Board Logo
« Paul Villa's photos genuine »

Welcome Guest. Please Login or Register.
Oct 17th, 2017, 09:51am


Visit the UFO Casebook Web Site

*Totally FREE 24/7 Access *Your Nickname and Avatar *Private Messages

*Join today and be a part of one of the largest UFO sites on the Net.


« Previous Topic | Next Topic »
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6  7 Notify Send Topic Print
 veryhotthread  Author  Topic: Paul Villa's photos genuine  (Read 4980 times)
ufoscan
Junior Member
ImageImage


member is offline

Avatar




PM


Posts: 25
xx Re: Paul Villa's photos genuine
« Reply #45 on: Sep 25th, 2008, 11:29pm »

Hi James,

Very interesting that you should mention a Canadian UFO documentary because I happen to be Canadian and I do recall seeing a documentary in the early nineties that had a very short film sequence that reminded me very strongly of the Tahalita Fry pictures. But the film I saw was b&w and showed TWO objects in the same sequence, one of which looked like the Adamski-type craft and the other was reminiscent of the Dan Fry disc. I was very surprised by that. Unfortunately, I do not recall the documentary's title. I think it was actually a special on UFOs on a Canadian network and also had some segments on the AVRO saucer. Does that ring a bell or is your footage different ?

I don't know the original size of the VOB file you have but, if it's only a few seconds long, it could be uploaded to Rapidshare. The advantage of Rapidshare is you can upload files up to 100 Mb and you can also make them password-protected if you wish. Therefore you could for example put a password on it and put the password in this thread so only the discussion group here could access it. That said, the only person that holds copyright is the original owner and, by now, it is probably in the public domain. But by using Rapidshare, you are at least not displaying it publicly because that is a download site only. In other words, it does not display its video content like YouTube does. It is mainly for sharing between friends who can only access the files via a link you provide. If the VOB file is really too large, you can upload the WMV file on that same site - or you can upload both versions. Needless to say, I would be curious to see it in the best definition possible.

By the way, do you remember the title of the Canadian UFO documentary where the footage appeared ? Maybe I could tell from the title if it's the same one I saw.
User IP Logged

thepixelpusher
New Member
Image


member is offline

Avatar




PM

Gender: Male
Posts: 12
xx Re: Paul Villa's photos genuine
« Reply #46 on: Dec 19th, 2012, 12:37am »

on Nov 5th, 2007, 02:07am, bonehead wrote:
Imshadi,

I agree with you about the photos seeming to be authentic "in camera" photos (rather than composites). However, I am not so sure about the photos being a hoax. I am not saying they aren't either.

If you look at your photo and the other two variations here, the "Villa" and the "Slade" photos, it seems pretty clear to me that these were all taken at the same time at the same place. They are probably different shots taken from the same roll of film. The only difference between them is the position of the UFO and the general orientation of the background.

The differing positions of the UFO in respect to the background suggest that the object has moved between the photos. So, couldn't the noticeable blur (you suggest indicates a hoax) equally as well be caused by movement of the object as the photos were being snapped?

I have many years of experience at photography myself, so I am familiar with the depth of field issues you mention. But let's face it, if these pics are hoaxed, they are pretty good!

Other issues also are of interest: why is the supposed "earliest" example of these photos also the worst reproduction? It is a terribly degraded example compared to yours and the Slade prints, which appear to be genuine color prints of '60s or '70s vintage.

Even more intriguing is the object's resemblance to the Adamski "bell shaped" craft. This craft has appeared in many photos from different places and years. They have supposedly been photographed in the States by Howard Menger and in England by a young boy. However, those pics are terrible when compared to these.

And, as Backlit points out, this same type of craft was actually made into a Model kit by Aurora. The TV Series came out in 1967 and the model kit was released as a tie-in for the TV series. The model was clearly modeled after the Adamski photos from the '50s. If the Villa photo is correctly dated to '63, then his photos predated the model kit and TV series.

User Image

Here is one of Adamski's photos. I am aware of some issues here as well. But I find the comparison interesting at any rate.

So, do you think the blur could be movement as opposed to depth of field? The scenery in these photos is not that clear either. This suggests poor focusing, a cheap camera or both.




Wow! That's the clearest photo of that Adamski shot that I've seen. Is that yours?
User IP Logged

“There exist limitless opportunities. Where there is an open mind, there will always be a frontier.”
PowerKnight
Metallic Silver Flying Saucers Exist...I Should Know I Once Experienced A Close Encounter Of The First Kind!
Gold Member
ImageImageImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar

Silver Spaceships Of Sublime Beauty!


