Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(UFO)   WTF did I just take a picture of? I thought it was a planet, but it looks really weird   ( divider line
    More: Advice  
•       •       •

67223 clicks; posted to Main » on 18 Feb 2007 at 5:03 PM (11 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»

1484 Comments     (+0 »)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Oldest | « | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | » | Newest

2007-02-19 06:50:59 PM  
Schfanzst!: the Mole of Production makes my day.

Thanks! Photoshop's Linear Burn and Screen blend modes make my day.
2007-02-19 06:53:06 PM  
Liam and Me: After staring at MrDorkESQ's "back and to the left" morph picture for like two minutes, I no longer know what to believe. Something's just not right about that illumination pattern.

Thank you.
Also, the object was sort of ovalish on the bottom and the streetlights around here are more rectangular.
2007-02-19 06:54:09 PM  
Oops. Linear Dodge.
2007-02-19 06:54:19 PM  
Oh, and BTW -

forked_at_fark: Well, it is a very good tripod, cost about 150 euros.

Expensive != Good, at least not automatically.

/back to lurking now
//not an aerostat - tether's not right
////Occam has one wicked razor
2007-02-19 06:56:18 PM  
Not sure if I am going to get all those images uploaded tonight.
The SO is already sleeping in here and I still have 80 meg left to go.
2007-02-19 07:02:26 PM  
forked_at_fark: Well, it is a very good tripod, cost about 150 euros.

Unless the tripod is gyroscopically stabilised a $150 tripod is about as good as a screw through the bottom of a chair. Maybe worse, chairs have four legs.

I have never had any movement in any other pictures I have taken.

And yet, it happens. I've never died, either, though I can safely assume that that does not mean I will never die.

I took three pics of it and got exactly the same thing.

Why haven't they been posted?

I saw that weird tail on the pic even before I hit the button to take a delayed picture.

The tail either looks like a lens etching, a chromatic abberation, or a pole illuminated from a street light.

I'm going to tell you something I haven't brought up in years. Once, when I was nine or ten, me and a buddy by the name of Adam were laying on a patch of grass walking from my house to his around the block. Staring up at the sky, this huge black triangle with rounded edges and a lighted dome in the middle flies over head and lights at each rounded point. I look at him, he looks at me, we both wonder if the other saw what we just saw. We confirm that we weren't hallucinating. That thing was either very high and very large or very low and very quiet. It was definitely a UFO. Did it have aliens? Maybe. How the hell should I know. Over the years I realised sitings of this were more and more common and I've become convinced it's a sequel to the once top-secret stealth bomber. You know why I haven't mentioned this in 15 years?

Because it sounds insane.
2007-02-19 07:06:41 PM  
2007-02-19 07:06:58 PM  
Liam and Me: After staring at MrDorkESQ's "back and to the left" morph picture for like two minutes, I no longer know what to believe. Something's just not right about that illumination pattern.

Do a GIS on "streetlight"

When a very bright light source (such as... anyone? anyone?) is photographed, it tends to turn out as an oversized blur because the light bleeds into the nearby pixels or film cells as a result of the intensity of the light source.
2007-02-19 07:09:07 PM  
Dr. Mojo PhD: I took three pics of it and got exactly the same thing.

Why haven't they been posted?

Because it is repetitive.
I posted the link to the gallery (pops) earlier.

Goodnight fark.
Will post some pics tomorrow.
2007-02-19 07:15:35 PM  
[image from too old to be available]

2007-02-19 07:16:22 PM  
[image from too old to be available]
2007-02-19 07:18:16 PM  
Dr. Mojo PhD: I took three pics of it and got exactly the same thing.

Why haven't they been posted?

forked_at_fark: Because it is repetitive.

So wait... is it one streetlight, or three streetlights?

2007-02-19 07:19:15 PM  
buntz wins.
2007-02-19 07:26:12 PM  
Wait... I've got it.

Bear with me here.

Comissioner Gordon wanted to summon Streetlightman.

So, he shone a beacon into the sky...

It's the Streetlight Signal.
2007-02-19 07:32:09 PM  
Lord Ezekiel: So wait... is it one streetlight, or three streetlights?

There are FOUR streetlights!
2007-02-19 07:36:40 PM  
[image from too old to be available]
2007-02-19 07:43:09 PM  
Forked, I'm trying to figure out if you're just stubborn, naive, seeking attention, off your meds or all of the above.

What you're seeing is blooming which is why your "UFO" is a half oval even though the street light is a rectangle. Your camera, BTW, has a max of 10x magnification (35mm equivelent to a 420/3.7 lens) but a 12x zoom range. Your x48 "optical extension" is complete marketing BS, you gain no more information on your camera's sensor.

You're obviously naive when it comes to photography (taking a bunch of snap shots doesn't make one a good photographer, why do you put blurry travel pics up on your site?). I know I'm going out on a limb here, but could it be an internal reflection due to the fact that you camera has like 15 glass elements in its lens? There's a good reason that, as a pro photographer, I stick to prime lenses.

You don't offer a shread of proof to back up what you say yet people have offered compeling evidence to what the object is (hint: it's a streetlight). There's a word for people who make claims that can't be backed up: crackpot.

