Shape shifting UFO from Breakfast Television

[Meditation and Prayer]

Hello to all,

I have been taking a closer look at what was depicted to be a shape shifting ufo a while back on a show called Breakfast Television (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QSQqbPWMGYU&t=122s). I was able to capture some good stills which reveal that the object involved was etheral and not solid as we know it. The object was composed of a multitude of other smaller entities that were also shapeshifting. At one point the entities are separate, then they combine their head to the center and make one form. I am using the free Video Cleaner software used in forensics to change the lighting, color contrast etc. I will be posting stills, this was an amazing catch and I think it proves the etheral realm does exist.

[+Desertrat56]

Welcome to the forum.  I hope you can provide clearer pictures of what you want us to see.

[Meditation and Prayer]

Im sorry for the lack of clarity but this is the best I have been able to use the settings in the free opensource software Video Cleaner. What you should be able to see in these stills is an entity wearing a shell with a tail looking somewhat like a turtle with long legs on the left, and on the right appendage  a face/head of another entity.

[+Desertrat56]

1 minute ago, Meditation and Prayer said:

Im sorry for the lack of clarity but this is the best I have been able to use the settings in the free opensource software Video Cleaner. What you should be able to see in these stills is an entity wearing a shell with a tail looking somewhat like a turtle with long legs on the left, and on the right appendage  a face/head of another entity.

I see a fuzzy blue background with a fuzzy box like shape of something with shades of green, cream, purple, shadow type shapes.  It is like a bad impressionist painting.

[Meditation and Prayer]

ok follow the shades of green upward and you should see a translucent head with an eye

 

[MissJatti]

Seems to be a painting or something zoomed up close

[jethrofloyd]

To me, this most resembles a gray elephant paint by Salvador Dali. 

[Commander CMG]

41 minutes ago, Desertrat56 said:

Welcome to the forum.  I hope you can provide clearer pictures of what you want us to see.

This is the link to the video. https://youtu.be/QSQqbPWMGYU 

[moonman]

Saw the video - looks like nothing more than a shiny plastic bag that caught the wind. More specifically one of those really thin and light foam bags, like a new TV comes wrapped in. It's even shaped like a big screen TV, twisting in the wind makes it appear to change shape. It does nothing that light, shiny sheet plastic couldn't do in the wind and sun.

Common trash or "ethereal sky being" - yeah, I'll go with trash.

Edited September 30, 2021 by moonman

[+Desertrat56]

2 hours ago, Meditation and Prayer said:

ok follow the shades of green upward and you should see a translucent head with an eye

 

I don't see that.

[acute]

The stills are best ignored, but the video is a head-scratcher.

[+Desertrat56]

3 hours ago, moonman said:

Saw the video - looks like nothing more than a shiny plastic bag that caught the wind. More specifically one of those really thin and light foam bags, like a new TV comes wrapped in. It's even shaped like a big screen TV, twisting in the wind makes it appear to change shape. It does nothing that light, shiny sheet plastic couldn't do in the wind and sun.

Common trash or "ethereal sky being" - yeah, I'll go with trash.

I agree, it looks like the wind picked up a plastic bag and is "playing with it".

[acute]

21 minutes ago, Desertrat56 said:

I agree, it looks like the wind picked up a plastic bag and is "playing with it".

Really? 

A bagnado?

[moonman]

38 minutes ago, acute said:

Really? 

A bagnado?

Why is a bag in the wind so hard to understand? I've seen it happen. If the wind and conditions are just right, they turn into something like mini hot air balloons.

But for some reason, crazy otherworldly UFO is an ok explanation, but common trash is not...makes sense.

Edited September 30, 2021 by moonman

[toast]

Hell, that such ridiculous!

[Meditation and Prayer]

2 hours ago, acute said:

The stills are best ignored, but the video is a head-scratcher.

I would invite anyone to take some stills zoomed in to 400%+ darken video contrast, increase color contrast etc try to capture the same or similar and you will be amazed at what is moving within the  white silhouette.

https://videocleaner.com/download.html : Installation process is a little different from other software but if you follow the instructions it should work fine.

Strategy: (1 ) Zoom into an area/frame of clarity. (2) intensify the lumins under "Curve (lighting balance)" to a good level of contrast that intensifies the target object (3) Use the "Tools (denoise is slow)" section to also sharpen and add more contrast - this filter section slows the ability to move through the video fast so it can be turned off until you get to another section of video you want to check out.

Edited September 30, 2021 by Meditation and Prayer
posted software link

[Meditation and Prayer]

I know the over exposure is not helpful but this would not be visible otherwise.

[moonman]

Those stills do nothing but exaggerate detail that doesn't exist in the first place. You are mutating the picture beyond what it actually shows.

As far as you labeling specific parts in a photo with such low resolution and detail that has been further mutilated by software - frankly, that's about as silly and nonsensical as it gets.

Edited October 1, 2021 by moonman

[toast]

15 hours ago, Meditation and Prayer said:

I would invite anyone to take some stills zoomed in to 400%+ darken video contrast, increase color contrast etc try to capture the same or similar and you will be amazed at what is moving within the  white silhouette.

No.

Edited October 1, 2021 by toast

[ChrLzs]

On 10/1/2021 at 8:05 AM, Meditation and Prayer said:

I would invite anyone to take some stills zoomed in to 400%

No, no, NO.

All you are zooming up is false detail, mostly from jpeg compression blocks and sharpening or contrast - did you honestly think all those little square blocks and Lego-like edges and straightened lines were details in the original scene?  By enlarging that far you have utterly compromised the resolution of the images.  You do not get high resolution detail by zooming the bejeebers out of an image, no matter how many times you see people on TV saying "Enhance.."

There's a similar example of this over here:

Someone has used a few enhancement tools and then zoomed in way past the actual resolution of the image and presented a completely false 'demon/ghost'.

 

In general terms:

1. Video footage is usually over compressed and 'damaged' so it cannot be zoomed in on unless you go back to the original uncompressed / raw file.

2. Even on high quality video, you cannot use non-linear enlargement (which blurs or 'smooths' the image) nor zoom past the point where the pixels begin to appear as little blocks.  And you most certainly should never use sharpening or contrast/colour enhancement, or any of the 'effects' like solarisation.  In particular, NEVER 'play with the sliders' until you get something you like - that's not how genuine image analysis and enhancement works. 

Specifically (and I now deeply regret going there...) that video is a joke.  It's digitally zoomed in at ridiculous levels (more false details), the lens appears to be damaged or just horrid quality, it's NOT in focus so you are getting bokeh effects and distortions, and likely they are shooting at a significant angle thru the two layers of perspex window.  It could simply be a flaw in the window that changes at different angles.  And don't start me on the handholding - could it be more shaky?

This is the perfect storm of bad imaging.  Oh, and where did all the colors in your image above, come from?  You can't use additive enhancements like that and not get more false detail...

Edited October 8, 2021 by ChrLzs