Trindade Island Case:
Preliminary comparisons betwen the images of the object
por Kentaro Mori, airsmither@yahoo.com.br
December 6, 2002

WARNING: This is a draft

This page is seen better in the resolution 1024x768+ (The comparisons are one beside the other) 

The study of Martin J. Powell, that analyzed official Sunderland's allegation for his/her time proceeding that the image of the object in the second picture of the series of pictures is inverted in comparison with the image of the same in the other pictures, I made these comparisons preliminary, or lay if they prefer. 

The comparisons are preliminary because they were not done tends for base the negatives, or even the original pictures. On the contrary, it was used as base scans of the reproductions in the magazine UFO n.82, págs 18-19. They are also preliminary because I used in the digitization process a domestic scanner, and mainly because I am not an expert capable to accomplish professional analyses. My intention here is to call the attention of some qualified expert to be disposed to look with more care to the points than it can indicate, be to refute them or to confirm them. 

The program that I used to do modifications in the images was Corel Photo Paint 11, therefore the reference to filters, processes and values should always be taken as referring the such program (and they are supplied with the intention that, in case of doubt, anybody can reproduce the results). 

The program used to do the animations was Macromedia Flash 5. In these animations, unlike some previous ones that I already did, I didn't make any arbitrary redimensionamento of the images. In other words, the only modification is the rotation, and this should be to analyze in a preliminary way the subject of the supposed difference of sizes among the objects (that is, clear, assuming that all of the images reproduced in the magazine UFO were it in the same scale).

Images base:

The images that I took as base are available in the format lossless TIFF. To access them, it is enough to click on the respective image below. The files TIFF have around 1Mb each. 

The images base in TIFF is like me the escaneei, without any redimensionamento process, distortion or manipulation. The images below went redimensionadas to 1/4 of the original size.

F1

F2

F3

F4

It should be noticed that the angle with that the images were scanned doesn't possess precision for analysis, although it is approximately correct to the that is in the magazine. To supply a notion of the quality of these images base, I also put below an image of the island below the object in the picture 2, socket with exactly the same process used to capture the images of the objects. To purpose, all of the images of the objects were also taken with exactly the same parameters (DPI, gamma, shine, contrast and same size of the image). 

Piece of the island below the object in F2: 

Transformations in them image-base:

- Using the transformation filter 'Threshold.'.

- Using the adjustment 'Contrast Enhancement'

Comparisons:

The comparisons that I put below are the ones that judge more curious and/or relevant. To avoid to induce the reader, I tried to also supply other variations that are accessible in the links above. (In other words, here they are the images in the way that I judge support the allegation that there are intriguing similarities among the images of the object, but I also tried to supply in the two links above other images that cannot support the allegation). 

F1 threshold=100 e F2 threshold=100, girada 180°

F1 threshold=100 e F2 threshold=95, girada 180°

F1 threshold=100 e F3 threshold=130, girada 180°

F1 contrast 60,150 e F2 contrast 60,150, girada 180°

F1 contrast 60,150 e F2 contrast 50,140, girada 180°

F1 contrast 60,150 e F3 contrast 60,150, girada 180°

F1 contrast 60,150 e F3 contrast 120,160, girada 180°

F2 contrast 50,140, girada 180° e F3 contrast 120,160, girada 180°

Animations:

- F1 threshold=100 and F2 threshold=95, rotated 180°

- F1 contrast 60,150 and F3 contrast 120,160, rotated 180°

Considerations:

I believe that the similarity among the image of the object between F1 and F2 is evidenced in a clear way starting from these comparisons. An important detail is that, reminding, me no redimensionei nor F1 nor F2 for the animation, and nevertheless I don't think it is exaggerating to the saying that the similarity is whopping. Would the similarity fruit of the bad quality of the images base be used here? That sounds unlikely, random degradations used to do with that the image of an object seems similar and inverted in two different pictures. Would an effect of the own UFO be? He/she also sounds unlikely, if the image simply went similar maybe we could imagine some effect (the UFO emitting own light, wrapped up in a shock wave, fog or what goes), but the image of the object looks to be inverted of F1 for F2.

Starting from these comparisons, and of some other ones including the own comparison of Powell, as lay thinks that this similarity among the image of the object in F1 and F2 is really a serious indication of trucagem in the pictures that he/she needs profissionalmente to be verified in the negatives or you originate as soon as possible. If there it is present, the case of the Island of Trinity will suffer a great reverse in his/her credibility, and still plus, all of the professional analyses that stopped detecting this aspect, and all that studied the case along these decades will have to admit to have let to escape an indication of elementary trucagem like this. 

It is now passed to F3 and F4. In the animation between F1 and inverted F3, I think there to be some similarity, but she is not as clear as between F1 and F2. This supposed similarity among the image of the object in F1 and in inverted F3 it sounds out of tune of the own allegation of Sunderland. To the that seems, it would be the image of the object in F1 to be inverted in relation to F2 and F3, contradicting the allegation of Sunderland that the image of the object in F2 is that it would be inverted in relation to F1 and F3. A reference used to identify 'inversion' it is the rectangular stain ("dome" call), and as we see in the modifications of the images in this page, she is in the left superior part in F1 and right inferior in F2 and F3. 

F4 didn't really allow me to form any opinion. If F1, F2 and F3 are versions different from a same image, everything would take to believe that F4 would be also. But I need to admit that if it is already more uncertain than F3 is the same image of F1 and F2, F4 seems not to maintain any similarity with the other three images. 

The case of the Island of Trinity to today was not sufficiently well evidenced as a real UFO, in the sense of something ignored by the science, much less as an alien ship. There are good indications in favor of his/her authenticity, but also persuasive elements against her. In the general, the case stays as a legitimate UFO, in other words, something that was not simply identified. 

If the considerations above be confirmed, it will remain little doubt that one of the most famous cases of the ufologia, not only Brazilian as world championship, it is another fraud. 

END