Calvine UFO Photo - Reflection In Water Hypothesis

Vee7

New Member
Since we're entertaining the idea of a hoax, could it just be done with a large mirror? Maybe a mirror would have to be absurdly big to pull this off, but worth considering.

As for it possibly being a water reflection, if there were ripples, where would we be most likely to find them? I would guess towards the fence-side of the picture? There's some streaks across one of the posts, but could just be down to the the photo development/copying/scanning etc.
 

Vee7

New Member
Also (maybe it was obvious to some but it just occurred to me) the reflection idea would explain why the photo appears to be taken from such a low angle.

Makes more sense than someone lying on the floor next to a very low fence, or a very tall fence in a farm for that matter.
 

jackfrostvc

Senior Member
If it's a hoax, I would lean more to a simpler answer, like a model hanging from the tree in the foreground.
No need for reflections and double exposures to make a hoax.
 

deirdre

Senior Member.
If it's a hoax, I would lean more to a simpler answer, like a model hanging from the tree in the foreground.
No need for reflections and double exposures to make a hoax.
but if youre out hiking and stop for a break and your buddy says..."heh heh that rock looks like a UFO".. it could be a spur of the moment hoax.
like i doubt the bridge rivets in a puddle famous ufo was planned out before hand.
https://www.metabunk.org/threads/ci...nd-objects-reflection-of-bridge-rivets.11813/
 

jackfrostvc

Senior Member
but if youre out hiking and stop for a break and your buddy says..."heh heh that rock looks like a UFO".. it could be a spur of the moment hoax.
like i doubt the bridge rivets in a puddle famous ufo was planned out before hand.
https://www.metabunk.org/threads/ci...nd-objects-reflection-of-bridge-rivets.11813/

How would you see that naturally as a reflection. There is no lake visible.
Makes no sense. Nor does it really look completely like a reflection as the bottom and top don't really match
 

Charlie Wiser

Active Member
If it's a hoax, I would lean more to a simpler answer, like a model hanging from the tree in the foreground.
No need for reflections and double exposures to make a hoax.
Sometimes, hoaxes make use of opportunity. A reflection or other trick photography is simpler than models. If the hikers knew the local flight paths, it would be pretty easy to plan out.
 

jackfrostvc

Senior Member
Sometimes, hoaxes make use of opportunity. A reflection or other trick photography is simpler than models. If the hikers knew the local flight paths, it would be pretty easy to plan out.


But it's not simple though, they would have to take a pic of a rock reflecting in the water, that doesn't mirror like it is a reflection. Then ad a double exposure of it against another pic with clouds and a plane flying by

Hanging something from a tree is far simpler

BTW, anyone have a link to the hand written incident report where it supposedly says the object shot off?
 

Charlie Wiser

Active Member
Also (maybe it was obvious to some but it just occurred to me) the reflection idea would explain why the photo appears to be taken from such a low angle.

Makes more sense than someone lying on the floor next to a very low fence, or a very tall fence in a farm for that matter.
The angle of the shot (or specifically, the fence) is really bizarre, if the thing is in the sky. David Clarke posted a scenery image of where he believes it was taken - fence and all - and the topography doesn't make any sense. From that angle, surely there should be ground showing in the image all the way into the distance. From: https://drdavidclarke.co.uk/2022/08/12/the-calvine-ufo-revealed/
 

Attachments

  • landscape2.jpg
    landscape2.jpg
    444.4 KB · Views: 31

Charlie Wiser

Active Member
But it's not simple though, they would have to take a pic of a rock reflecting in the water, that doesn't mirror like it is a reflection. Then ad a double exposure of it against another pic with clouds and a plane flying by

Hanging something from a tree is far simpler

BTW, anyone have a link to the hand written incident report where it supposedly says the object shot off?
I don't think a double exposure is necessary. Just wait until the plane flies over.
Differences in the reflection symmetry could be accounted for by stuff under the water - weeds, a fish disturbing the currents, etc.
 

jackfrostvc

Senior Member
I don't think a double exposure is necessary. Just wait until the plane flies over.
Differences in the reflection symmetry could be accounted for by stuff under the water - weeds, a fish disturbing the currents, etc.

But a reflection needs a pool of water, where is that? the back drop is clouds
So if it is a reflection, it has to have been taken and added to a pic of a cloudy background
 

FatPhil

Senior Member.
1660351873585.png
I'm not 100% sure this is a real picture. But it's one of the results from googling "reflection lake". Could murkiness be responsible for making the reflection appear slightly brighter than the mountains?

