<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.2604" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>I just couldn't pass up the opportunity to curb a
moment of boredom. I did this for fun, perhaps to get you all to smile
(thought Spike would like this humor!), and mainly to </FONT><FONT face=Arial
size=2>see if I could reproduce the image, not to speculate one way or
another. And, as you have already established, I would never, ever upload
to a site where I do not have authorization to do so. Just an incorrigible
artist here, but that's all! : )</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>The only way I was able to save the image from
Google Maps was to hit the "Print Screen" button, since if you take a
look, you can see that there is no right click "save
picture" option available (PC users) on their site. I don't know what
program they are using but I did notice that they will allow
others embedded access of Google maps on their web site using <A
href="http://www.google.com/apis/maps/documentation/#The_Hello_World_of_Google_Maps">Java
Script</A></FONT><FONT face=Arial size=2>. So it might be safe to assume that
this could be what they are using as well. But JavaScript may just be the
"viewer" so to speak of the images, and not the actual format of the images -
(for example the standard psd, or jpg format - they/or the satellite
people could also be using some proprietary file extension). Anyway, since
I saved it as my own generated Prt Sc image (jpg), if there was an
original format I did not have access to it. Hypothetically, if I were
looking at a psd of an image, I would be able to see all of the layers and
figure out how everything works, but if it was a jpg these layers would be
compressed and thus the history would be lost. For example the image that I
made, while I was making my version(s), I was saving as a psd, and each part had
it's separate layer, but when I saved it to a jpg and uploaded it, you wouldn't
be able to tell if I did anything to it, unless you were a forensic graphic pro
or something (or if I was really bad at it - if I am, don't tell me). But
the point is moot, since as I mentioned earlier, the image I used as a base was
from my own jpg generated "print screen" save - so I was not able to see or
determine anything from the flat replicated image. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>I did notice one thing while making my
reproduction, when I looked at the <A
href="http://maps.google.com/maps?q=33409&ll=26.748651,-80.074550&spn=0.005622,0.007875&t=k&hl=en">first
image mentioned</A> on the list I noticed that the background (the houses and
streets etc.) was a little shaky, out of focus, as opposed to the Google Map I
sequestered of my neighborhood. This was the only thing that stood out to
me, simply because mine was so clear. To make mine look the
same I had to blur the whole image a few times before I began (minus
the letters in the right bottom and the buttons on the top right). This also
helped later when trying to have a natural transition from the real photo to the
object I created. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>To create my mysterious object, it was really quite
simple. I drew an empty selection circle on a new layer and filled it with a
gradient of the same colors on the original object: white, grey and
light blue. With Keith's observation in mind, I looked at the direction of the
shadows under the trees and houses in the picture and lined my gradient in the
same direction, so that it would match. </FONT><FONT face=Arial size=2>I then
applied a bevel contour to the circle so that it appeared a little 3D. Then I
blurred it to soften it. The original mystery object looked like it had a slight
transparent haze around it. To achieve this effect I simply duplicated my
circle, and using the free transform, enlarged it so that it was a little bigger
than my first circle, I emptied the center of it (making a halo ring), lowered
the opacity quite a bit and added blur to this too. I merged the center of the
circle and the surrounding haze into one. Then I positioned it, so that the haze
was obviously layered over defined structures, so that it appeared to be
hovering. Specifically, semi transparent blur over the houses tricks the eye
into thinking the object is floating above them. If I had the same object over
that <A href="http://www.nanogirl.com/images/satellite.jpg">park area</A> (where
you see the baseball diamond) there would be no distinctive structure underneath
the haze that our eyes would surmise as lower or underneath it. It
also doesn't have a lot of distinct color variations to simulate perspective
either. That was it!</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Honestly this thing could be anything, I'm not up
on my satellite engineering, lenses or software - but I could easily
imagine that if it wasn't something legit in the air, it could be any number of
these things interacting with or leaving an artifact on the photo. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Here are two super close ups for you:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Original: <A
href="http://www.nanogirl.com/images/satellitetheirs.jpg">http://www.nanogirl.com/images/satellitetheirs.jpg</A></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Mine: <A
href="http://www.nanogirl.com/images/satellitemine.jpg">http://www.nanogirl.com/images/satellitemine.jpg</A></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>You can see the original is more blue and you can
tell in my pixels that the image has been blurred. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Gina "Nanogirl" Miller<BR> <A
href="http://www.nanogirl.com/museumfuture/index.htm">http://www.nanogirl.com/museumfuture/index.htm</A><BR><BR></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=avantguardian2020@yahoo.com
href="mailto:avantguardian2020@yahoo.com">The Avantguardian</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A
title=extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org
href="mailto:extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org">ExI chat list</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Sunday, August 07, 2005 7:15
PM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [extropy-chat] UFO on
satellite photo.</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT><FONT
face=Arial size=2></FONT><BR></DIV><BR><BR>--- Gina Miller <<A
href="mailto:nanogirl@halcyon.com">nanogirl@halcyon.com</A>>
wrote:<BR><BR>> Okay here is a zoom in of the object near my house
-<BR>> in which you can really see what is going on:<BR>> <A
href="http://www.nanogirl.com/images/satellite2.jpg">http://www.nanogirl.com/images/satellite2.jpg</A><BR>>
<BR>> Gina Miller<BR>> <A
href="http://www.nanogirl.com">www.nanogirl.com</A> <BR><BR>Sheesh, Gina. You,
my dear, are why nobody trusts<BR>photographic evidence anymore. ;) This does
not bode<BR>well for justice in a transparent society dependent on<BR>security
cameras. But that is a separate issue. You<BR>have convincingly shown that it
is possible for<BR>someone to have hacked Google maps, doctored the<BR>photo,
and uploaded it back onto the site. My question<BR>is this: Since you are
really good at doctoring<BR>photos, can you find any flaws in the
original<BR>photograph that would indicate that it was doctored as<BR>yours
was? Is there any irregularities in the pixels<BR>or whatever that would
suggest this?<BR> <BR><BR>The Avantguardian <BR>is <BR>Stuart
LaForge<BR>alt email: stuart"AT"ucla.edu<BR><BR>"The surest sign of
intelligent life in the universe is that they haven't attempted to contact
us." <BR>-Bill
Watterson<BR><BR>__________________________________________________<BR>Do You
Yahoo!?<BR>Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection
around <BR><A href="http://mail.yahoo.com">http://mail.yahoo.com</A>
<BR>_______________________________________________<BR>extropy-chat mailing
list<BR><A
href="mailto:extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org">extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org</A><BR><A
href="http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat">http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat</A><BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>