Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Mexican UFO expert posts up AI-enhanced image of object spotted over Juarez


UM-Bot

Recommended Posts

 

AI does not know what the shape is and is only guessing. Since the data was not there before the 'enhancement' it is basically just filling in and making a shape up. This provides zero evidence. Chances are if you took a permanent marker to a photo and fed it to an 'AI' it would look something like this.

 

Check out AI images of people. Check out the hands and teeth. It cannot even get that right

https://creator.nightcafe.studio/creation/ZPYvhJVG5ELo7wpmiAbF.

Edited by esoteric_toad
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, UM-Bot said:

Jaime Maussan used artificial intelligence software to enhance the original image of a 'round, domed ship'.

https://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/news/363391/ufo-expert-posts-up-ai-enhanced-image-of-object-spotted-over-juarez

Oh, dearie, dearie me...  Where to begin?  First, I think I'll vomit...  Second, you probably should Google Jaime Maussan.  He is a UFO=alienz promoter, his background is NOT in any sort of digital image enhancement or genuine scientific analysis..  and to be more than polite, his utterances on the topic in the past have been somewhere between blatant misinformation and unscientific claptrap.

But that all being said, we must always assume the best, even if initial appearances are to the contrary.  And they are...

Please note that I'm busy at the moment, so this rebuttal analysis is going to be spread over several posts, possibly over a few days, even.  Sorry, but I'd really like to sink this comprehensively..

So... let's take a look at the original image supplied by Jaime:

Mexico's most-famous ufologist Jaime Maussan claims a photo of a supposed UFO hovering over the FC Juárez soccer stadium last weekend shows "a ship of nonhuman origin."

Now, what follows assumes that this is the best original that is available.  If anyone has found a higher resolution version of this 'full' image, please let me know.  Jaime is not very reliable when it comes to posing links and references.  First impressions can be quite important, and I'd make a few comments:

1. This appears to be a crop from another file.  It is 664 x 589 pixels - that is not a standard image size.

2. The quality is poor. Note that everything is a bit fuzzy, there don't seem to be any truly sharp edges (more about this later), and also if you look at areas of high contrast, eg the edges of dark things against a light background, note that there is a 'halo' around everything.  This tells me the image has been excessively sharpened and or had its contrast adjusted, either via the camera settings or post-processing.  More about this later too - suffice to say it's a very bad thing, especially if you are wanting to enlarge anything.......

3.  My first impression is that there is a bird flying past, that has been identified by Mr Maussan as a UFO (=alienz!)

 

Stay tuned...  by the way, I'll explain everything I do, so you can verify what I say.  You'll never see Jaime do that...

Edited by ChrLzs
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Photo enhancing AI? Sounds like meh. Why would you need AI to use photoshop? That said it’s a pretty cool photo even without enhancing especially if the object was not added after it was taken. Would love to see the original before it was shrunk to twitter size limits. Doubt that will happen. 

Edited by OverSword
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now to justify those first three points above...

For note 1. - I just measured the pixels, so that is 100% correct and verified.

For note 2. - here's the edge effect - if you look at where there is edge contrast, eg a dark area abuts a light area, you will find that a couple of pixels width on the dark side has been artificially darkened and a couple of pixels width on the light side has been lightened.  The effect is quite noticeable where I've put the arrows:
sharpen.jpg.0a1c3887400d0ba43e9786c1dff678da.jpg
This is a very common way to sharpen an image, although it has been done *very* poorly here.  All of that 'tinkering' is FALSE detail - the program made it up, based on nothing real..  Analytically, that sort of image 'enhancement' is far worse than useless as it results in the dreaded false detail..  So even from this alone, our 'UFO' has been polluted by false detail.  Only a fool or someone completely unfamiliar with digital imaging, would throw ANY additional enhancement or enlargement at it, let alone lousy amateurish work as shown here.

The other HUGE problem here, is if that is the highest resolution of this image, the 'UFO' is only about 5 pixels wide by about 18 pixels long.  That is nowhere near the amount required to (for example) show those ridiculous windowy looking things in the enhanced version.  Here's what it looks like if you enlarge it WITHOUT adding any false details (which is what Jaime's 'AI' method has done in spades):
zoom2.jpg.c7b50cebd0c76d61adb9d9bf7449bcbb.jpg
That's all the camera recorded.  Each of those little blocky squares is one pixel, which is the smallest dot in an image.  I've deliberately enlarged it so you can see the true extent of the 'detail'.  Yes, you can see a vague shape, but you can also can see that if that original sharpening affected a couple of rows of pixels at the top, bottom and sides, virtually the whole thing is contaminated by false detail.  And that's before Jaime mangled the image with his incompetence.  It is absolute and utter bull**** that any AI can resolve 'hidden detail' as demonstrated here -  Jaime may as well have got out his crayons.