Given that it's a reflection, the first thing that comes to mind is polarisation - can someone with the appropriate filters take photos of such a scene with and without a circular polarisation filter (and with a linear polarisation filter at canonical orthogonal directions, if that's also possible)?
 

saucerpilot

New Member
Given that it's a reflection, the first thing that comes to mind is polarisation - can someone with the appropriate filters take photos of such a scene with and without a circular polarisation filter (and with a linear polarisation filter at canonical orthogonal directions, if that's also possible)?
My guess is that in this picture of mountains, particles just under the surface are scattering light from the sky.
 

JFDee

Senior Member.
I don't think the image is flipped (ripples added). I think it's the right way up (so the reflection is darker, as expected) and the plane is either upside down (rolling) or just too blurry to tell that it's the right way up. Neither the fence or foliage is a reflection here:

I agree. The branches of the left tree resemble that of a weeping willow, with the shoots hanging down. They would go straight up if the photo was flipped.

calvine_willow.png
 

Charlie Wiser

Active Member
But a reflection needs a pool of water, where is that? the back drop is clouds
So if it is a reflection, it has to have been taken and added to a pic of a cloudy background
The rock (UFO) is in a pool of water, and the water is reflecting the sky and the jet (as well as the rock).
 

Charlie Wiser

Active Member
I agree. The branches of the left tree resemble that of a weeping willow, with the shoots hanging down. They would go straight up if the photo was flipped.

calvine_willow.png
David Clarke mentions Scots Pine in this video:
Source: https://youtu.be/h80GkZ5ZyIA


"Scotland’s only native coniferous forests".
On the one hand, Scots Pine needs point up, not down. On the other hand, the leaves in the photo don't look like pine to me - certainly not the species on the right here, which is in the center of the complete photo.
So it would be interesting to find out what other species are found in that area. If this is a hoax, of course, we really have no idea where it was taken.


leaves.jpg
 

JFDee

Senior Member.
But a reflection needs a pool of water, where is that? the back drop is clouds
So if it is a reflection, it has to have been taken and added to a pic of a cloudy background

Not necessarily. If the water area is large enough and quite still, you get a near perfect sky. The clouds don't have any distiguishable orientation in the UFO photo.

Here is a photo of Loch Bhac, three miles from Calvine (Wikipedia, "Loch Bhac") :
Loch_Bhac_-_geograph.org.uk_-_1233478.jpg
 
Last edited:

JFDee

Senior Member.
If this is a hoax, of course, we really have no idea where it was taken.

Indeed. We can only assume. If it was a spontaneous idea after taking the photos, the general area and time range may be genuine.

There are some water bodies around though, with forest around them. At Loch Bhac, I think there are fences visible in the north-western part, along with trees right at the shore. That's just one example of course.


bhac_fence_trees.png
 

jackfrostvc

Senior Member
But again, the clouds above what would have to be the mirror line do not mirror the clouds in the reflection below, assuming their is a reflection.
I just dont buy this reflection theory based on the image itself.
 

Easy Muffin

Active Member
There's what appears to be rolling hills or maybe some hangar-like structures along the bottom of the original photo.

a.jpg

I don't see how the geometry would work out here if this was a reflection? 1, how these features could be lined up with the top of the fence and 2, how they're not upside-down.
 

saucerpilot

New Member
There's what appears to be rolling hills or maybe some hangar-like structures along the bottom of the original photo.

a.jpg

I don't see how the geometry would work out here if this was a reflection? 1, how these features could be lined up with the top of the fence and 2, how they're not upside-down.
Those might not be hills at all.
 

deirdre

Senior Member.
But a reflection needs a pool of water, where is that? the back drop is clouds
So if it is a reflection, it has to have been taken and added to a pic of a cloudy background
the camera only captured the reflection not the edge of the lake, like: (i'm using this grass clump as the rock. the castle is the fence.
Screenshot 2022-08-13 040950.png

1660378542155.png
 

Mendel

Senior Member.
why would you put a fence that far down the hill..your sheep would roll into the wire
as a rule, sheep do not roll down hills

sheep are used to keep the grass on dikes short (and the ground tread down) because they easily cope with the incline. the fences are often right next to the dike.
5244002_web.jpg
 

JFDee

Senior Member.
But again, the clouds above what would have to be the mirror line do not mirror the clouds in the reflection below, assuming their is a reflection.
I just dont buy this reflection theory based on the image itself.

