In these days of computer animation and digital imagery, it is a simple task for a computer whiz kid to create a UFO hoax on computer and transfer it to video tape.  The hoaxer can then claim that they saw what was on the tape and that they just happened to have their camcorder handy at the time.  So if we record a UFO on a camcorder, what can we do to convince the experts that our footage is original and not tampered with?  Ivanhoe Chaput is the president of CC Design & Development Inc. based in the USA and as such has a great deal of knowledge on the subject of camcorders.  He gave some advice on this subject in a Citizens Against UFO Secrecy (CAUS) e-mail update and has kindly allowed us to reproduce that update here.  In addition to the update I asked him some further questions on the subject of videoing dimly lit objects and he has answered these questions admirably.  I had tried to get answers to these questions from other UFO imaging "experts" but was fobbed off with excuses so I would like to thank Ivanhoe for this article.

Bill Bimson

Some things that you can do to assist video analysts determine a fabricated or hoaxed video against the real thing are:

 1.  Zooming in and out.  Zooming increases and decreases both size of image and perspective.  Features (objects) that are videotaped move in a proportionate ratio of size/distance.  When one zooms, an analyst can extrapolate relative distances of objects, hence eliminating close-up models and reducing the possibility of computer model insertions.  So, when videotaping, make sure you do some zooming.

 2.  Camera movements such as panning, both up and down to include other relative objects that are much closer than the UFO.  When a camera is panned to other objects, especially ones that are close up, the camera's autofocus feature will change the lens to focus on the closer object.  This also helps to determine that an object, such as a UFO was in fact at a certain distance.  It is also difficult for a computer image to "pace" the autofocus characteristics exactly.  In other words, it would be difficult to fake a UFO where the camera was first focused at infinity with the UFO in focus, then focus on a close-up object and then back.  The time lag in the autofocus feature will bring the UFO in focus along with other distant objects.  So, when videotaping, make sure you pan to close up objects then back to the UFO.

 3.  Briefly move your camera behind some object that will occlude your UFO, then pan back to the UFO.  If the UFO you are taping has clear blue sky as a background and nothing in the foreground, it won't fly as "proof beyond a reasonable doubt" footage.  If someone passes in front of your camera, or you duck back behind some tree branches, your car, or even slowly pass your own hand in front of the lens (provided your hand is far enough away from the lens to get some focus on it, and the camera can discern a clear edge of your hand) this will be hard to fake and will add more credibility to your video.

 So, when videotaping, make sure that you temporarily put some other object between your camera and the UFO, especially if that object can provide a crisp edge to occlude the UFO.  The best is to briefly obscure only a portion of the UFO.

 4.  Move with your camera.  A camera in real, or quick motion is also hard to fake with most computers.  If you can, walk with your camera while taping and the UFO is close, the background movement will give away its relative distance.  If it is far away, it will appear to move with you. Some most convincing video and stills have been taken in moving cars.

So, while taping, try to take a few or several steps.  (Watch out for cliffs, rotating machinery and that stubborn old bald headed man I sometimes see on the television that said "There has never been a good picture taken of a UFO"!

Ivanhoe Chaput.

I asked Ivanhoe about what lux rating you should specify when purchasing a camcorder for the purpose of videoing a UFO at night time.  He replied:

The lux rating of a video camera may be important to low level light on terra firma, i.e. taping your kids blowing out birthday cake candles in a dimly lit kitchen, but when it comes to small dots against a black sky, many complexities make good images almost impossible.  Almost every video camera sold today has the ability to capture even low magnitude stars. This is not the problem with taping UFO's against a low lux background.

For some information, lux = 50 x the lens f number squared, divided by exposure time in seconds x ISO (film speed). This doesn't mean much for video cameras, they follow a different set of rules since the "film speed" is dynamic. However, for the sake of a camera's capability, if you shot at f8, your exposure was 1/3 second and your ISO film speed was 64, you would have a lux capability of 150. Or the object you are photographing should have this approximate lux value.

Lux = 50 x 8² = 150

^{1/3 x 64}

If however you are in a low light situation and you set your camera at a 1 second exposure time, your lens has a f1.4 aperture and you are shooting wide open (f1.4) and your film speed is 200, you will be able to capture an object of a lux value of 0.49. 

Lux = 50 x 1.4² = 0.49

1 x 200

Change your film speed to 400 and you can capture an object with a value of 0.245 lux.

A video camera may have a low lux rating, but this does not give any indication as to its picture image quality especially at low light levels.  A lux rating of .5 means that you can take pictures under moonlight.

To get the best out of the average video camera one should set the focus on manual and at infinity. The reason one should do this is that most objects that represent a small spot of light that is visible enough to catch a person's peripheral vision will most likely saturate the pixels on the CCD chip due to the surrounding black that the camera is trying to set the exposure for.  This usually causes pixel bleed (a long subject that involves glass coatings and so on). What this means is that adjacent pixels will be lit and the object will only appear as a slightly larger white dot with fuzzy edges.

Most video cameras have what is called an exposure lock. If one has the time during a sighting, and there is a street light or some other light in the vicinity, one should point the camera at this light, zoom in until the light fills about 50% of the viewfinder and lock the exposure.  Afterward, pan back to the UFO. It will be much dimmer, but may produce a much better outline and may bring out unseen features of the object. Do zoom in and out.

On the other hand, if the object is quite dim, simply set the focus on manual and at infinity. This is the best you will be able to do. If you do not set the focus at infinity, you will experience blooming as the camera searches for some feature to focus onto. This is what is seen on many UFO tapings where the object seems to get unrealistically large and round or take the shape of an internal camera aperture. It can also bring out dirt or smudge features on the surface of the lens itself.  Blooming is obvious to an expert.

To answer your question, a rating of .3 lux is very good. Even a 3 lux camera will provide an adequate image. It is not so much the low light gathering capability of the camera as the overall quality of the camera used.  This includes the CCD chip, the lens, the way the camera has been preset for infinity focus at the factory and so on. It is true that the higher lux rated cameras will produce more grainy images at lower light levels, however, we have to shoot with what we happen to have at the time don't we now?

I hope this has shed some light on the lux of things. I would be very interested in getting a copy of the article. This has been fun.  

Best regards,

Ivanhoe Chaput

President

CC Design Development Inc.

3545-A Lomita Blvd.

Torrance, CA 90505 USA