Ty's Photo (Marvin smells smoke?)

[elevenaugust]

That could show us at least if there's a size differences between KK and LL drone size.

[10538]

That could show us at least if there's a size differences between KK and LL drone size.

What if Ty cropped and resized them before sending to Linda?

[elevenaugust]

That could show us at least if there's a size differences between KK and LL drone size.

What if Ty cropped and resized them before sending to Linda?

It will not change the difference size estimation (in pixels) between the two shoots, assuming the scale cropping/resizing was the same for all the pictures.
And I just need to know if there's a differences or not, no matter the estimation itself.
If there's a difference, then the drone is really further than the background tree line, like at the position of the pole, in my example, and I was right about the resolution factor..... And the drone is huge.
If there's no differences, then we have several possibilities:

• The drone was moving at the same time and the same distance as Ty.(It has to be a perfect coordinate movement to make the size at the hi-res pixel level match)
• The drone is really really further, somewhere around the background tree line in my example (impossible, this could give for the drone a kilometer size....)
• The drone was composited into a background landscape and the hoaxer forgot to modify it's relative size (For a hoaxer supposed to have high level skills, it's the BIG mistake not to make)

All of these propositions are very unlikely, IMHO

[10538]

Oh my!  The beer bottle stays the same size but the other bottles increase!  I guess it's either cgi or I better lay off the beer, eh 

Marvin, drinking beer and staring at gifs will make you see things.

[majicbar]

Measuring the Ty Drone in pictures kk and ll.

Grabbing the measurements of the Ty drone in both pictures from the farthest point of the "panda" on the left side of the drone in the pictures to the farthest point of the arm along the axis on the right side: in kk we get 441,97 and 1386,366, and in ll we get 805,159 and 1795,407.

We will use the Pythagorean Theorem to triangulate the size of the drone along its long axis by determining the hypotenuse of the resultant triangles.

In kk we then take 1385-441, yielding 944, squaring equals 891,136: we take 366-97, yielding 269, squaring equals 72,361. Adding 891,136 and 72,361 we get 963,497 which we then take the square root to yield the distance along the axis in kk as 981.6 pixels, roughly.

in ll we then take 1795-805, yielding 990, squaring equals 980,100: we take 407-159, yielding 248, squaring equals 61,504.
Adding 980,100 and 61504 we get 1,041,604 which we then take the square root to yield the distance along the axis in ll as 1020.6 pixels, roughly.

1,020.6 pixels - 981.6 pixels, a difference of 39 pixels. Longest length of the axis measured such is 1020 pixels, 39 pixels is roughly 4 percent of that. Clearly this is not the same image replicated in both kk and ll.

Any method which says that these are the same image is clearly faulty.

I think marvin is a problem trying to "Ty" down what he is trying to prove, which I think is that: he is saying that he fails to see that the Ty photographs have a natural setting and placement in that setting. I disagree with him, but I find it interesting that he keeps extending the thread and fails to nail it down. In that his effort lacks understanding of the many components that we have identified for him, that is unfortunate.

And now I think I need a beer.

[majicbar]

I see over on OMF that the DRT has a request in to Linda Moulton Howe at Earthfiles for complete high resolution scans of the Ty prints. I would hope that some arrangement could be made for her using an outside service that could overscan the photographs and perhaps also provide enhanced prints to bring out edge enhancements to sharpen the images, much like leviathan has enhanced the ISAAC image of the anti-gravity device. Perhaps a Lab that does forensic work for PI's. Like the DRT PI's.

[10538]

It seems Marvin has stumbled onto his own solution.

This is as accurate a reconstruction as can be done.  You pick an object of reference which should be the farthest fixed object, in this case, the pine trees on the right.  This is basically what Ty saw and shows the movement of the drone.  I like mine a little better though.  I've used trees from LL to fill in KK.

[/quote]

[leviathan]

IMO, this change in Drone size is due to a slight change in lens focal length or a very slight zoom (not a digital zoom).  This effect would be very difficult to do in a photoshop layer method with out a lot of planning and two (2) different images of the Drone.  When we compose, we compose in a 3D program not a 2D program, so with effort we could get this effect.  This adds even more complexity to the image and IMO is further proof that this series of photos is of some sort of REAL EVENT.
L E V I A T H A N.

[drewlac]

Luckily this distraction has not had an effect on the PIs who are still hard at work chasing down two important leads right now.  All I can say is both of them are adding to the legit side and have the potential to go much further.  Unfortunately we have to wait until they are concluded before we can release the info.

This is great news!  As always, I look forward hearing an update from the PIs!!

[leviathan]

The Ty photos have no lighting issues.
L E V I A T H A N

[10538]

The Ty photos have no lighting issues.
L E V I A T H A N

I have always wondered about this and thought that the distance of the drone from the camera (as apposed to the distance to the trees) could account for perceived lighting differences (atmosphere haze, higher altitude causing more ambient light).  Do you have any more thoughts on that?

[leviathan]

Yes, we recently built a new model of the Raj Drone and tried various renders with different lighting in Cinema 4D.  The results were so variable that we saw no proof of anything at all.  We once again learned the difficulties of building a CG model of a particular Drone and trying to be very accurate.  If these are CG models, what artist who can accomplish this, would not be able to composite them with proper lighting in a background image!!!  In our attempt to do so, with the Raj model, we never got the chromatic aberration seen in the original.  Now the Ty Drone is orders more complex in design and there is chromatic aberration present just as there should be.  The Drone has an apparent surface that is very complex in geometry and texture and material color.  The internal soft reflections would change with each move of the Drone or clouds or ground refection movements.  All you say is correct including any glare or reflection that might wash across the camera lens from any source in the scene.  No 3D software can take every light and shadow possibility into account in recreating a scene.  Just a simple walk in nature will show you this.  We recently saw a utility pole that seemed to defy the lighting conditions of the area it was in.  On examination it was simply a lighter color on one side than the other from top to bottom.  The overcast lighting made the pole appear to have an unaccounted shadow on the dark side.  It was that the pole was darker in color on one side and that was all.  Aerial perspective and foreshortening come into play in all the Drone photos and in themselves are changed by the reduction of a 3 dimensional reality to a 2 dimensional image.  In the Ty photos, it appears the OPTICAL zoom was used on purpose or by accident and this gave an illusion that the Drone changed size.

To us all these little kinks in the images give rise to their reality, because a CG Artist skilled enough to design and model the Drones would not risk their detection by sloppy rendering.  This shows realism and not fakery to us.  There are just too many factors to rule on the reality or fakery of the Drones by these photos and say it is total proof.
Hope this helps.
L E V I A T H A N

[elevenaugust]

Thanks Lev for these very interesting explanations.

[tomi]

Thanks Lev, a rational assessment for sure Cheers!

[Douglas]

Atmosphere and distance can make a big difference in the color of an object.  The color of an object can vary wildly if it is more distant from the camera or the viewer.

The color black can turn almost to a pale gray at distance.  This is why most all CGI look a little fake because they do not take this into consideration.   Plus, if the object is large,  the color and hue can vary from the front to the back.   

The Ty photos:    all photos of a real object seen over the trees on that fateful day he took those now famous images.  Thank you Ty.  THE most famous photos,  in the public arena,  of an object from an alien civilization ever seen.  IMO.

DOUGLAS

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Thanks Lev for these very interesting explanations.