PM

Gender: Male
Posts: 1705
xx Re: Paul Villa's photos genuine
« Reply #47 on: Dec 19th, 2012, 05:36am »

The second set of photographs just the one but enhanced is actually in a very similar vein to the one I witnessed all those years ago, hence the change of my avatar!
However the main difference being I couldn`t identify any markings or a seperation a middle etc, but it appeared to look just like that in shape and similar dimensions, it always reminds me of the classic flying saucer type craft.
The Adamski affair is a complete hoax end of, not too sure on the other scan? PowerKnight wink
User IP Logged

PowerKnight`s Perchance To Dream...

Joust With Thee
For I The PowerKnight Hath Taken
Escaped From The Castle
A Damsel Distressed Unto Thee
The PowerKnight Legacy

...Composed From The Poetic Pen Of PowerKnight.
thepixelpusher
New Member
Image


member is offline

Avatar




PM

Gender: Male
Posts: 12
xx Re: Paul Villa's photos genuine
« Reply #48 on: Dec 20th, 2012, 1:26pm »

on Mar 15th, 2008, 7:26pm, JTruthseeker wrote:
Greetings everyone,

I just found this forum, so this is my first posting for which you have obviously touched upon a topic area for which I have in the past, done extensive private research and investigation into.

OK Now to begin..

The photo or sets of photos, some of which you have posted here, allegedly claimed to be from Paul Valli, Neil Slade, etc, are actually taken from a series of photos originating, from a home movie clip taken near Merlin Oregon by Tahahlita B. Wiese Fry, A former wife of UFO contactee Daniel Fry.

Tahahlita B. Weise who's real name is also Bertha Mantzurani, while she was gathering home movie footage to sell her property near Merlin Oregon, took film footage of this suddenly appearing UFO (1964) which was later stolen by her real estate agent, Fritz Van Nest, who later made several attempts himself to profit from the photos.

Fritz Van Nest relocated himself to Kanab Utah 4 years later and claimed to have taken the photo himself by a lake near that location while on a camping trip. In the process, several cropped up photos of this type have been printed in different formates, sold, circulated and yet reclaimed by many individuals adding in their own copyrights to the photos, all within the past 40 years. About 4 or so years ago, I was able to find many of the different copyright holders and bring them all to each others attention, but as one of then would say to me, "Talk about a tempest in a teapot"! On one occasion the photo was even made into an X-files poster.

For those interested, I do have further poof of this story, because I have a portion of the original film clip, reversed mirror imaged, along with a collection of these same photos.

Others who have made claims to the photos since Fritz Van Nest, include...

-Bill McDonald who received the photo submitted to him by a Bruce Smith on 08/09/2003.
-Bruce Smith who took it from Gerry also in 2003.
-Dr Oren Swearingen who received the photo or photos from Bob and Yolanda Curtis.
-Neil Slade who received the photo from Henry Rowland, who then claims was from the brother of a client.

Note: Paul Valli had no association with the photo.

Peace in knowing,

James Truthseeker


How do I get the best quality copies of the Adamski, Villa, Fry, photos etc. I got interested in UFO's from seeing these in UFO books in the 60's.
User IP Logged

“There exist limitless opportunities. Where there is an open mind, there will always be a frontier.”
ufoscan
Junior Member
ImageImage


member is offline

Avatar




PM


Posts: 25
xx Re: Paul Villa's photos genuine
« Reply #49 on: Dec 20th, 2012, 2:29pm »

on Dec 20th, 2012, 1:26pm, thepixelpusher wrote:
How do I get the best quality copies of the Adamski, Villa, Fry, photos etc. I got interested in UFO's from seeing these in UFO books in the 60's.


I too got interested in UFOs in the early sixties and took an interest in many of the pictures made by the so-called contactees. In 1967, I met a man that had been in touch with many of them and had an album of original prints he got from Adamski as well as prints of pictures by Cedric Allingham and Paul Villa. He also knew Menger, but I don't recall him showing any pictures from him. On my part, I got prints direct from frames of the Fry movies (Fry never took pictures - only 16mm footage). In 1968, I met Madeleine Rodeffer, saw the Adamski film footage taken in her backyard and she gave me prints made from frames of the original footage. I also researched most of the well-known pictures of Adamski-type photographs.

Today, I still have the prints made from the Fry frames and also acquired sets of the Villa pictures that were sold by Gabriel Green at the time (AFSCA) from a friend who has since passed away. I also maintained contact with Madeleine Rodeffer over the years (she passed away not long ago) and acquired many more prints from her film sequence back in 1988.