Now about item 3. - let's look at something rather odd.  It's a rather dark blob compared to the rest of the picture... Can we work out anything from that?

Stay tuned.

Edited by ChrLzs
  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, ChrLzs said:

 Second, you probably should Google Jaime Maussan.  He is a UFO=alienz promoter, his background is NOT in any sort of digital image enhancement or genuine scientific analysis..  and to be more than polite, his utterances on the topic in the past have been somewhere between blatant misinformation and unscientific claptrap.

He is a complete and total charlatan and i wonder if he is facing legal repercussion from his desecration of human remains and burial sites with that alien mummy BS he was pushing. If not he should be.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Once I read “Jaime Maussan” in any article, I’m out! It’s equal to reading Ed and Lorraine Warren in a paranormal article!

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
Could this drop of water on someone’s windshield be of non-human origin? Some ancient astronaut theorist somewhere is saying a profound yes.
  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Fauxhammmer said:

Once I read “Jaime Maussan” in any article, I’m out! It’s equal to reading Ed and Lorraine Warren in a paranormal article!

You way nailed that one!

Did you hear the story where the warrens were on some talk show with joe nickells who ask ed for proof ed threatened joe with bodily harm.

Best i got on jaime is he paid 10k for a monkey skeleton because he thought it had to be an alien.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a few moments, so let's delve a little deeper into specifics, and see whether Jaime Maussan's AI is artificially intelligent, or artificially idiotic.

Here's what Jaime ended up with, and then the actual data at right:
maussan_bullshit.jpg.632a13fecd1da7951c3c07630792169f.jpgzoom2.jpg
A few comments... (I can't help thinking one eyed shark..)  Sorry, I'll be serious now..

Look at the little cloud above - that VERY strongly looks like Photoshop's EMBOSS tool.  The emboss tool is an additive tool that adds false detail in order to get a 3D effect.  Jaime wanted a 3D effect and sorta got one (that's NOT how you do image analysis).

Maussan used his AI (Artificial Idiocy) program to smoothed out the outline and transform it into a curved solid shape, with about a bazillion added pixels to falsely raise the resolution.

It then looks as if he has used either a contrast enhancement, or perhaps UnSharp Mask (USM).  USM can be handy if you have a very good quality original (we don't), but it is a tiny bit out of focus.  It enhances edges, but in this case it seems to have been applied very amateurishly, as it is all over the shop - some parts have the extra contrast, others don't.  Added to the EMBOSS effect, USM and contrast adjustment are ALL tools you should not use in image analysis as they fu mess with the original pixels - they change things, add things, and delete things.  FALSE details.  Made up pixels.

And what about those 'windows'?  Look carefully at the circled line of pixels in this original, enlarged image:
zoom3.jpg.c7e76037a56e3cd0e236cfeb07861d27.jpg
That line of pixels suffers badly from 'posterisation'.  Posterising is the effect you get due to there being a limited number of discrete colors, so in order to show a gradient of say light to dark, or of one colour changing to another, there will be 'jumps' in the color brightness of adjacent pixels - at normal viewing distances it will look smooth, and this process saves on file size.  Let me repeat that - JPEG files use a limited color depth and the compression process (which keeps the file size down) uses a method where it jumps from one color/brightness to another.  It looks fine at a distance but if you enlarge the beejezus out of it, you'll see ... FALSE 'detail'.  So, in this case, the Artificial Idiot AGAIN decides to emphasise this already false detail by adding skinny lines as if each original pixel was in fact a 'window'.  Of course it is obvious that there aren't enough pixels in the original image to have captured any such detail.

 

I hope it is clear what Jaime Maussan has done here.  He's completely mangled and regenrated and heavily altered the original image in a way that is utterly moronic, and that has very little in common with the actual recorded pixels, which are way to few and way too small to resolve any detail in what is almost certainly a seabird flying past.

 

When I have time, I'll pop by and explain another reason why I believe this is simply a nearby bird flying across the shot...  And if not, is most likely a fake addition.

I might also take the liberty of reversing Jaime's enhancement, to see exactly what we get back to.... :D :D  (what this means is that we'll take that made-up image back down to the same number of pixels as in the original data, and see just how closely it matches.  If it's not identical, then that will very obviously mean Jaime Maussan has cheated, and at best doesn't understand anything about how his AI program works.

Frankly, I don't think he has got any AI software, as nothing could be that bad..  He's just played with photoshop.  Like I said, he may as well have just scribbled all over the image with his crayons.

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.