies above Glasgow - The Scotsman
‘UFO’ spotted in skies above Glasgow - The Scotsman
NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!
If we assume Noble was photographing the Perseid Meteor Shower, and setting his exposure as reported, then it was not set very fast because you can see a slight shift in the star positions ( I'd estimate about a 10 second exposure ), so it seems odd to me that an object that was reportedly slowly rising and observed over the course of a minute, would not have left a more visible trace in the photo.Goggs, we'll need a complete follow up on this unidentified orange object sited in Glasgow on Friday night...
‘UFO’ spotted in skies above Glasgow - The Scotsman
Because the object was allegedly observed independently of the camera, I wanted to give the witness the benefit of the doubt first, and because it was getting late here ( 4:00 am ) and I'd spent a fair bit of time figuring out the star positions and sifting through local news on the Internet trying to find events that might explain it, I focused on things other than photographic artifacts that might be used as a hoax or misrepresented by some reporter. But if we assume it's not actually something observed ( as was claimed ), then I'm right in there with you on the lens flare .I've seen this many times. I've also seen this in a few of my pics. I'm 99.98% certain this is a lens flair. The light source is probably a light post that's below the image. I can't know for sure since it's cut off from the image, but I certain that's what it is. Also, if you look at the trees, they are the same color as the flair, a good indication of the light source.
Because the object was allegedly observed independently of the camera, I wanted to give the witness the benefit of the doubt first, and because it was getting late here ( 4:00 am ) and I'd spent a fair bit of time figuring out the star positions and sifting through local news on the Internet trying to find events that might explain it, I focused on things other than photographic artifacts that might be used as a hoax or misrepresented by some reporter. But if we assume it's not actually something observed ( as was claimed ), then I'm right in there with you on the lens flare .
If that's the case then I guess we're going to have to accept that either the photographer or the reporter, someone, someplace along the chain in the story got their facts mixed up or fabricated the visual observation. I guess it wouldn't be the first time. Nice graphics BTW.THE GLASGOW LENS FLARE STRIKES AGAIN!!
I've seen this many times. I've also seen this in a few of my pics. I'm 99.98% certain this is a lens flair. The light source is probably a light post that's below the image. I can't know for sure since it's cut off from the image, but I'm certain that's what it is. Also, if you look at the trees, they are the same color as the flair, a good indication of the light source.
Example from a long exposure lens flare caused by a light post:
I'm used to lens flares fogging an image or creating visual artifacts as the sun bounces around in the lens but with night shots? The most flaring i've seen with lamposts at night is flaring at the source as seen in the long exposure you posted. But I am not familiar with the lightpost producing a refracted flare up in the night sky as you have drawn and labeled in this image. Could you educate me on this with lens size, f-stop and duration as i'd like to replicate this. I've just not seen this before in long exposure work in my own shots, especially not producing those arrow shaped objects. Does this happen more often with unclean lenses?
Absolutely, and wish SIGIL did much more commentary on issues pertaining to UFO's getting captured in still photography and time based media.You might not be an expert on the matter but that was as concise an argument rationalizating something that I've ever seen in these parts.
You might not be an expert on the matter but that was as concise an argument rationalizating something that I've ever seen in these parts.
He definitely rationalized his critique of the Glasgow UFO as a caustic flare, and he also explained how a caustic flare gets created. So I'm thinking SIGIL gets a double word score for these entries and a bonus for excellence in tone.I don't think you meant rationalizing, I think you meant something like "explaining through a rational manner". Rationalizing would be a criticism of the approach Sigil used, which I don't think was the intent. Is that correct?
I don't think you meant rationalizing, I think you meant something like "explaining through a rational manner". Rationalizing would be a criticism of the approach Sigil used, which I don't think was the intent. Is that correct?
Brilliant analysis Sigil!!
When I read the thread title I got a little excited - I'm just a few miles from Glasgow... Oh well
He definitely rationalized his critique of the Glasgow UFO as a caustic flare, and he also explained how a caustic flare gets created. So I'm thinking SIGIL gets a double word score for these entries and a bonus for excellence in tone.