Odd UFO photographed over Poland

[professorpan]

<!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://www.ufodigest.com/news/0806/acorn.html">www.ufodigest.com/news/0806/acorn.html</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><br><!--EZCODE IMAGE START--><img src="http://www.ufodigest.com/images/acorn-wide.jpg" style="border:0;"/><!--EZCODE IMAGE END--> <p></p><i></i>

[Dreams End]

That is creepy. It appears BEHIND the clotheslines (there are little clothespins on the lines which is what the three small objects are.)<br><br>The article also states that Kodak analyzed the film for defects and found none and said the reason she didn't see it when she made the photograph was that it was "moving too fast." Something has been lost in translation, though because there is no blur so I don't get that explanation. <p></p><i></i>

[bvonahsen]

<!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>there is no blur so I don't get that explanation<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br>Neither do I - if it was moving so fast she didn't see it then I don't care what camera you are using, there is going to be motion blurr.<br><br>It looks like some kind of eye or.... an olive with the colors reversed? yeah, creepy - but I'm voting fake <p></p><i></i>

[Et in Arcadia ego]

The only way there wouldn't be a motion blur is if the camera was equipped with a $10,000 high speed professional lens with an enormous lens diameter and extremely fast f-stop. Those kinds of lenses are used almost exclusively by professional sports photographers as those are the main photographers that would benefit from the lens speed and actually be able to afford it.<br><br>The more the image is pushed in PS, the more it's colors depart from the rest of the image:<br><br><!--EZCODE IMAGE START--><img src="http://www.sickle666.com/images/eyeball_ufo.jpg" style="border:0;"/><!--EZCODE IMAGE END--><br><br>The offered explanation that the author accidentally captured it is unacceptable here, and hardly explains why the picture was taken in the first place as without the object, the background is more than mundane, especially considering the use of extremely expensive gear.. <p>____________________<br>Some are born to sweet delight, some are born to endless night.</p><i></i>

[Dreams End]

I don't assume expensive gear...I assume the explanation about its moving fast was simply wrong. <br><br>Not sure what the color differences mean to you....it's not part of the environment so naturally it won't have the same colors.<br><br>If it's a hoax, it's pretty sophisticated because it is done on film (unless the news accounts are completely bogus) and the object appears behind the clotheslines. It's also an odd looking thing...not your typical flying saucer.<br><br>I did question the boring photo subject, but regular people do tend to do that sort of thing. And there could have been a purpose to the photo we don't know about...just taking pics of the property or something. LOVE to see the rest of the roll, which is step one in a good investigation. <p></p><i></i>

[Seamus OBlimey]

It's a fuggin acorn! The image's filename tells you as much.<br><br><!--EZCODE IMAGE START--><img src="http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v642/seamus_oblimey/fun/acorn-wide-open.jpg" style="border:0;"/><!--EZCODE IMAGE END--><br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>Mrs. Korejwo didn't see the object when the photo was taken. Note that the horizontal lines visible in the photo are clothes lines with colorful clips.<br>Kodak photo laboratory workers concluded that the film was not defective and suggested a possible explanation for the appearance of the acorn shaped object. They stated whatever the object is, the reason the photographer did not see the actual object, was simply because the object was moving too quickly!<br>Further analyses excluded the possibility that the photograph had been altered and stated that it was not a hoax.<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>It fell between the camera and the clotheslines but was only visible for a fraction of the time of the film's exposure. The clothesline was there longer so both are imprinted on the film. <p></p><i></i>

[Et in Arcadia ego]

DE, doesn't matter if it's a natural part of the enviornment or not; it's a matter of wavelength absorption. For example, take a look at the color of the object and the ground beneath it. The two are of not identical, but similar hue. Now look in the image I posted, and you'll see the difference that presents the main credibility issue for me. <p>____________________<br>Some are born to sweet delight, some are born to endless night.</p><i></i>

[orz]

Double exposure of a chinese-lantern style lamp of some kind?<br><br>It certainly looks transparent.<br><br>As usual the JPEG is so horribly low quality as to render any opinions or photoshop explorations totally meaningless.<br><br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://www.australianufowave.com/">www.australianufowave.com/</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>I grew tired of seeing researchers proclaim a clip genuine, without realising how easy it is to fake most sightings. I also grew extremely tired of seeing people apply Photoshop filters to still frames from a clip, as though this proves something about the clip. (During this project, I received countless such 'enhancements' which always proved everything the researcher wanted it to prove, whether that researcher was a skeptic or a believer. The one thing this Photoshop analysis never managed to do was expose the clips as fake.<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--> <p></p><i></i>

