UFO ~ ORB over Charlotte, NC ?

[Waterglass]

I picked this up on the George Noory web site and looked at the video and image. See the pics as attached. I have been doing this for years after seeing UFO's on May 4, 2018 in South Carolina. I stopped the video and took a screen shot. [see pic with info]. I then opened it with FastStone Image Viewer and zoomed in 900%. I sharpened the image the put it into negative. I then Reduced Noise by 100% and once again Sharpened the Image and returned to the actual image from Negative. See small picture. The shape appears irregular and there are 100's of "bubbles" around the circumference. Among the "bubbles" on the outside diameter areblack "cicular" "dots" which appear to almost reflect the numbers on a clock. Said object also has some sort of a small energy field or wispy atmosphere surrounding it. As I wrote previously I have done this over 500 times and if the ibject is round its round. This isnt a perfect circle. So, is it just "pure energy" IMO its NOT a balloon. So, if its a DRONE then someone or something has developed a propulsion system that doesnt leave a signature behind. 

[Nerb]

I sharpened the image the put it into negative. I then Reduced Noise by 100% and once again Sharpened the Image and returned to the actual image from Negative. See small picture. The shape appears irregular and there are 100's of "bubbles" around the circumference. Among the "bubbles" on the outside diameter areblack "cicular" "dots" which appear to almost reflect the numbers on a clock. Said object also has some sort of a small energy field or wispy atmosphere surrounding it. As I wrote previously I have done this over 500 times and if the ibject is round its round. This isnt a perfect circle. So, is it just "pure energy" 

For this thing to have a "circumfrance" to you or the camera would mean it was facing the camera. That makes no real sense, and with all the photomanipulation and enlargement, it creates artefacts that can be mistaken for elements that aren't there due to pixelation.

I've done this many times before too, so my conclusion would be a balloon or group of balloons tied tightly in a bunch. It moves quickly because there is a strong wind which is evident from the trees moving.

Thanks for sharing and keep at it.

[Waterglass]

For this thing to have a "circumfrance" to you or the camera would mean it was facing the camera. That makes no real sense, and with all the photomanipulation and enlargement, it creates artefacts that can be mistaken for elements that aren't there due to pixelation.

I've done this many times before too, so my conclusion would be a balloon or group of balloons tied tightly in a bunch. It moves quickly because there is a strong wind which is evident from the trees moving.

Thanks for sharing and keep at it.

Thanks for your opinion but I do this same manpulation on other UFO ~ UAPs. [1] Very rarely do I ever see "bubbles" [2] Round remains round but even in the video one can see there are flats along the circumference and yes it could be a balloon with "flats" sort of how a soccer ball is sewn together. 

So, if its an imperfect diameter balloon is must have been made in China?

[pianopraze]

A lot more of these recently. 

If it’s not a balloon.

[Waterglass]

A lot more of these recently. 

If it’s not a balloon.

I recall the one in Irag that was videoed by US military. Then George Noory said once was also recently seen in Canada. Based on the countries where it has been seen it would seem to me more of an ET probe rather than domestic earth. Just my opinion. NO proof.

[ArMaP]

I stopped the video and took a screen shot.

If you took a screen shot of the already zoomed in video then you started not only with the object's image but also with all the resizing artefacts created by the digital zoom, and these are clearly visible on the video.

I then opened it with FastStone Image Viewer and zoomed in 900%. I sharpened the image the put it into negative.

Sharpening reduces quality, unless you know that you ended up with the same number of colours as before.

I then Reduced Noise by 100% and once again Sharpened the Image and returned to the actual image from Negative.

Reducing noise always reduces image detail, and sharpening it again only makes things worse.
Also, working in negative to return to positive after is useless, you gain nothing by doing it.

See small picture. The shape appears irregular and there are 100's of "bubbles" around the circumference. Among the "bubbles" on the outside diameter areblack "cicular" "dots" which appear to almost reflect the numbers on a clock.

I think those are the artefacts from the original digital zoom.

Said object also has some sort of a small energy field or wispy atmosphere surrounding it.

Look at the letters at the bottom of the image taken from the video, you can see a kind of "aura" around them, a result of the compression used by the video algorithm.

As I wrote previously I have done this over 500 times and if the ibject is round its round. This isnt a perfect circle. So, is it just "pure energy" IMO its NOT a balloon. So, if its a DRONE then someone or something has developed a propulsion system that doesnt leave a signature behind. 

Or it was just a balloon made from several "slices", making it not perfectly round.

PS: do we know the wind direction? That could help.

[ArMaP]

So, if its an imperfect diameter balloon is must have been made in China?

Or a homemade balloon.
Or a cheap balloon made anywhere.

[Waterglass]

If you took a screen shot of the already zoomed in video then you started not only with the object's image but also with all the resizing artefacts created by the digital zoom, and these are clearly visible on the video.


Sharpening reduces quality, unless you know that you ended up with the same number of colours as before.


Reducing noise always reduces image detail, and sharpening it again only makes things worse.
Also, working in negative to return to positive after is useless, you gain nothing by doing it.


I think those are the artefacts from the original digital zoom.


Look at the letters at the bottom of the image taken from the video, you can see a kind of "aura" around them, a result of the compression used by the video algorithm.


Or it was just a balloon made from several "slices", making it not perfectly round.

PS: do we know the wind direction? That could help.

I have done 100's of this type of enhancement. Much of what you write is true but much isnt also. Can you explain the bubbles around the circumference as I have only seen these "bubbles" less than 6 times of over 500 screen shots of UFO's taken all over the world. 

So lets put your INTEL training to work!

[Nerb]

I have done 100's of this type of enhancement. Much of what you write is true but much isnt also. Can you explain the bubbles around the circumference as I have only seen these "bubbles" less than 6 times of over 500 screen shots of UFO's taken all over the world. 

So lets put your INTEL training to work!

Like I pointed out earlier, for those bubbles to be on the circumference, the object would have to be facing the viewer which makes no logical sense does it? The centre of the object shows just a flat colour. Lots of photomanipulation artefacts creating things that aren't there in the actual object.

And "enhancing" photos is a great way of seeing what isn't there by creating those artefacts with our limited available image software. Pixels are usually the bottleneck in photorealism.

The best way to judge something like this is to see it WITH OUR OWN EYES. Then, we can at least hold a personal truth. Even if we cannot prove it, it is a satisfaction that does not need outside scrutiny.

Stick the clip in A.I. and see what it comes back with perhaps?

[Waterglass]

Like I pointed out earlier, for those bubbles to be on the circumference, the object would have to be facing the viewer which makes no logical sense does it? The centre of the object shows just a flat colour. Lots of photomanipulation artefacts creating things that aren't there in the actual object.

And "enhancing" photos is a great way of seeing what isn't there by creating those artefacts with our limited available image software. Pixels are usually the bottleneck in photorealism.

The best way to judge something like this is to see it WITH OUR OWN EYES. Then, we can at least hold a personal truth. Even if we cannot prove it, it is a satisfaction that does not need outside scrutiny.

Stick the clip in A.I. and see what it comes back with perhaps?

Sorry bud, I have done thisn 100's of times. Most of what I see are triangles. I sent my UFO video to The Black Vault and they wrote back they also are seeing a triangle. Different subject but I dont need to be played