We make our own conditions in life and you're choosing ridicule.

/Please don't take this to personally, I think you're being a good (if naive) sport.
2007-02-19 07:46:13 PM  
ATC radar operator at Kalamunda, 1835 hours on May 23, received a strong stationary "paint", 300 degrees 9N miles from the airport. He had first observed the return whilst talking on the phone to a woman reporting an object "like a big streetlight" over Cloverdale at the time. The "paint" was of 36 seconds duration on the screen. An aircraft was about 4N miles SE of the UFO, but no visual sighting was made. The woman reported the object had departed to the North at tremendous speed and had disappeared from sight.

Streetlight-shaped UFO are not unprecedented. It's a common tactic for aliens to disguise their vessels as everyday objects so photos of them will be ridiculed. Think, people!
2007-02-19 07:59:29 PM  
No, it definitely wasn't a meteor/ite. It was moving far too slowly and stayed bright for 30 seconds or more while tracing no more than a 20 degree arc within my field of view. I also noted that some of the "sparks" coming off it landed closer than nearby mountains, putting the maximum range at 8 - 15km. Feel free to do the math, but it was slow.
I'm not asserting that it was anything freaky paranormal or alien, but it wasn't a meteor/ite. A more reasonable guess would be a homemade hot air balloon catching fire, but the point is that it's unknown.
2007-02-19 08:02:54 PM  
Not sure if it was said, but it definitely was the ISS (Identified Standing Streetlamp) that she saw.
2007-02-19 08:17:34 PM  
[image from too old to be available]

It's not a streetlight, it's a Martian Monocle!
2007-02-19 08:18:28 PM  

I, for one, have not idea what you saw. Yes, it looks like a street light to me but I'm not saying that's what it is. If you say it wasn't a streetlight, then I believe you. I just wanted to pop in and say thank you for fueling one of the best Fark threads I've ever read.

/May this thread live in Fark infamy.
//Did a few 'commercial' google searches from your site as a way of saying 'thanks.' ; )
2007-02-19 08:28:34 PM  
Wife says: Whoever's spaceship that is has an oil leak.

Let's go Occam's Razor on this: Is a near-black super-zoomed picture of a streetlight-like object (that apparently stayed visible for a few hours before abrubtly disappearing) with house windows in the lower left-hand corner and a tree to the immediate right:

a) a UFO that floats stationary high up in the sky for hours before suddenly going into stealth mode?
b) a streetlight?
2007-02-19 08:33:04 PM  
Either forked_at_fark is a genius on level with Andy Kaufman or... well, I think I prefer to think the best of her so I'm going with that.

BTW, I like wil's entry in his blog in exile:

But be warned: before I read [the thread], I thought the phrase "laughed myself sick" was just a figure of speech; I seriously laughed so hard while reading it, I almost Olsen Twinn'd all over my desk.
2007-02-19 08:45:54 PM  
BGates: I have never had a street light move on me.

If you do, let it. It'll give you a night you'll never forget.
2007-02-19 08:48:44 PM  
At least the carpet matches the curtains.
2007-02-19 08:49:24 PM  
I saw a UFO once. It made light-trails across the sky and changed direction a lot, suddenly and without any kind of notice. Then the crank and booze wore off, I quit twitching, and I was staring at the sun. I never was able to figure out what I saw, though.
2007-02-19 09:01:44 PM  
I believe this entire thread was filmed on a sound stage in Burbank, California.

Damned government/Fark industrial complex.
2007-02-19 09:04:34 PM  
For farksake, at least if your German streetlight poles were bent or something there might be some reason to debate this, but LOOK AT YOUR OWN NEIGHBOURHOOD STREETLIGHT PHOTOS and then LOOK AT YOUR MYSTERY BLOB...

/ It's a G.D. farkin' streetlight
// Top-notch entertainment
/// Wonders if this thread has put a dent in the world's GDP yet
2007-02-19 09:06:41 PM  
has anyone said "has anyone said streetlight yet"? yeah? it's been done to death? ok.
happy to be posting in this thread
2007-02-19 09:12:24 PM  

1. It wouldn't be able to be tethered at one end and have the other just hang at the same relative level without a tether on the other end.

2. Also the tether for an aerostat is singular and goes up the middle and splits near the top to the right and left sides to keep it level. Like a Y.

3. Also the reflected line definately looks straight.

4. The light reflected looks a lot like a streetlamp, and nothing like the shape of an aerostat.

5. She (forked is a woman) wasn't pointing directly at the streetlamp. But camera's are known to have internal reflections.

Yeah, I thought of all of these things (except the last one), but this was the closest explanation I could think of that didn't assume that forked_at_fark was lying and/or insane (or stupid enough to mistake a streetlight for something in orbit which, you know, would be really, REALLY hard to do).

I figured someone ought to do it ;)

There you have it prospero. don't consider this a personal attack, i'm just pointing out what i know.

