Is this a 'Photoshop'? Analysis welcome.
Miscellaneous Forums/General Discussion/Is this a 'Photoshop'? Analysis welcome.
yes, I think it's fake, you'd have seen it on the news if it was real
Damn!
I wanted it to be real.
Sniff 'till it hurts.
I wanted it to be real.
Sniff 'till it hurts.
No, it's real, this thing is called "Riesenrad" and it really exists!
No, no - not the big wheel thing - it is the thing to the left of it - looks like a disk in the sky.
Hub cap?
Why is it that UFO's are only ever spotted by people with cameras they found in a Christmas cracker?
IT is FAKE...
Who spotted this gets my vote:
Definitely fake.
First off, there'd be nothing up there to illuminate it like that.
Second, take away the UFO - why would you take a photo of the London Eye and deliberately offset it slightly to the right leaving a UFO-sized empty space?
Third - its in The Sun, therefore its cobblers by default.
Finally, the Tower Bridge photo. Everything in the shot is blurred except for the UFO. The UFO itself has exactly the same lighting/highlights as in the London Eye one. They've made absolutely no effort to make it look different.
First off, there'd be nothing up there to illuminate it like that.
Second, take away the UFO - why would you take a photo of the London Eye and deliberately offset it slightly to the right leaving a UFO-sized empty space?
Third - its in The Sun, therefore its cobblers by default.
Finally, the Tower Bridge photo. Everything in the shot is blurred except for the UFO. The UFO itself has exactly the same lighting/highlights as in the London Eye one. They've made absolutely no effort to make it look different.
They've made absolutely no effort to make it look different.
I wouldn't say that... they still did the jpeg/camera overfilter (all that oddly colored stuff) on the "UFO".It looks like an IFO tbh.
It looks like an IFO tbh
Imagination, Figment Of? Headline -
"Drunken UFO pilot takes Londoner's for a ride!"
Would be my headline. With that angle and altitude they'd have hit something big (like the Earth) and then thee would have been a real photo opportunity.
I love the idea of life on other worlds - I am convinced there are other beings out there, just not here.
IPete2.
"Drunken UFO pilot takes Londoner's for a ride!"
Would be my headline. With that angle and altitude they'd have hit something big (like the Earth) and then thee would have been a real photo opportunity.
I love the idea of life on other worlds - I am convinced there are other beings out there, just not here.
IPete2.
It makes you wonder who these 'experts' are who claim its real.
Probably the same 'experts' who think that bits of dust and camera straps are ghosts...
Probably the same 'experts' who think that bits of dust and camera straps are ghosts...
Maybe the little green men wanted to have a go on the London Eye, but the parking is terrible around there, so never bothered and tried their luck over Tower Bridge.
They should of went to Jongleurs in Bow... Cracking night there! :D
They should of went to Jongleurs in Bow... Cracking night there! :D
Prolly just a lens flare coming from the xenon headlights of that car. It's even the same color.
Prolly just a lens flare coming from the xenon headlights of that car. It's even the same color.
Those are street lamps.We're talking about the UFO.
The real is usually so fuzzy and crappy looking, is it's easier to photoshop that way :oP
Agree with gfk, the illumination on the UFO is rather odd and fake looking.
No motion blur either, so i take it this thing was just static. Even the cars have a slight motion blue to them looking at the headlights. Surely thousands upon thousands of people would have seen it.
Agree with gfk, the illumination on the UFO is rather odd and fake looking.
No motion blur either, so i take it this thing was just static. Even the cars have a slight motion blue to them looking at the headlights. Surely thousands upon thousands of people would have seen it.
no puki, but this image is real:
Anyone noticed that though the shots in the article are taken from two different angles the UFO shows the exact same orientation?
Probably that well known space-time artifact that comes after travelling at lightspeed 'Copy and Paste'
why is there so much news on UFO's these days ???
actually this wouldn't be a UFO because it LOOKS like
what we call a UFO ... maybe UFOS don't look like that at all ?!
actually this wouldn't be a UFO because it LOOKS like
what we call a UFO ... maybe UFOS don't look like that at all ?!
Those are street lamps.
That's what I meant. I've seen half-arsed lens flares on dirty objectives before.
Its not lens flare its a hoax, not only was there a picture from more than one location but both images were the same source ie. its the same saucer just rotated a little.
lol.
I'd call it a bona fide UFO before I call it a lens flare!
I'd call it a bona fide UFO before I call it a lens flare!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TfXredHqQMY
There you have some examples of lens flares claimed to be UFO pictures. Quite a few of them look similar to this one.
There you have some examples of lens flares claimed to be UFO pictures. Quite a few of them look similar to this one.
What would be the odds of the first 'real' UFO having the stereotypical saucer shape anyways?
Yeah, be ironic if the first ever confirmed flying saucer turned out to be shaped like a teapot.
There's too much detail in the pic for it to be a lens flare. :)
Lense flare? I know some people feel the need to debunk UFO stories, but calling it a lense flare is ridiculous (there are two lines of light rimming the saucer, and a clear underside). Personally I think it's photoshopped.
I'm the last person having the need to debunk UFO stories, given that I've actually seen one... Or at least want to believe it was one, though.
But don't hang me by the balls. It was just a suggestion ;)
The best proof that this is not a flying saucer is that it would've had a lot media coverage if it really happened above a crowded city.
But don't hang me by the balls. It was just a suggestion ;)
The best proof that this is not a flying saucer is that it would've had a lot media coverage if it really happened above a crowded city.
there are two lines of light rimming the saucer, and a clear underside
Which happens with lens flare.
I'm the last person having the need to debunk UFO stories, given that I've actually seen one... Or at least want to believe it was one, though.
Maybe it was a lens flare?Or a flying teapot?
Or a goat?
We'll never know.
I don't know what the hell it was, but it was scary, flying and I couldn't identify it :)
Which happens with lens flare.
How do lens flares darken the sky?
Lol....it can not be an UFO, because it is over London. And from what I know *every* ufo land/crash only in United States. :P [sorry I can't resist...for what reason a 'supposed-intelligent-life-form' (or robot/satellite ala Voyager/Mercury/Spirit/Pathfinder) can't simply landing?]