• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

Your Favourite UFO Photo

Yes, that's the one. I like it because unlike a lot of flung hubcaps I'm not very sure what it could possibly be if it were manmade. It does look like a blimp, but with legs or fins like that? Not likely. And what would it be doing out in that part of Mexico?

Yeah, it's a good 'un.

Only thing that briefly came to mind when I saw the close-up was Sputnik, not saying it's anything like that, it's just I guess the closest match my brain thought of :)
 
Yeah, it's a good 'un.

Only thing that briefly came to mind when I saw the close-up was Sputnik, not saying it's anything like that, it's just I guess the closest match my brain thought of :)

I suppose it was a little Sputnik-y, suggesting it was manmade, but it's too late for that unless someone was inspired in its manufacture.
 
Unfortunately, I don't put much stock in anything coming out of Latin America. Faked photos and videos seem to be a cottage industry down there.
 
Hi Henry - Heflin report attached here.
 

Attachments

  • 10.1.1.552.6587.pdf
    1.6 MB · Views: 20
Unfortunately, I don't put much stock in anything coming out of Latin America. Faked photos and videos seem to be a cottage industry down there.

Maybe not so much in 1973, though. These days it's seemingly impossible to find a UFO pic that wasn't faked, no matter where it's from.
 
I suppose it was a little Sputnik-y, suggesting it was manmade, but it's too late for that unless someone was inspired in its manufacture.

Ah, no, I wasn't saying it was manmade though, just that's what my brain conjured up as a way of putting familiarity to the shape, I suppose. :)

Thionking about it, the Russians thought Sputnik design to be a good shape for moving about in orbit, so no reason why aliens wouldn't also think it a good shape to use for a spaceship.
 
I am amazed that nobody has mentioned the 4 photos taken by the Brazilian Navy off Trindade Island in the South Atlantic (16/1/58) :
http://ufologie.patrickgross.org/htm/trindade58.htm#pics

There were no less than fifty eyewitnesses on the deck of the ship from which these pictures were taken.

Move on, move on though - nothing to see here - expert-on -everything Steuart Campbell (The UFO Mystery Solved, 1994) points out that the images show...wait for it... the planet Jupiter as seen through wind and temperature inversions.

Yeah, right.
 
I am amazed that nobody has mentioned the 4 photos taken by the Brazilian Navy off Trindade Island in the South Atlantic (16/1/58) :
http://ufologie.patrickgross.org/htm/trindade58.htm#pics

There were no less than fifty eyewitnesses on the deck of the ship from which these pictures were taken.

Move on, move on though - nothing to see here - expert-on -everything Steuart Campbell (The UFO Mystery Solved, 1994) points out that the images show...wait for it... the planet Jupiter as seen through wind and temperature inversions.

Yeah, right.

They are good 'uns.

Jupiter? *falls off chair laughing* ah yes of course I totally see the resemblance there. :artist:

"The UFO Mystery Solved" is the name of his book? Wow, good to know we can all stop wasting our time.

:D
 
The Trindade case has long been considered a UFO cornerstone but my understanding is no one has had much luck locating the dozens of alleged observers. So, most of the story ends up riding on the statements of the photographer, who was known to have dabbled in trick photography. I know that being able to fake the photos doesn't necessarily mean that he did - but unless solid, corroborating testimony turns up, this is reduced to a single-witness case.
 
This pic was taken by a geology student in New Mexico in 1967. Details (including the identity of the photographer) seem to be missing. The photo was allegedly taken by a high quality press camera. No word on whether any analysis was ever done on the negative.

920x920.jpg
 
I like the Billy Meier photos, not because I harbour any illusions about their authenticity, but because they look amazing.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I'm not familiar with the gentleman.

Anyway, obviously Meier's photos are as fake as feck and I doubt anyone has believed otherwise for many years, but I like the way they're composed like attractive 'Greetings from Switzerland' postcards. And yes, the saucers look cool.
 
I have seen this first photo but don't believe I have seen the second image from the series. The photos were taken in the 1960s in New Mexico but no one seems to have the backstory for them. Anyone know the history for these?

1963-picture-purportedly-009.jpg
515302652-612x612.jpg
 
I have seen this first photo but don't believe I have seen the second image from the series. The photos were taken in the 1960s in New Mexico but no one seems to have the backstory for these. Anyone know the history for these?
No, but I recognise them - I think they may have been plates in Tim Good's Alien Base. TBH looking back they look a little like close-up models, and the way the photos are framed provide ample possibility for such a model to be hung from an out-of-shot tree limb.
 
Last edited:
Oldest known ufo pics....the one I was trying to find was the Ward Sawmill pic in 1929...
https://www.oddee.com/item_99047.aspx ...

The photo presented as the oldest known UFO pic (see below) isn't a UFO at all - unless you're talking about 'Unusual Frost Overview'. That's not a cloud formation in the sky - it's not even the sky ... :roll:

It's an image of snow and frost formations on the summit of Mount Washington, New Hampshire - #17 in a series of such stereographic photos, titled 'Frost Architecture'.

