so it as U that photoshoped it!!!!!!!
hmm...well done. and yes, the friend of a friend story would probably make more people believe in its authenticity

Is this also a friend of a friend story?
Click to view attachment

--> -->

well......since theres writing on it, explaining what it is....no

You always walk dog with camera and focus on trees and bushes?

Don't know! You should ask the owner of this image! But to me, this one looks an Oil in canvas picture.

Click to view attachmentWhen ever i walk my dog or wherever i go i always take my phone which has a small camera on it,so do 70 million other people in the uk,as far as focusing in on trees and bushes i was just taking random shots of the countryside,the reason i zoomed in on the tree was to try and get a close up shot of the tree,as i am a lover of all things to do with nature,take a look at this photo,this was taken by a worker in australia back in 2004 and the photographer claims not to have seen anything at the time,this is just another example of the digital camera phenomenon where mysterious objects show up for no apparent reason.

Oh well been to that railway station, there's no doubt in my mind it's real.

What i dont understand is you say you take loads of photos with your phone, but the quality is so bad, why bother? Do you have any other photos you have taken of the country side with your mobile. Maybe you can take a photo of the same place from different angles, so we know its really a location. Also, would it have benn better to go closer to where you wanted to take the photo, instead of zooming in and getting a really bad photo?

The camera i used was a cheap camera phone which i bought at a carboot sale for £10,yes i agree the photo quality is a bit sh**ty but what do you expect from such a cheap camera,i have since invested in a better model,peoploe are making out i used a top of the range nikon camera with a telephoto lens worth 1000's of pounds which a professional would use,i was not after good quality photos or i would have took my decent camera with me,i just wanted a few quick shots to email of,i think the main problem here is jealousy,most people intrested in ufo stuff have never had any kind of ufo experience so its difficult for them to believe,once you have an experience it changes you forever.

Its nothing to do with jealousy! I have a huge interest in ufos, and i only want the truth. I dont read a persons account and think to myself that i am jealous, because that is just stupid. What you have to understand is some people will not just believe anything. I have seen better video, photos etc that have been more impressive than yours, but have ended up being fake. Your photo is so bad in quality, you must understand why people are skeptical about it. If they were not, then they would believe anything, and in this subject, it is never a good thing.

You said you wanted a few quick shots to email, but i really dont understand this. What is the point of emailing these photos to someone. The photo is so small, and at the end of the day you have taken a photo of a tree, thats hardly amazing countryside, dont you think??

Again, why dont you show us more photos of the country you took with that mobile. Even better, some photos of the same location would be good, even if its with your new phone, then we will know that the location really exists.

If you are going to put a photo on here, you must realise that people are going to be skeptical. Its nothing to do with being jealous. Its to do with the photo looking a bit dodgy.

Good point morrison, personally i've always thought that combining a phone with a camera to be a daft idea. I would much rather have a phone/shaver combination as this would be much more practical. Perhaps others reading this have their own ideas with regard to mobile phones, how about a phone with built in breath tester. The possibilities are endless.

I kind of know what lucidlou is talking about with her cell phone- I had an LG that I would take pics with because I didn't have a camera. It took awful pics unless they were upclose shots. The far away shots were out of focus, and the lighting could make the pic look almost like a painting because there wasn't much detail or clarity. I took pics with it because it was the only thing I had, and even though they weren't quality pics by any means, it was better than nothing at all. I'm not saying her pics are real, but I can understand how a cell phone camera would be used again and again if a person doesn't have anything else, and why they might look strange. I took a picture of a flower that looked like a painting, but that was real. Who knows?

Thats why we want to see more photos with the phone she used. Or photos of the same location, but she has not shown us this, which makes it even more dodgy. If someone comes on here with a photo like this and claims it to be real, of course we will question it, but she seems to be ignoring some of the requests people are asking, which is never a good thing when you are trying to convince people that you are telling the truth.

So, one more time.

1- do you have more photos of the country you took with that phone?
2- do you have, or could you get another photo of the same location?

Click to view attachmentIt seems that i am now been accused of the actual area of the alien photograph not even been a real location,well here is a more very recent photo of the area taken by a friend which is much better quality,me and a friend go back to the area all the time and leave dog food and other food and water,just incase the alien comes back,yes the food is always gone and this could be wild animals,we are planning to go back and set up a small hidden camera to see if we can catch the thing again,a few times we have been back we have both seen dark shadows darting past us at the side of our eyes,and we believe the creature could still be in the area.

Wow.............Sorry but this looks faker than a fakester on fake street....what im saying is...looks really fake to me.......if you get a video or more pics which Dont look fake...ill consider it

What I find curious - is your recent posted pictures are amazingly clear and crisp. Just like the ones I posted earlier from other Razr phones.

