So you wanted a clear video on HD of an UFO, how about this?
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fhPozqEtYhI
>Clear
>subject is so small that it could be simply dust on the lens
>>18770002
Watch fully, it's not dust, at some point they say that the other cars can see it too, maybe there is another recording.
>>18770002
have u seen the video? it`s one of the best videos there
>>18770002
bit of dust that's flying behind trees yeah?
>>18770051
No, that's retarded. What ever it is is traveling faster then the car.
What is a drone?
>>18770185
how can you tell it's moving at all? It could be stationary and very far away.
>>18770198
Please show me where i can buy a spherical drone
>>18770200
At the end of the video you can see the people struggling to catch up to it.
>>18770224
no, at the end of the video i see it still being a small speck in the sky.
there is absolutely no way to estimate distance/size of the object in the video because it never passes in front of anything that's a known distance from the camera.
Looks like it was added in pist production, movement is a little choppy and unnatural, but not in that ufo way
>>18769987
>240p
>HD
Secureteam10 ... when?
>>18769987
>>18770239
Thats a mexican family, I dont think they know how to do post production effects with that quality
>>18770224
no, they're passing it.
mylar balloons are probably not as well known in other countries
>>18769987
>this is what passes for HD in Mexico
>>18769987
>clear video
>HD of an UFO
>gives youtube link for a 240p video
So where's the 1080p at, m8?
>>18770212
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=55d5ppwQBQ4
>>18769987
Here's an actual clear ufo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f3b_FuDXecw
This is better https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sl4Ep53rwSw
ITT:
>hi guys, douchbag youtuber here with yufo
>press subscribe/like/tell your friends/watch more of my shit
D R O P P E D
R
O
P
P
E
D
>>18769987
ALIENS R REAL
>>18772252
Just a round copter.
>>18772268
CGI.
>>18772288
Shit I don't know.
>>18772325
The video it's legit, but as usual it just roves that normal people can't film for shit.
>>18772473
What did you searched?
>>18769987
I feel like someone tried to make it look super realistic with cgi adding diffused reflection to the object but it turned out like shit.
Now come and call me shill, faggots.
>>18772484
Clicked on the link my dude. Can't do it even with a vpn.
It's blinking in and out and jumping around really randomly. Maybe these things are all over the place, but they are cloaked. This one is having malfunctions.
>>18769987
>clear video on HD
>240p
Clever one m8 I r8 8/8, no h8
>>18772268
top kek youtube comment:
"This is a tent filled with fart gas after curry this happed to me I was camping went to have a crap came back tent gone"
>>18769987
shitty editing job . the object vanishes before trees and pops back up well after the trees are out of the way.
its small and lacks any real definition to its form. probably just a single brush that was made for shop and it was all done frame by frame and they still didnt manage a proper illusion
this is why mexicans need to learn how to make images in layers. they could have made a master frame for the object then erased what was needed after pasting it into a empty layer so the transition would be tighter
Orbs of light making crop circle...
Sort of clear...
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6M6vP8-SbU0
>>18772857
Another cool one is the first one here also:
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XOgn9JZm6qI
..
What is this? A UFO for ants?!
>>18772857
No, two birds flying around cropcircle that you can't see until the guy changes focus.
Retard.
>>18772873
>CHECK OUT THIS BLURRY FOOTAGE OF A DRONE WHILE I CUT TO CROP CIRCLES OCCASIONALLY
Noice.
>>18772886
That doesn't look like a change of focus... The background doesn't change focus, and the crop circle appears in sections and not all at once. Second video is also clearly not a change of focus, but might be cgi.
>>18770012
I can see that it's moving, but I still wouldn't call it clear. There are digital cameras with over 80x optical zoom. you would think someone would use that for footage of a UFO, but instead they use a low quality setting on their phone.
What's with paranormal footage always coming from the most technologically inept people?