Indigo Star Lines

File: IMG_7502.jpg (3MB, 5184x3456px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 5184x3456px

1

File: IMG_7505.jpg (3MB, 5184x3456px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 5184x3456px

2

File: IMG_7507.jpg (3MB, 5184x3456px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 5184x3456px

4

Used a tripod i expect?

File: IMG_7508.jpg (4MB, 5184x3456px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 5184x3456px

5

File: IMG_7509.jpg (4MB, 5184x3456px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 5184x3456px

6

>>19365500
Actually, No, She layed the camera on its back (The Screen...the fucking girl....) Facing up.

>>19365494
This is the one that confuses me the most.
The Clearest, Yet, the most dramatic.

>>19365521

That hurt to read :D
No wonder it was full of shit on the first picture.

I'm actually super intrigued regarding the pics..

>>19365536
It was a bittersweet experience to have someone care about what you like to do, Then ruin your things you do it with, Then take a picture of something you've never seen before.

>>19365556

Begginers luck eh?
I have no idea what i'm looking at but i can't take my eyes away..

>>19365580
The fourth upload is my problem.
It's like the camera was being shaken, but other than the "Problem Stars" there isn't any evidence of the camera being moved at all, and there was absolutely no light sources in the area, Literally, the middle of the mountains.

>>19365465

You witnessed reconnection.

Beautiful.

>>19365600

Precisely, i was just discussing that with my gf.
If the camera had been moved, every other point of light would have followed the same pattern.
Wich leads to the only possible conclusion.. and weirdest..

>>19365605
As in "Magnetic reconnection"?

>>19365607
I've played with the idea of a bug or something somehow reflecting light, but staying the frame, in that small area, traveling such a small distance (since its a bug) so slowly..
Even with the idea of a flare of some sort, it wouldn't make a trail like that?

>>19365663

The flare wouldn't make a trail like that.. not with the absence of movement. I'm not an expert though so take that with a grain of salt :)
Where the pictures in succession?

>>19365770
Yeah, the camera wasn't moved too much at all from the series of photos. Within inches. One after another.

>>19365770
I believe the photos have a time stamp on them (guessing they correct.) They sort themselves by date when put on my phone.

File: tmp_28446-Fig2-1569722984.gif (21KB, 664x221px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 664x221px

Since conventional cameras are designed for the visible spectrum, it's possible that errors in the manufacture of the convex lens(es) are causing the camera to pick up light from objects composed of antimatter. There are specific lenses which have an inversed refraction index, designed to observe the light from antimatter objects, which would otherwise be incoherent light signals, not visible to the unaided eye.

http://www.thunder-energies.com/index.php/ct-menu-item-18/11-articles/17-article-8

>>19365829
See when you say it like that, it makes me sound like I have a magic camera that picks up special things beyond standard photos.

Can't you just tell me "camera broke, buy a new one"

>>19365787

Good.
I really can't wrap my melon around what it could be.

>>19365892
I cannot, as the exploration of non-creepy subject matters is in violation of Global Rule 3.

>3. You will not post any of the following outside of /b/: Trolls, flames, racism, off-topic replies, uncalled for catchphrases, macro image replies, indecipherable text (example: "lol u tk him 2da bar|?"), anthropomorphic ("furry") or grotesque ("guro") images, post number GETs ("dubs"), or loli/shota pornography.

http://www.4chan.org/rules#global

The category of on-topic subject matters for /x/ is described as follows:

>1. For all your creepy images and stories.

http://www.4chan.org/rules#x

Perhaps if you visit the photography board, subsequently linked below, you will be able to find another person who can accommodate your request.

>>>/p/

>>19365988
Promising.
So, actuality of having a photo of beyond human spectrum is promising?

No shit, this camera takes weird photos.
Or I do, not sure.

Orbs, lights, odd shadows.

Do you believe strange settings and a slight defect could lead to taking photos of something "beyond"?

>>19365829
>objects composed of antimatter.
like what

File: tmp_20390-downloadd91c1adf_ee_2c_20holy_2c_20bible_2c_20Obama_2c_20alien_2c_2032_283_29-651603777.png (143KB, 790x460px) Image search: [Google]

143KB, 790x460px

>>19366012
An offset convex lens would be able to generate artifacts that would otherwise be incoherent to correctly calibrated camera lenses. To generate coherent imagery of objects comprised of antimatter, the photographer would require a calibrated concave lens, that rotates the index of refraction one half of a whole cycle of the frequency within the spectrum of light signals that the concave lens is calibrated to focus on.

Without a properly calibrated concave lens, the entropy of information that your camera will be able to coherently analyze is near 2; by cross referencing its observed light signals with a scientific control, you would be able to detect if something other than normal matter either is, or is not there. But not much beyond that, unless you had the patience to assemble a binary pixelation of what you're photographing.