Maybe that's a misunderstanding. From the clouds, we'd only see the reflections, not the real thing - because they are not anywhere close to the waterline.
 

Easy Muffin

Active Member
Those might not be hills at all.
Well like I said, they are not necessarily hills but they do look rather like features on the ground. Got a suggestion what this could be if it's something in the sky?

The only thing that supports a reflection to me is the roughly symmetric nature of the object whilst the rest - the appearance of the clouds in the contrast-boosted version, the odd geometry and lines of sight that would be required, the jet pilot deciding to roll his plane at that precise moment and so on - points toward this being a run-of-the-mill picture of the sky taken through the top part of a fence, sort of like this one.

b.jpg
 

Charlie Wiser

Active Member
T
But again, the clouds above what would have to be the mirror line do not mirror the clouds in the reflection below, assuming their is a reflection.
I just dont buy this reflection theory based on the image itself.
The entire image is water, so we can't see the sky it's mirroring.
 

Charlie Wiser

Active Member
Well like I said, they are not necessarily hills but they do look rather like features on the ground. Got a suggestion what this could be if it's something in the sky?
Maybe they're not reflections at all - they could just be the crud collecting at the edge of the loch or pond.
 

Charlie Wiser

Active Member
Not necessarily. If the water area is large enough and quite still, you get a near perfect sky. The clouds don't have any distiguishable orientation in the UFO photo.

Here is a photo of Loch Bhac, three miles from Calvine (Wikipedia, "Loch Bhac") :
Another image of Loch Bhac from https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-48472958 - very similar fence:loch bhac.jpg

The hikers apparently worked at the Atholl Palace according to Craig Lindsay, who doesn't remember if the hiker he spoke to at the time walked a long distance or a short distance before reaching the spot but Calvine is 10 miles to the NW and Loch Bhac is on the way. There are several bodies of water on their route.

Image41.jpg
 
Last edited:

Easy Muffin

Active Member
Maybe they're not reflections at all - they could just be the crud collecting at the edge of the loch or pond.
I considered that too at first but eventually ruled it out. There are so many different objects here that I don't see how you could bring them all together if you were looking down at a reflection.
 

Space_Raider

New Member
points toward this being a run-of-the-mill picture of the sky taken through the top part of a fence, sort of like this one.

It is likely a standard farmer's barbed wire fence. You can see clumps of animal hair caught on the wire. You get this when cattle and sheep come up against the fence.

Regarding the odd placement of the fence - it could be a large puddle or flooding in a field like below.

FloodedField.jpg
 
Last edited:

Charlie Wiser

Active Member
I don't buy the reflection theory one bit.. Also, why would the MoD keep a photo of a reflection hidden for 30 years, and even more, the ID of the persons is secret for the next 50 years. Or is that all a big lie/hoax (I don't know what to trust these days anymore).
The photos weren't kept hidden. The MoD returned the negatives to the local paper after determining they were nothing special. The paper never printed them - maybe they were informed it was a hoax. Nick Pope said the picture was on the wall as a poster - obviously not top secret, more like a joke to fool newbies. The MoD press officer Lindsay took the print home for 30 years (indicating it was not classified) and then handed it over to the first journalist who asked after it (again, not classified).

Keeping the ID of the photographer is simply the law, not specific to this case:
The facts are that the names and addresses of all UFO witnesses and MoD officials who dealt with their reports have been routinely redacted from files transferred to The National Archives since 2005. From that date section 40 of the Freedom of Information Act, covering personal information, replaced the former ’30 year rule’.
 

Charlie Wiser

Active Member
I considered that too at first but eventually ruled it out. There are so many different objects here that I don't see how you could bring them all together if you were looking down at a reflection.
What different objects? The stuff on the right seems to be vegetation on the bank. Other than that, all I see are vague lines. Andrew Robinson sees hills and trees but it's not at all clear. Could even be dirt on the print. Robinson's close-up:hills and trees.jpg
 

simfly

New Member
Here is another version of water reflection hypothesis.
1.The plane was actually flying from left to right (A)
2.An image of small rock in the loch reflected as a UFO (B).
3.Picture(B) was clockwise turned 180°, resulting the Calvine UFO photo.
No flipping needed, question of upside down flying plane solved.

In addition, to shoot a “water reflecting” photo, a small pond or even just small area of wet surface is sufficient if the shooting angle and framing is right.Water reflection3.jpg
Water reflection3a.jpg

edafb3bcbe2f4770e843306e6f3b3b86032179f0.jpg
 
Top