This thread is way too amusing for me to take anything said in it personally. Don't worry about it.
2007-02-19 09:26:15 PM  
MrDorkESQ: Fata Morgana


/Broken9754 wuz here
2007-02-19 09:38:54 PM  
I love this thread! Some of you TFers really make me miss my TF days.

/un lampo del streeto
2007-02-19 10:17:13 PM  
[image from too old to be available]
2007-02-19 10:17:57 PM  
I've come back to this thread off and on and it just keeps getting better. I think I like it better than lipstick cat, even.
2007-02-19 10:34:32 PM  
2007-02-19 05:48:09 PM Dr. Mojo PhD [TotalFark]

forked_at_fark: No, I was using the two second self timer on all the pics, so there is no way I was touching anything.

Then here's what happened. Once you set the timer, the camera moved. Pull away from the viewfinder, don't see that it's moved, *click* there goes your UFO. It happens all the time in photography. It happens to me all the time with a decent SLR and a good tripod. Do not be surprised at what the slightest vibration will do to a high-zoom field of view. A little rumble in the Earth can move your lens far off course and resettle it somewhere else.

Then why is there nothing in the background (yes, other than the faint tree and possible roofline or scrambling).

Her pic was not a direct shot of the streetlight in the daytime photo. Thats about all I know for sure.

As for all of you farkers who are so damn sure of yourselves, good for you! Many of you remind me of the "I know the earth is only 6000 years old, so there is no point in pondering" types. -Not that there's anything wrong with that.
2007-02-19 10:35:30 PM  

This whole thread is win, but that is win^2.
2007-02-19 10:35:31 PM  
This thread is pure brilliance.

In spite of the couple sightings that I've had, I still think it's a streetlight, but I'm willing to sit here and wait for more... evidence?
2007-02-19 10:36:28 PM  
Want more proof? Here's some animation goodness. Look at the branches... and as Elzar would put it: "BAAAM!"

[image from too old to be available]

Slightly different angle, maybe. DIAF, forked_at_fark
2007-02-19 10:41:06 PM  

Here's what I want you to do.

Drop everything. Go to a local library. Check out every book you can find on optics, photography, and the nature of light.

Spend a few days, weeks, perhaps even months studying these sacred tomes.

If you come back and proclaim that this was STILL not a streetlight being reflected in the lense of your cheap digicam, then you are certifiably insane.

Seriously, I'm an amatuer photographer, and this kind of thing happens all the times. The fact that you could see the "stem" before taking the picture only reinforces the fact that it WAS reflection/refraction from the lens, because the LCD on your camera (I'm assuming you used the LCD to compose and not an optical Viewfinder) would show exactly what your sensor is seeing (I.E, THROUGH THE LENS).

Bottom line: It is a STREETLIGHT. Please accept this and MOVE ON. Thank you, thank you, thank you for bringing so much joy into people's lives by providing us with this thread, even if it was intentional. But PLEASE, PLEASE admit that IT IS A STREETLIGHT.
2007-02-19 10:42:43 PM  
One more post then I'm leaving this thread, again :-)

Here is my point of view:

1. Its not a misfire that was aimed at the ground level streetlight.

2. Yes, it is most likely a streetlight.

3. Isnt anyone curious as to how the streetlight was captured when the original photo was clearly focused towards the sky?

Quit picking on her, though this thread has been unearthy fun, some of you are being kind of mean.
2007-02-19 10:57:21 PM  
[image from too old to be available]
2007-02-19 11:00:17 PM  
I make no claim to what it means, but I would like to point out that forked_at_fark suggested her friend submit a classified (p) for his "psychic drawings".

Additionally, gusgraphics, the friend, did not make an appearance here defending her. She did defend him in the other thread.

/anyway, some people just believe whatever they want to believe.
2007-02-19 11:01:07 PM  
I hope Forked never admits it's a streetlight.

That will be the day the music dies.
2007-02-19 11:03:18 PM  
ChadManMn: Quit picking on her, though this thread has been unearthy fun, some of you are being kind of mean.

I feel the same way... good natured ribbing is one thing, but telling someone to DIAF because they can't accept your point of view is another. I still think it's a streetlight, but one thing we have to remember is we were not there.
2007-02-19 11:17:14 PM  
Please tell me most TFarkers are not this obtuse. :(
2007-02-19 11:20:28 PM  
Just came back to see if things were still hopping in here and to my complete surprise they still are. I would like to point out that it really is no longer important what it was or what anyone thinks it was. Laughs have been had and some of the best photoshops I've seen in a while have been posted and that my friends is what counts.
2007-02-19 11:30:49 PM  
[image from too old to be available]

"Hey, what is that?"
"Don't worry, it's a streetlight."

/seriously, greatest thread ever
//and it'll keep going tomorrow when forked throws more fuel on the fire with new pics
///I love this place
2007-02-19 11:32:05 PM  
Cameron_Talley: PLEASE admit that IT IS A STREETLIGHT.

Stick to your guns Forked. If it gets ugly we'll bring the whole LP crew in here to be your posse.

/i always get to carry the boombox
2007-02-19 11:32:46 PM  
I think it could be a streetlight.
Displayed 50 of 1484 comments

Oldest | « | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | » | Newest

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

On Twitter

Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.