OVNI. Estados Unidos

 Photographic AnalYsis of The “Fortune” Photo BY John T. HoPf (Takcn on Oct. 16, 1957, ncar thc holloman North Test Rangc.) This report is based only examination of the original slide and enlarging copies made therefrom, and deals only  with the photographic questions involved’ I must leave to others more qualified thc discussion of whether a cloud this compact and brilliant could actually form and remain motionless under the atmospheric conditions existing at thc timc thc photograph was taken. Miss Ella Louise Fortune should bc complimented on hcr exeellcnt tcchnitluc in taking this linc photograph. Thc original 35mm Kodachrome slide is verY striking as the obiect is a brilliant white with quite distinct form contrasted against the dark blue sky. Thc thin bluish-white trail coming from the left end of the object does not reproduce well in thc black and white copics duc to its faintness. There is no question whatever that thc photograph is authentic and is of an object at a great distance from the camera. Actual shutter speed with a camera lf this type ( Kodak Pon)’ ) is usually closer to 1,z25th whcn sct at 1./50th sec. Therefore the exposure given of 1’50th scc. at f16 with Polarscreen checks well with observed density of the slide. Persons who havc seen only the black and white prints are invariably struck by thc “third-dimensional” effect when the slide is projected. This is simply due to the high contrast bctwccn thc white “object” and the dark sky caused by using a polarizing filter and a minimal exposure. Normal cxposurc for a scene of this typc would be 1,z50th at fll; however, the exPosure userl was exactly right to show maximum detail in an object as brilliant as this one. Careful examination of thc original and enlarge Ektachrome copics ttradc from it indicate that the object was reflecting or producing at least twice as much light as the other clouds in thc picture. A small cloud in ” upper left and those at the top are bright blue by comparison and slightly underexposed. (See front page picture in May Bulletin.) I do not think that any ortlinarl cloud would produce such a strong exposure on the film. The enlargement shown hcrc is about 50 diameters from the original. On this scale the entire picture would bc six (6) feet wide. The grain shown is that of thc original film. Although with such extreme magnification even the sharpest lines appear slightly fuzz.y dut’to residual aberrations in the camera lens and loss of rcsolution in the film emulsion, I ciitt think- that o cnlid nhinnl rr:nrtlrl have produced a sharper outline, especially since no motion was apparent at the time of the exposure. Of course if the “object” were beYond the mountains, there would be some blurring due to atmospheric “boiling” over the mountains, but probably not enough to produce the unsymmetrical shape and the shaded points which indicate a form more cloud-like than solid. Although I fccl that thc “object” is not a solid one, it certainly is an unusual phenomena and should receive the attention of a qualified aerologist. (Signed) John T. Ilopf Thc analysis performed by the staff when the original slide of thc Fortune picture was received, was based on the slide as wcll as atmospheric conditions and Miss Fortune’s testimony. Miss Fortune stressed her opinion that thc object could not havc bccn a cloud, that a rough triangulation gained by looking at from points along the highway between Tularosa and Three Rivers indicated that it rvas considerably closer than thc mountains-perhaps as much as 1./3 of thc distance from the highway’ to thc mountains from hcr position. Wc havc yet to find anyone who can identify the object photographed by Ella Fortune