The Fry film footage can be seen on YouTube. There was also some footage made by Fry's then wife some years later, but the still pictures discussed were actual stills made along with the film footage, not prints from frames.

By the way, it is my interest in UFO pictures when I was young which drove me to become a professional photographer !
User IP Logged

JTruthseeker
New Member
Image


member is offline

Avatar




PM


Posts: 13
xx Re: Paul Villa's photos genuine
« Reply #50 on: Dec 21st, 2012, 03:46am »

on Dec 20th, 2012, 2:29pm, ufoscan wrote:
I too got interested in UFOs in the early sixties and took an interest in many of the pictures made by the so-called contactees. In 1967, I met a man that had been in touch with many of them and had an album of original prints he got from Adamski as well as prints of pictures by Cedric Allingham and Paul Villa. He also knew Menger, but I don't recall him showing any pictures from him. On my part, I got prints direct from frames of the Fry movies (Fry never took pictures - only 16mm footage). In 1968, I met Madeleine Rodeffer, saw the Adamski film footage taken in her backyard and she gave me prints made from frames of the original footage. I also researched most of the well-known pictures of Adamski-type photographs.

Today, I still have the prints made from the Fry frames and also acquired sets of the Villa pictures that were sold by Gabriel Green at the time (AFSCA) from a friend who has since passed away. I also maintained contact with Madeleine Rodeffer over the years (she passed away not long ago) and acquired many more prints from her film sequence back in 1988.

The Fry film footage can be seen on YouTube. There was also some footage made by Fry's then wife some years later, but the still pictures discussed were actual stills made along with the film footage, not prints from frames.

By the way, it is my interest in UFO pictures when I was young which drove me to become a professional photographer !


So when you say they were "actual stills made along with the film footage, not prints from frames". Do you mean they were snap shots taken from the Movie footage when it was being shown on a screen? Also thanks for you input. Also when did, or how long ago was it when Madeleine Rodeffer past away?
« Last Edit: Dec 21st, 2012, 03:48am by JTruthseeker » User IP Logged

ufoscan
Junior Member
ImageImage


member is offline

Avatar




PM


Posts: 25
xx Re: Paul Villa's photos genuine
« Reply #51 on: Dec 21st, 2012, 04:31am »

on Dec 21st, 2012, 03:46am, JTruthseeker wrote:
So when you say they were "actual stills made along with the film footage, not prints from frames". Do you mean they were snap shots taken from the Movie footage when it was being shown on a screen? Also thanks for you input. Also when did, or how long ago was it when Madeleine Rodeffer past away?


No. I mean that she (Tahalita) shot some film footage as well as stills of the objects.

Here is my story on how I first saw those pictures and how I met Madeleine Rodeffer:

Back in the late sixties, I belonged to a local group called the Montreal UFO Study Group. This group was very active and they sometimes held conferences with internationally known guests. Madeleine Rodeffer had been invited by the group to give a lecture in Montreal in May 1968. As an active member very interested in contactee claims, I was invited to meet her at the apartment where she stayed the day before the conference. I spent several hours talking with her and a few other guests. (We were only five including Madeleine.)

She was invited again in 1970 and I had supper with her and a few other friends. We kept in touch by phone over the years and in 1988 I organised another conference in Montreal. She came and stayed for a whole week and met with many people here. After that our contacts were sporadic. A couple of years ago, I was talking to a friend of mine who also knew her and we decided to try and get back in touch with her. He called and got her answering machine and left a message. About a month later, he got a phone call from a man who was a close friend of hers and he announced that she had passed away two weeks before my friend's phone call. I believe this was about two years ago. But I'd have to check my files to find the exact date. There was a memorial service in her honour but I could not attend.

As to the Tahalita Fry pictures... In 1970 the MUFOSG organized another conference with Marianne Francis (a channel) and Daniel Fry. After the conference, Marianne showed me a set of pictures she said were made by Fry's wife. There were five or six square prints - quite clear images showing the Adamski-type object in various positions over a railway. Those were original prints that belonged to Daniel Fry who was standing a few feet away from us at the time. All the prints were mounted in sequence on a long piece of thick cardboard.

