• NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!

    Subscribe to The Paracast Newsletter!

How easy was it to fake this

Forums New posts

Free episodes:

dragon376

dragon376

Skilled Investigator
This photograph has been debunked as a fake
Ummo photos - TinWiki.org

Nowadays, with some knowledge of photoshop, almost anyone that has a couple of hours to waste can add a fake UFO to a picture that looks half decent.
My question to the expert, David Biedny: how easy was it to fake this in 1967?
 
It looks like a model suspended by fishing line. Probably pretty easy. Stick it up there, take 3 or 4 rolls of film and then take the best image or two from the rolls. Seems easy to me. My gut feeling is initially, 8 to 10 hours to build it, drive to the location, figure out how to position it and take the photo's. Subsequent photo sessions could probably be setup and done in about an hour or so. Of course, thats just a guess.
 
I can think of a few easy ways. Take a photo of the location, get yourself a button or bottle top and paint it white, before adding the Ummo symbol. Then, when you have a large print of your location image, lay it flat on a table, place the painted button/bottle top on the image, and take a shot of the image, including the Ummo 'craft'. The tilted aspect of the craft could easily be achieved by placing the button/bottle top over a small piece of cotton wool, rolled-up paper, etc. It could also have been suspended slightly over the image, on a piece of fine white thread, or the thread passed through a small hole in the image, concealed by the 'craft'. If the location image was stuck to a wall, a knot would keep the 'craft' in place.

I'm no imaging expert, but the so-called craft just looks to me like it isn't part of the original location shot. Also, it appears in the lightest part of the scene - very handy for concealing strings, etc. The whole thing looks very amateurish. BTW, have any negatives of this image been provided?
 
Back
Top