Now this only proves the very real possiblity that your "Entity Photo" is NOT exactly being presented correctly. Look at it again and compare them to your recent photos.

Why are we suppose to be believe that that suddenly your camera got all 'bad' for the entity photo where the recent ones are really rather good for cell phone pic's?

I think you just shot yourself in the foot! w/your own 'gun' (Camera.)

I'm sorry - you just 'sold me' on that real possiblity that the "Entity" photo is not exactly 'right'.

do you people ever read what you are replying to? she said a friend took these photos and they are much better quality. she never said she took them with her crappy cell phone. I dont get you people I once again tried to keep my mouth shut on this one but please read before you post especially if you are going to rake someone over the coals.

I honestly miss that - sorry - I mean that sorry.

So then - I guess now it begs to be asked - is there any way we can get validate pictures from her phone to assure we are not being taken for a long ride down "Fantasy Lane"? This is where the challenge lies.

I have to wonder why anyone expects to have their words taken at face value these days - with the flood of hoaxes, scams and cons online. It's seriously sad!

Whats your point? I've looked at this picture numurous times now with an open mind but it just doesnt look real to me, sorry! Would be cool if it was real though!

Is it a Gumby sighting?

Ufodata is to run a full story on the alien photo,it will be complete with photos and expert analysis,be sure to get your copy of the july/august issue of the uk's only glossy ufo magazine by subscribing at http://www.ufodata.co.uk

It's not an alien. It's Leaf-man. What? You never heard of Leaf-man?

I don't like it either when people don't believe things I experienced and am sure they happened. It's very degrading. The first thing that came to my mind after seeing this photograph is that it's fake. Nevertheless, before writing anything, I decided to do a little analysis of the situation : both the picture, and the story. The first thing which caught my attention was that the person who did the photographs was actually using a mobile phone. Now why would anyone make mobile phone pictures of scenery which are very low-res and cannot be used for any purposes (showing them to others, looking at them, even for wall-paper for windows). Recently she posted images made with a digital camera. Why didn't she do this the first time? And what exactly was she taking a photo of? The tree alone with very big pixels? And why with maximum zoom?

Secondly, the photo. Let's consider it's not a fake and look at the creature. It is either walking or running. I'd say it is walking, judging by the posture. Let's look at it's limbs. Where is it's other arm? It cannot be seen, which suggests it is covered by it's thin body.This suggests that the whole of the body is in a walking posture (in my opinion). This means it's not it haste, it's not hurrying anywhere. However the person said she didn't see anything, which is quite curious. If it would be the case, and the creature was not running, how could this photo have been taken? Unless the creature could walk with a quite considerable speed...But if even the creature was running at a very high speed which disabled anyone to see it, why is it so clear on the image, instead of being a little blurred by it's speed?

I didn't find any photoshop manipulation marks on the photo, but again, due to it's size I couldn't look into it further. Nevertheless, I think we all saw that the center of the image differs highly from the rest of it (look at the trunk of the tree which disapears), but this could be simply be due to the jpg format. I'd note also that the bottom corners of the image are also very blurred.

But if we look at it from a different angle, we could say the body of the creature looks quite fitting for traveling at high speeds. In fact, even it's ears (or whatever they are) seem to be in such a way as to maximalize the aerodynamics. And, let's note that it doesn't seem to have a neck (or has a very small one), which further enhances this ability.

I have several personal opinions :
1) It's not fake : the creature moved at extraordinary speeds, and could not have been seen (but not very likely, see above)
2) It's not fake : the creature could have been invisible, the mobile phone's camera has an ability to photograph higher wavelengths that visible light
3) It's fake (see above)

Either way, we all learned the following lesson : never convert an image of such importance into jpg format, blurring important parts of it.

Leslie

You can see extreme pixelation around that and your image. They were edited in.

The most important thing is: to post the original photo.
With EXIP data. No exip-likely fake.

We are also an expert on analysing stories if real or not.
Mostly people who come here with stories and pictures has a website to promote.
Next time just post the link in your sig or profile.

fake. that looks so fake sorry.

Wow, this is the most elaborate spam thread I have ever seen. Kudos.

HHHmmmmmmmm!

I'm starting to think all this is only advertising.

Lucid, are you and the comany in need of new subscribers??
What a foul attempt !!!!

Very intresting post soel,your comments are appreciated,as to the original photo this has been posted by myself,look through the thread and you will see it,as to the rest of you who have nothing better to do then attack me,isent it time you had your nappies changed???Sorry but i have said this already,i am not prepared to get involved with sad armchair experts who have less intelligence then garden gnomes,grow up you bunch of childesh imbosiles.