The prints were too sharp to be derived from tiny 16mm film frames and besides, the prints show images which do not match any of the sequences I have seen of the Tahalita Fry footage. Another important point is that all the footage I have seen of this scene shows two objects in the frame: an Adamski-type one and another one that looks more like the classic Fry saucer in Daniel Fry's original film. But the stills only show the Adamski-type object.
User IP Logged

thepixelpusher
New Member
Image


member is offline

Avatar




PM

Gender: Male
Posts: 12
xx Re: Paul Villa's photos genuine
« Reply #52 on: Dec 21st, 2012, 04:47am »

Any chance you could figure out who has that Adamski type photo sequence now?
User IP Logged

“There exist limitless opportunities. Where there is an open mind, there will always be a frontier.”
ufoscan
Junior Member
ImageImage


member is offline

Avatar




PM


Posts: 25
xx Re: Paul Villa's photos genuine
« Reply #53 on: Dec 21st, 2012, 12:51pm »

on Dec 21st, 2012, 04:47am, thepixelpusher wrote:
Any chance you could figure out who has that Adamski type photo sequence now?


I lost touch with the man who had these prints many years ago. However, the last time I talked to him he had given away his entire UFO books and documents collection to his nephew. I met his nephew once about twenty years ago and have no contact information for him.

Anyhow, the Adamski prints were nothing special - essentially the same pictures that you see in the first book.
User IP Logged

HUBCAP9
UFO Casebook Staff

member is offline

Avatar




PM

Gender: Male
Posts: 276
xx Re: Paul Villa's photos genuine
« Reply #54 on: Dec 22nd, 2012, 07:30am »

Hello UFOSCAN,

I was very interested to read your posts. It is good to have people here who have taken a serious interest in this whole subject over a long period. It must have been extremely interesting for you to hear Madeleine Rodeffer's accounts first hand.
I am of the opinion that George Adamski was a very special person who gave us as much genuine information as he was able, allowing for the fact that he quite rightly would not give details which might endanger his contacts.
We live in a world where trust is in very short supply, but what people forget is that George was born in a different era, and anyone who diligently studies his life can easily see that he was a man of great integrity. It saddens me to hear people call him a hoaxer.
Modern ufologists are always looking for new cases, new photographs or film. What many people fail to understand is that we have already been given many of the answers we seek by people such as George Adamski, Howard Menger, Daniel Fry and others.

Best Wishes,

Rob Hulse
User IP Logged

Equalizer
Guest
xx Re: Paul Villa's photos genuine
« Reply #55 on: Dec 22nd, 2012, 1:15pm »

Very interesting..I can see how these matters hoax or not can become labours of love, and even collected like baseball cards.. smiley
User IP Logged

ufoscan
Junior Member
ImageImage


member is offline

Avatar




PM


Posts: 25
xx Re: Paul Villa's photos genuine
« Reply #56 on: Dec 22nd, 2012, 7:29pm »

on Dec 22nd, 2012, 07:30am, HUBCAP9 wrote:
Hello UFOSCAN,

I was very interested to read your posts. It is good to have people here who have taken a serious interest in this whole subject over a long period. It must have been extremely interesting for you to hear Madeleine Rodeffer's accounts first hand.
I am of the opinion that George Adamski was a very special person who gave us as much genuine information as he was able, allowing for the fact that he quite rightly would not give details which might endanger his contacts.
We live in a world where trust is in very short supply, but what people forget is that George was born in a different era, and anyone who diligently studies his life can easily see that he was a man of great integrity. It saddens me to hear people call him a hoaxer.
Modern ufologists are always looking for new cases, new photographs or film. What many people fail to understand is that we have already been given many of the answers we seek by people such as George Adamski, Howard Menger, Daniel Fry and others.

Best Wishes,

Rob Hulse


Thanks for your comments, Rob. Unfortunately things are not as black & white as one would like...

As an example, when I first met Madeleine Rodeffer in May 1968, I was very interested in the Menger case. I had read Menger's book back in October 1967 and was very taken by it. But when I mentioned him to Madeleine, she said that "George said he is a fraud". She proceeded to tell me that George had told her that before Menger made claims of being a contactee, he had visited Adamski and spent a week with him and asked many details about his story. Then Menger went public with his own UFO account and pictures of "craft" that looked like the ones Adamski had photographed.

Menger, on his part, recanted his own account in the early sixties but then in the nineties, he came back with a new version of it with several alterations and new twists. I corresponded with Menger at that point and just didn't know what to make of it... That's when he self-published "The High Bridge Incident".

Also, back in 1968, Madeleine told me that she was the one that had taken the movie footage in front of her house in February 1965. But some years later, she admitted it was Adamski that took it. She explained that it was Adamski that asked her to say she did. But even stranger, she also revealed that Adamski had asked her to say that he was not even there at the time the film was made !