The_Summit_Of_Mount_Washington_During_The_Winter_Of_1870-71_-_view_17.recto.untilted+cropped.jpg
The_Summit_Of_Mount_Washington_During_The_Winter_Of_1870-71_-_view_17.verso.cropped.jpg

See:

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:The_Summit_Of_Mount_Washington_During_The_Winter_Of_1870-71_-_view_17.recto.untilted+cropped.jpg#/media/File:1871UFO.png

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:The_Summit_Of_Mount_Washington_During_The_Winter_Of_1870-71_-_view_17.recto.untilted+cropped.jpg#/media/File:The_Summit_Of_Mount_Washington_During_The_Winter_Of_1870-71_-_view_17.verso.cropped.jpg
 
But what's the black thing?

If you go to the first of the 2 URL's I posted above you'll see the somewhat enlarged and cropped version of the original stereograph image (at Wikimedia Commons).

The dark object appears to be a length of wood, broken off at one or both ends, laid upon the snow / ice column.
 
Thanks @EnolaGaia. They certainly would be some weird-looking clouds. I'm not 100% sure what I'm doing, but I've done an experiment which would seem to indicate that the object is at the same distance as parts of the background.

I've overlaid the two images. I've made them different colours and set the composite mode to 'difference' as otherwise the picture is too unclear. The distance between the two images of the object is comparable to that of other background features, meaning the distance is also similar.
 

Attachments

  • Screen Shot 2018-07-19 at 7.39.09 PM.png
    Screen Shot 2018-07-19 at 7.39.09 PM.png
    517.1 KB · Views: 20
Good thinking and a well-done investigatory exercise! :clap:

It hadn't occurred to me that the stereograph images - being two views from slightly different angles - offered the basis for a depth analysis. Hats off to you! :hoff:
 
The photo presented as the oldest known UFO pic (see below) isn't a UFO at all - unless you're talking about 'Unusual Frost Overview'. That's not a cloud formation in the sky - it's not even the sky ... :roll:

It's an image of snow and frost formations on the summit of Mount Washington, New Hampshire - #17 in a series of such stereographic photos, titled 'Frost Architecture'.

See:

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:The_Summit_Of_Mount_Washington_During_The_Winter_Of_1870-71_-_view_17.recto.untilted+cropped.jpg#/media/File:1871UFO.png

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:The_Summit_Of_Mount_Washington_During_The_Winter_Of_1870-71_-_view_17.recto.untilted+cropped.jpg#/media/File:The_Summit_Of_Mount_Washington_During_The_Winter_Of_1870-71_-_view_17.verso.cropped.jpg
'Yes...I have always thought that pic was odd...seen it many years ago. But it was simply one of the many on that page link.
 
Actually if we continue the experiment and overlap the two instances of the object, the area immediately surrounding it appears to be at the same distance.
 

Attachments

  • Screen Shot 2018-07-19 at 10.25.30 PM.png
    Screen Shot 2018-07-19 at 10.25.30 PM.png
    520.5 KB · Views: 14
The problem with these very old pics is provenance. You don't know how many hands they've passed through and the photographer's name and details are often lost over time. If you look at the sawmill picture, you would think a surprised cameraman would likely try to center the unusual object in the photo rather than the parking lot. That suggests that the object may not have been there when the original image was snapped. Rather, as some have suggested, it may be damage to the emulsion that occurred sometime later.

The 1927 Cave Junction, Oregon picture is interesting but its backstory is rather fuzzy too. In fact, there are some who say it was taking in the 1960s rather than the 1920s. Either way, the UFO seems to be in better focus than everything else in the picture - leading me to wonder whether it's an old photo that was manipulated sometime after the fact.

So, as interesting as these photos may be, it is their supporting human testimony and chain-of-custody that really determine their value as evidence. Even then, we are often left to believe whether or not the photographer is telling the whole story and whether the camera, lens, and film accurately captured what was seen.
 
The Trindade case has long been considered a UFO cornerstone but my understanding is no one has had much luck locating the dozens of alleged observers. So, most of the story ends up riding on the statements of the photographer, who was known to have dabbled in trick photography. I know that being able to fake the photos doesn't necessarily mean that he did - but unless solid, corroborating testimony turns up, this is reduced to a single-witness case.

Well, if you read the attachment that went with my post you will see that the Captain of the ship - Captain Viegas -is sited as a witness as are some other navy personnel: had they been wrongly named in this regard then they could have -presumably - sued for libel. So it is not a single witness case. Granted not all 47 of the alleged witnesses have been located and in terviewed (which is hardly surprising given that they were military staff).

Trick photography? Well pretty much all semi-professional or professional photographers will have dabbled in trick photography at some point in their careers - it's kind of what you do, isn't it? - and this would most likely invlove a ghost shot or a UFO shot. Does that mean that all evidence semi-professional or professional photographers should therefore be discounted?

The photos have been extensivley analysed and not found to be faked. They show som features that only those quite well-versed in UFO lore would have known to include such as semi-translucence combined with luminosity.

Maybe that's why Mr Campbell, the arch sceptic, knew better than to fall back on the obvious explanation that these were fraudelent shots. Instead he cooked up this uniquely overwrought explanation that they are daytime shots of Jupiter as viewed through atmospheric distortions.
 
Back
Top