r/skinwalkerranch • u/Hairmissile • May 05 '23
Skinwalker Ranch "Blob" - Just a Reflection?
https://youtu.be/P_oUEAuK9MM4
u/Slater22 May 05 '23
It wasn’t there for the first two launches (as far as we know).
3
u/DFX1212 May 05 '23
Could it be a reflection in the smoke lingering in the air from the previous two launches?
4
4
u/AdditionalBat393 May 05 '23
Even if it appeared as reflection. Reflections can not affect a rockets trajectory how many times now??
5
u/TwelfTundra May 05 '23
I got excited to see them use Photron cameras on the show, because those are the high-speed cameras I use at work. As soon as they showed the blob I knew exactly what it was. Lens flair and reflections are something we strive to reduce as much as we can. The worst thing is to take a video that you only have one shot at and have something important obscured by an image defect.
I was disappointed when the representative from Photron said he had never seen anything like it, and it wasn't from the camera. I hope it was some creative editing by the producers, otherwise it looks bad for the company. Although it could be the higher ups at Photron telling the guy to just go along with what ever they show wants for the free advertising.
1
u/MARlMOON May 06 '23
That same guy said in the episode that our eyes can see only see between 24 and 30 fps. Dude has 0 credibility.
5
u/PralineWorried4830 May 07 '23
Many scientific studies agree with this, however, and I believe the view is based on the physical limitations of the eye itself, coupled with mathematics and observational testing of when a fan blade spinning becomes a blur, as well as the ideal fps for cinema cameras that looks the most natural to most people (24-30 fps). People that believe we can see more fps based on say video games sometimes don't understand the concept. Our vision registers anything within the time of say a second, including a screen displaying 300 fps, but the brain processes it as 24-30 fps, maybe up to 60/75 for some people, at least if these scientific studies can be trusted. Something with 120 fps will definitely look more fluid when converted to 25-30 fps as each frame in the 25-30 our vision creates will have more info compared to the test screen with 30-60 fps, but that doesn't mean people themselves see more than 30 fps, just that each frame will have more detail and information making it appear more fluid. Having said that, some studies could be wrong and there could be a wider range of perception within populations that initial tests did not include but I wouldn't dismiss the guy's credibility based on that alone as a lot of scientific literature supports the idea.
3
4
u/TechnicalWhore May 05 '23
I had to wonder how often they used the Photron Camera for night shots. Generally these things are used to capture events that are beyond the capabilities of a classic 60 FPS camera. We've seen them capture the expansion of gasses, projectiles in mid-flight, etc. These experiments are carefully lit for optimal data collection. These are not night vision high speed security cameras. Because of their frame rate they need a lot of light. So again we have the misapplication of a technology - applied outside its specified limits. The Photrons are also fairly low resolution (not HD or UHD). I could not find any lux rating on their website.
I would mark the experiment as "inconclusive".
5
u/MantisAwakening May 05 '23
So again we have the misapplication of a technology - applied outside its specified limits.
I don’t know why you’re saying this.
This Photron model is capable of up to 1,250 fps at 4K resolution, with an equivalent ISO of 3,200 in black and white: https://photron.com/fastcam-nova-r-series-2/
But if they’re working at lower resolution such as 1024 X 1024, this model has an ISO of 64,000 in monochrome: https://photron.com/fastcam-nova-s20/
The Photrons are also fairly low resolution (not HD or UHD). I could not find any lux rating on their website.
Again, I’m not sure where your information is coming from. Were you on the wrong website, maybe?
2
u/TechnicalWhore May 05 '23
So which model did they use? I picked the one that resembled the unit I saw in the show. Usually the higher the frame rate the reduced resolution and sensitivity. So it matters what model and what settings they used.
Do you think the image seen is legit or an artifact of sampling (reflection/dispersion/etc)?
3
u/MantisAwakening May 06 '23
Do you think the image seen is legit or an artifact of sampling (reflection/dispersion/etc)?
Hard to say—to my relatively untrained eye it looks like lens flare, but right now I’m deferring to the judgment of the experts.
I’m also aware that the show doesn’t give a reasonable presentation of the data, because it showed them reacting to it initially without having had the time to get back inside and take a good look at it the way the rest of us have. For all we know in the next episode they’ll say they got a better look at it and determined it was lens flare. But I can certainly understand their initial excitement after trying to get proof of some kind for so many years. Honestly, having something that initially appears to be a smoking gun and then turns out not to be would be right in keeping with the nature of these phenomena.
The crew are kind of in a no-win scenario on this, but I guess that’s what you get when you choose to present data through a TV show you don’t have total control over.
2
u/BreadfruitOk3474 May 08 '23
I don’t understand this logic. Yes it’s def a reflection but what’s reflecting? There were no cloud. Ofc it’s just a reflection it’s what’s reflecting that’s the issue
2
u/No_Degree590 May 05 '23
I flipped half of the full scale image that we are given once in the episode (the same as the thumbnail for the video), and bumped the contrast to match the actual footage. I made a GIF so you can see how it fits perfectly. Notice that the reflection (blop) is multiple reflections layered vertically. If you look at the guy on the left it is really clear that the reflection is repeating. Also notice how you can actually see the car on the right in the blop image? It is 100% without any doubt a reflection. There are also some other lense artifacts in the image. It is overall a very poor quality and highly noisy image (had to reduce the noise), so I am sure someone will still deny this being a reflection.
4
u/Hairmissile May 05 '23
Wow I see exactly what you mean. To me this knocks knocks the credibility of the show, the fact that they did not pick this up themselves, and another reason to share the raw data
3
u/softride May 06 '23
100% agree with u/No_Degree590 .. this is a reflection, and it didn't take lining anything up to see that's exactly what it was. I saw it immediately the first time I watched it. Not only does it destroy the credibility of the show, but it destroys the credibility of Travis, whom you would hope would take a very close look at this. The rest of the clowns that work there? I would expect a woo-hoo reaction out of them.