[professorpan]

Armchair/Photoshop speculation doesn't help much without further data, as is usually the case with Internet UFO photos (see the recent Australian hoax for examples of this kind of back-and-forth).<br><br>And it's pretty common for UFOs to appear in photos when the photographer wasn't aware of anything odd or unusual. And UFOs have been known to simply disappear, so the arguments about speed and blurring are not really relevant.<br><br>Who knows. Interesting photo, but I'd like to see more data.<br><br> <p></p><i></i>

[Dreams End]

I liked the falling acorn explanation, but there should be blur...if the exposure time was long enough to imprint the clothesline in front of the acorn, then it would be long enough to bet blur on the falling acorn..the whole trail of it, in fact.<br><br>I don't know how photoshoping a low quality .jpg of a film original will help and I also don't know enough to know if the color thing is important. I mean, it's "otherworldy" so why wouldn't the colors be weird?<br><br>my favorite photo of this type which I don't know how to locate online is of a child and in the background is a man in a white spacesuit looking thing...but no one saw such a person when the photo was taken and I think a hoax was ruled out. <p></p><i></i>

[professorpan]

<!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://www.ufocasebook.com/1964solwayfirth.html">www.ufocasebook.com/1964solwayfirth.html</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><br><!--EZCODE IMAGE START--><img src="http://www.ufocasebook.com/solwayfirth.jpg" style="border:0;"/><!--EZCODE IMAGE END--> <p></p><i></i>

[4911]

looks like a lampshade reflected in a window overlooking a yard <p></p><i></i>

[Seamus OBlimey]

<!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>I liked the falling acorn explanation, but there should be blur...<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>Unless the acorn fell through a sliver of sunlight. The verticle centre of the pic is darker than the rest if not blurred.<br><br>And the acorn is so central. You don't get pics like that by accident.<br><br>Or it could just be washing on the line. Is this the only pic? If I was offering this as proof of anything I'd provide at least one before and one after pic. And some to give a wider perspective.<br><br>And that's obviously 1970s hair decoration Prof. I remember being told to hold similar posies in kidhood, much to my embarrasment later. <p></p><i></i>

[bvonahsen]

What the articles actually says:<br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>According to an article in "Nieznany Swiat" Magazine, the photo was taken at the end of June or beginning of July 1995 by Mrs. Maria Korejwo, a school teacher, in Katy Gorne [near Pustelnik Pinski] in Siedlce district in Mazowieckie wojewodztwo, Poland.<br><br>Mrs. Korejwo didn't see the object when the photo was taken. Note that the horizontal lines visible in the photo are clothes lines with colorful clips.<br><br>Kodak photo laboratory workers concluded that the film was not defective and suggested a possible explanation for the appearance of the acorn shaped object. They stated whatever the object is, the reason the photographer did not see the actual object, was simply because the object was moving too quickly!<br><br>Further analyses excluded the possibility that the photograph had been altered and stated that it was not a hoax.<br><br>Source: Nieznany Swiat [Unknown World] magazine, Poland By: Piotr Cielebias - "NOL - Eastern European UFO Journal", [<!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://nol-polishufojournal.blogspot.com/">nol-polishufojournal.blogspot.com/</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END-->]<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>It was the photo laboratory workers who suggested the "too fast moving to be seen" theory, not Maria Korejwo. We've seen that this doesn't cut it, or at least no one here believes it.<br><br>My theory is accidental double exposure. Perhaps a light fixture was accidentally photographed at an odd angle. And perhaps the settings were wrong or messed up somehow. Maybe this was done by another member of the household. Then mom picks up the camera and takes a picture, not advancing the film, and this shows up. But I don't know much about double exposures or whether or not clotheslines would appear to be behind the object.<br><br>Seems plausible to me and probably explains lots of reported UFOs.<br><br>I downloaded the large cropped pic, it's even labeled "acorn.jpeg"!<br><br> <!--EZCODE IMAGE START--><img src="http://img91.imageshack.us/img91/2545/acornak9.jpg" style="border:0;"/><!--EZCODE IMAGE END--> <p></p><i></i>

[4911]

no wait... it is the eye of saurumon, balefully cast over the land and draining it of all that is true and just and decent in human culture!<br><br>no, its a lampshade reflected in a window overlooking the yard and the powerlines. <p></p><i></i>