If i am saying the truth i won't get disappointed.
That means you're guilty !

lucidlou,

I would like to respond with comments about the photograph and story you have posted but, before I do, can I please ask you to confirm or deny whether you have any interest in the company(ies) behind the magazine and website for UFOData?

This might clear up any misunderstanding over the post you wrote which seemed to advertise for subscription to the periodical.

Cheers.

Thank you

I'm not sure if this has been linked before but it's a university web page that runs some statistical scripts on photos you submit.. it gives ratings as to how likely something is an authentic photo vs cg (which probability of correctness)

Trustfoto

Not that this is a flawless technique, and it only picks up digital forgeries, but it's interesting to look at. There are papers that describe process they use, but generally they look for statistical features that digital images contain that natural photo's don't.


And for those that are curious, the OP's pic (the one pasted on page 6?) comes up identified as a CG on two out of three metrics.

Edited to add a note - it would be nice if someone else with a Razor phone could submit an image to discount a the image source as messing with metrics since cell photos aren't that great.

Well after testing some images that are reasonably believed to be authentic (nothing particularly special in them), and seeing them come up as strongly CG, throws a decent amount of doubt on these. So I'll leave the link because I still think it's interesting, but might need to look more into the significance of each metric before accepting the results too much.

Well I used your website link w/the "entity" and the dog photo that I posted on an earlier post:

Entity Photo:
Click to view attachment

Website analysis:
Click to view attachment

Dog Photo:
Click to view attachment
Website Analysis:
Click to view attachment

I'll let you all decide for youselves - fake or not - based on if this sites test is actually valid or not.

http://www.ee.columbia.edu/ln/dvmm/trustfoto/

Link to the papers and conference presentations the authors of the test site have prepared / given.

Good link Nocturnal

Lucidlou is keen on referring people to ufodata instead of posting any supposed photo analysis here, so I'm in agreement with the earlier posts about this being a bid for more subscribers for the ufodata mag. No wonder I didn't get a reply back when I emailed them... I'm supposed to buy the July/August issue if I want any answers. No thanks, the pixel size differences and website analysis Jjbreen posted is enough for me. Some ride we've all been taken on, fun while it lasted

It does sound that way, but let's not conclude right away. The picture analysis program is far from perfect, it gave me 0.57 chance that a photo I made isn't CG. I don't think we should put all our confidence in that program.

This link Nocturnal provided is cool, but I don’t think we can rely on its analysis. I tried many images, some 100% photograph other 100% CG and it said that many CGs were natural and many real photographs were CGs.

ONE: You say you were taking photos to send to a friend or someone: why take a photo without any central reference ( apart from the " Alien").
TWO: The subject appears to BE "the Alien".
THREE: NO this cannot be a fault in your camera
FOUR: Why is it copyrighted?Hoping to make some monez from a gullible public?
FIVE: This is not evidence of anything

I think that most of us have seen through this feeble attempt at presenting something real, that is actually fake. Was it part of your Photographic Thesis for College? I would give you an "F" grade

Alright. I downloaded the picture and upon further observation...I think this might be legit.

I hate to sound like a broken record but I do believe they have the ability to dissapear. I've seen it myself. A friend argued that the Aerial Craft sped away then came back but I beg to differ...I saw it with my own eyes, it literally went invincible and then reappeared. I wonder how they do it though..? Will we ever come close to learning that kind of technology?

LucidLou0 The creature you photograhed looks more like an Elf than the traditional depiction of an alien. Though I'm certainly no expert; I think it's an almost certain thing that if Aliens do exist...there will be different kinds. In the same way that we have difference races.

I didn't know that Motorola has no exip on photos.
This pic was zoomed on Razr
Click to view attachment
and this one is modified
Click to view attachment

And here's the analysis
Click to view attachment

HI there new to the site...i'm just sort of curious, u said that u noticed the alien when u sat down to look at the pictures later on, were you not looking through the camera, or did u not notice someone running through the shot when you took the picture...because if it is real, then that means that the alien might be invisble to the human eye, which is curious that its image was captured on fil, or were u using a digital...? just thinking... u know

Hi people,look,iam no way associated with ufodata magazine,i just thought i would give it a plug as it is a new mag,and i thought maybe some people might be looking for a ufo mag,thats all,like i said i am no expert in analysis,all i did was to take a photo which showed something wierd,and i wanted to share it with you,i copyrighted the photo so people cant steal it and make money from it such as newspapers,anyone who wishes to download the original image in the thread and send it to someone who might be able to give some answers then i would be as intrested as you lot to see the results,im not trying to hoax anyone,believe me i have better things to do.

Hello Mr Diamond and welcome to the forums. Not long ago I posted my analysis which sounds similar to your post. What do you think of my idea?