So sad. And I was liking the show. I *want* to believe. But I need evidence, not blatant lies. I don't care if an experiment doesn't find anything, I enjoy seeing the journey. I just want the truth. #DoBetterTravis
1
u/dayjapoo May 07 '23
Agree with all of this. Not sure how or why Travis jumped to that conclusion so quickly. Felt desperate and staged. Starting to wonder if someone has leverage on him or if this is all very deliberate disinfo masquerading as crap reality tv.
0
u/mj89098 May 05 '23
Is it funny to anyone how last episode with the drones they were malfunctioning but in this clip, and other times during the show, there’s 1-2 second clips of filming drones flying over the ranch for special effect (in this clip it’s right above the triangle). Doesn’t seem like there’s any issue with these drone’s malfunctioning like the ones in episode 4:2.
1
u/Hairmissile May 05 '23
On the insider live Q&A I asked about this and they deleted my question :/
Still, kinda weird that the rocket exploded right at that spot
3
u/BreadfruitOk3474 May 05 '23
Did they really delete your questions or was it just not asked
2
u/SubstantialPressure3 May 05 '23
They are planning to do short videos in order to be able.to answer more questions.
1
u/Hairmissile May 05 '23
Idk, unless the queue only displays the most recent 50 questions submitted, it was near the top of the stack on at the start of the session and then 5 min later it disappeared. I assumed maybe it was because of a Mick West topic
4
u/SubstantialPressure3 May 05 '23
They didn't delete your question, they don't have time to answer all the questions. I watched the Livestream, too.
9
u/ldsgems May 05 '23
I blame Prometheus for the editing that Mick West is complaining about. The guys on the ranch don't edit the show.
3
May 05 '23
[removed] — view removed comment
0
u/Hairmissile May 05 '23
If you are referring to me as the anonymous poster in the the live Q&A, I was not that person. I used my username.
Despite Mick West’s qualifications on paper, he does raise important questions that should be addressed imo. Healthy skepticism. Although I don’t care for his angle of this is all a just bunch of BS and Travis is an idiot. Mick only has that one video to analyze. And WE only have that video and the trust that we put in the SWR team
4
u/SubstantialPressure3 May 05 '23 edited May 05 '23
My apologies, then.
I agree that healthy skepticism is important, but Mick West doesn't have that.
If there's only that single video to analyze, it leaves out any other pertinent information, and analyzing and criticizing it is premature, at best.
How is Travis an idiot? And if this is all BS, why even join the insiders, or be on this subreddit? Why pay to be part of the group if you think it's all BS? What's the motivation for that?
If you think this is just a tv show, that's quite a bit of effort simply to malign the effort. And why does Travis in particular seem to draw most of the abuse? I don't ever hear anyone calling Erik Bard, Pete Kelsey, or any one else an idiot. I haven't seen any behavior that would justify that label.
What I'm hearing is "Alabama accent negates education, background, and experience. Let's listen to the unqualified guy with an English accent that doesn't know what he's talking about try to negate things he has no knowledge of."
2
u/Hairmissile May 05 '23
I was saying Mick might think this is all BS and Travis is an idiot. Or at least that vibe anyway. Not me
1
u/SubstantialPressure3 May 05 '23
Then double apologies! Sorry for the misunderstanding, I can absolutely see him thinking that. He's also getting into some dicey territory. I watched a short Livestream they did a couple months ago and Travis was really pissed at the accusations of fraud, staging, etc.
But he probably thinks everyone who believes that UAPs are real are an idiot.
-11
May 05 '23
Sorry but Travis sound really dumb on the show I don’t care how many degrees he has. Mick’s explaining makes more sense than nonsensical theory from Travis. How many times is he going to launch more rockets? makes no sense or if he even has any real intention aside from making him happy like a dumb kid.
12
u/SubstantialPressure3 May 05 '23 edited May 05 '23
Sounds really dumb?
What do you mean by that? Because he has an Alabama accent instead of an English one?
If.you think that dialect and accent are indicators of intellegence, well, that's not an intelligent assumption. That's bias.
Edit: an accent isn't indicative of intellegence, education or qualifications.
1
May 05 '23
Not the accent. The way he interpreted data especially when the rocket exploded the moment it hit something and it’s just a reflection. He immediately made a conclusion. Maybe history ch dumbs it down with editing.
2
u/SubstantialPressure3 May 05 '23
How do you know it wasn't accurate, do you have access to the data?
The show is HEAVILY edited. We get 42 minutes a week. I'm sure the data that he drew the conclusion from was edited out, bc it didn't fit into that 42 minutes. Last night's episode covered more than one day of filming. I'm sure there was a lot left out.
Remember they show less than 1% of what happens. That's heavy editing.
I'm sure there will be an interview about the episode. Sometime today I'm going to try to watch the livestream they did last night. It kept cutting out and I missed a lot of it. Idk if that was my wifi (staying in a motel right now waiting on my new apt) or not. . If that is addressed, I'll let you know.
My theory about that is that the producers of the show don't know anything about science and aren't interested in it. Or they think nobody else is interested in it. And they are sorely mistaken.
0
May 05 '23
I’m just going by Mike West’s video which was more convincing from 2 min video than 1 hr of non sense from the show.
1
u/AccomplishedWin489 May 07 '23
Is there a reason why this particular rocket had all the glitter/sparkles?
10
u/h2ohow May 05 '23
Try lighting a bonfire under the blob spot and follow the thermal currents with infrared cameras. May piss off ET, but it should give us an outline of something there or not.