anybody have some time to waste?

[deuem]

Only if it added something to the photo, just the movement would not be enough (in my opinion) to make the video better than a photo.

We can get an idea of the movement from the person that took the photo.

Yes, video may be useful, but from the image analysis point of view it only gives multiple images, worse images than photo.

I guess it depends on the video, and the camera. A very nice HD camera, great lens with HD can take a video with every frame as clear as a camera. I had a hard time with this until I processed one and saw the frame by frame quality.

I do like the ability of making traces and flight paths. calculating speeds and distances. A good video is a very good tool if you stop looking at the picture.  Look at the math. I used to do more of these years ago but they take so much time and no one ever questioned anything I did or stepped up to do it and check my math so I got bored of it and stopped.

I need so much data that is very hard to get. If a video is not made by a member there is too much guessing. If there is nothing in the video to relate to size then it is all guess work. If I think the ufo is 30 feet and you think it is 600 feet then the numbers are all over the place. The only good part are the factors and ratios.

Deuem

[ArMaP]

I guess it depends on the video, and the camera.

In this case it would be the same camera but in video mode, so any video would be of a lower quality than an photo.

I do like the ability of making traces and flight paths. calculating speeds and distances. A good video is a very good tool if you stop looking at the picture.  Look at the math. I used to do more of these years ago but they take so much time and no one ever questioned anything I did or stepped up to do it and check my math so I got bored of it and stopped.

As you said, it's too much work for what we can learn about it.

If I think the ufo is 30 feet and you think it is 600 feet then the numbers are all over the place.

A video isn't going to solve that problem.

[deuem]

In this case it would be the same camera but in video mode, so any video would be of a lower quality than an photo.  ["an" proceeds vowels, an apple]

I don't recall off hand what camera Sky purchased. If it is consummer grade. I should agree if there is no standard in the frame. If she bought a high end HD camera with a nice lens maybe it would be worth something. Have to look at the pixels and how the camera stores them. Just saying that high end HD video cameras are as clear as good cameras. Each frame can be moved to a photo and printed with ease.

Question for Sky, can you choose what format to store your shots. Some cameras give an option.

As you said, it's too much work for what we can learn about it.

It all depends on what you want to learn. Sometimes I just do them for myself for practice. They are very time consuming over days and usually people have moved on.

Either I have to lead with it or try and enter it later. It depends on how strong the thread is and if it is stuck on something the math can prove one way or another.

We'll see if another pops up that really needs it. People will start to ask. I am a little suprised seeing how you like the science of things. Math is a science. I would think you would like to do this if a UFO was presented that you could not debunk without it.

A video isn't going to solve that problem.

On a Sky shot with no reference, your right. Give me any reference and the game changes in my favor.

Deuem

[ArMaP]

["an" proceeds vowels, an apple]

Thanks, I know that one, I was going to write "an image" but changed it to "photo" and forgot about the "an".

If she bought a high end HD camera with a nice lens maybe it would be worth something. Have to look at the pixels and how the camera stores them. Just saying that high end HD video cameras are as clear as good cameras. Each frame can be moved to a photo and printed with ease.

The biggest problem (besides resolution) is the compression, a video frame has always more "aggressive" compression.

It all depends on what you want to learn.

That's true.

I am a little suprised seeing how you like the science of things. Math is a science. I would think you would like to do this if a UFO was presented that you could not debunk without it.

I like math, but I didn't learn much, I only finished high school.

On a Sky shot with no reference, your right. Give me any reference and the game changes in my favor.

The best would be moving the camera, that's how they make the stereo views of Mars with the HRSC and HiRISE.

[deuem]

Per request 7 21

[sky otter]

well i see you are having some fun ..click me..lol
thank you

and hummmmmmmm to how many things weren't visible...

the skies here are  mostly busy..and one of these days i will get the nigt vision camera that i have wanted forever and see what is buzing around..

[deuem]

Hi Sky, on the jump back, as a poster and your thread, would you rather I jump back to the beginning of your thread or back to the cat. The work is the same one or the other. What would you prefer. On the first one I jumped back to the lead page but what if we were on page 25? Back to the cat?

Deuem

[deuem]

well i see you are having some fun ..click me..lol
thank you

and hummmmmmmm to how many things weren't visible...

the skies here are  mostly busy..and one of these days i will get the nigh2t vision camera that i have wanted forever and see what is buzing around..

I think if you got a night vision camera you would be keeping me busy 24/7 lol I have done many of them in the past. Once I ballance out the green it works rather well.
And yes I'm having fun, why not. I don't want to grow into an olg grough. I want to have fun until the day I stop.

Deuem

[VillageIdiot]

All I see is Mars.

[Flux]

Came across this video which I thought may relate to the objects sky otter photographed? Haven't researched the video much but does have a similar formation?


Video link:

[sky otter]

Wow

Flux that is very interesting..cool find

[A51Watcher]

Is that how fast yours were moving sky?

[sky otter]

i would have to say no..from what i can see on there

it  surprised me that it moved at all cause when i first saw it i thought it was the normal old satelite in that section of the sky
when i came back out and looked it was on the other side of the garage..
and as i fumbled with the camera it was heading away and i could tell it was moving south and awy
but not fast..kinda like you would watch a normal plane movement
but i am so glad that i did post this  . cause obviously i got lucky without know it..lol

i really need to win the lottery and get those night scope things...sigh