3 ms·
Maybe it would be more convincing if you could see something, anything other than pure black - buildings, a tree line, whatever. As it is, it's literally a whit
by GordonS 6y ago
Maybe it would be more convincing if you could see something, anything other than pure black - buildings, a tree line, whatever. As it is, it's literally a white dot on a black background - I couldn't even see any image noise in the black (although I am on mobile).
- dylan604 6y agoWhy? It's western Colorado. There's nothing out there except land. The sky at night is black. Something flying in the night sky will be flying above tree lines requiring the observer to be looking up. I honestly don't know why you'd be expecting a full on feature film production level of equipment to be available to someone that happens to notice a drone flying and trying to capture it. There's a reason certain activities take place in the dead of night. Avoiding being seen is one of them. What's the confusion? I get it's "disappointing" to not see everything, but if everything could be seen in the footage there'd not be mystery/intrigue.
- GordonS 6y ago> honestly don't know why you'd be expecting a full on feature film production level of equipment to be available You're exaggerating now. My point was simply that the imagery is entirely unconvincing, and could be trivially faked.
- matthewdgreen 6y agoThe objection several posts up was "there are all these reports, but nobody captured video?" And then somebody pointed out that in fact witnesses did capture video, but it's as predictably terrible as one would expect given that smartphones are terrible for filming remote airplanes at night.