Back in 1988, when I invited Madeleine to come and spend a week in Montreal with our group (this was a group of friends with a common interest in UFOs - three of us knew Madeleine since 1968), I told Madeleine we wanted to examine her film footage carefully. Two of us were professional photographers and we wanted to evaluate it from a technical standpoint. At that time, I had not seen the footage in 20 years. I also asked that she bring copies of all the frame grabs that Bill Sherwood had made from the original footage.

To this she answered "for all I know that film could be fake. Government agents may have switched it !" She then said that it was "Mr. Adamski's message of the space brothers" that was important, not the photographs...

But she did bring the film and all the prints I had asked and we got to take a good look at it all. We videotaped the footage and she gave me the prints. We also interviewed her at length. She also gave some of us a little pin depicting the "scout ship".

As for Fry, I first obtained print enlargements from some 16mm film frames back in August 1967 directly from Gabriel Green. I only saw the actual footage in 1969 on the old Art Linkletter show. Frank E. Stranges was a guest and he showed some of it. Art didn't buy it at all as it looked to him like a model suspended on a string. I first saw the colour version on a large screen in 1970, when Daniel Fry gave his conference in Montreal. Frankly, I wasn't impressed by his footage. Everyone is free to believe what they want, but to me it looked pretty much as Art described - just a model suspended on a string.

The Villa case I also discovered in 1967 through Gabriel Green. I loved those pictures. They made my spirit soar... But there was a nasty skeptic in our UFO group that pointed out that, on one of Villa's pictures that showed a saucer next to a tree, one could see a branch extending behind - not in front of - the UFO. That really spoiled it for me, but I still love those pictures as they look very realistic and very similar to a UFO I saw around that time.

Timothy Good met Villa and chatted with him quite a bit, but he told me that Villa made some very ambiguous claims. For example, Villa claimed that the "space brothers" had taught him how to make his own remote controlled UFO model and there is a picture sequence that Villa made that are clearly of the same object in the same scene, yet where Villa insisted that one picture showed the alien saucer, while the other showed Villa's own reproduction of it !

So the problem with all these people is - whether you wish to believe them or not - some of the claims they make are hard to come to terms with...

User IP Logged

thepixelpusher
New Member
Image


member is offline

Avatar




PM

Gender: Male
Posts: 12
xx Re: Paul Villa's photos genuine
« Reply #57 on: Dec 22nd, 2012, 10:31pm »

on Dec 22nd, 2012, 1:15pm, Equalizer wrote:
Very interesting..I can see how these matters hoax or not can become labours of love, and even collected like baseball cards.. smiley


I wonder if someone had a set of UFO Collector's Cards, would you guys buy them?
User IP Logged

“There exist limitless opportunities. Where there is an open mind, there will always be a frontier.”
ufoscan
Junior Member
ImageImage


member is offline

Avatar




PM


Posts: 25
xx Re: Paul Villa's photos genuine
« Reply #58 on: Dec 22nd, 2012, 11:13pm »

on Dec 22nd, 2012, 10:31pm, thepixelpusher wrote:
I wonder if someone had a set of UFO Collector's Cards, would you guys buy them?


I suspect that Equalizer was kidding around...

But to answer your question: Definitely not. I am not a collector but a researcher. I am interested in seeing as close to original images -which means they should be prints made from original negatives or - nowadays - original image files that still have their meta data.

The pictures I mentioned fit that description. They interest me for evaluation purposes - not as "collector" images.
User IP Logged

thepixelpusher
New Member
Image


member is offline

Avatar




PM

Gender: Male
Posts: 12
xx Re: Paul Villa's photos genuine
« Reply #59 on: Dec 22nd, 2012, 11:26pm »

I understand the pure research aspect. That said, I would buy UFO Collector Cards. I like having things peak my imagination. Imagination and enthusiasm aide research in developing ideas of analysis for the incidents and evidence. I can easily separate the collectibles from the evidence, while still enjoying both. Helps keep the world an interesting place.
User IP Logged

“There exist limitless opportunities. Where there is an open mind, there will always be a frontier.”
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6  7 Notify Send Topic Print
« Previous Topic | Next Topic »

Become a member of the UFO Casebook Forum today and join our more than 19,000 members.

Visit the UFO Casebook Web Site

Donate $6.99 for 50,000 Ad-Free Pageviews!

| |

This forum powered for FREE by Conforums ©
Sign up for your own Free Message Board today!
Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | Conforums Support | Parental Controls