The McMinnville, Oregon UFO Photos of 1950

One of two photos taken by Paul Trent on May 11, 1950 McMinnville, Oregon. by Kal K. Korff
Internationally Syndicated Copyright 2011 by Kal K. Korff - ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

One of the classic, now iconic UFO photo series ever taken, was made by Oregon farmer Paul Trent, on May 11, 1950 in McMinnville, Oregon. ! While Trent captured only two images, both of his photos show a clear, metallic disc of some kind. The object in Trents photo cannot be a bird, plane, helicopter, nor swamp gas. ! Just exactly WHAT the Trent UFO photos show has long been debated. A simple search on the Internet breeds confusion, for there is NO DEFINITIVE consensus, despite the passage of more than 60 years! ! The issue is binary: the photos are either the real deal (which means they can only show one of two things) or they are not: ! 1. A genuine extraterrestrial spacecraft and/or secret military aircraft ! 2. They are hoaxes.

The McMinnville, Oregon UFO Photos of 1950

Reality: Too Often Ignored One limitation in UFO photography, is that the very nature of UFO photos LIMITS scientic understanding of the phenomenon. While this may surprise many people, like everything, photographic evidence has its parameters. More importantly, it has its limits. ! One of the Golden Rules in UFO Photography is that even if no evidence of a hoax exists, it is still not possible to scientically prove that the imagery in question, depicts a real extraterrestrial spacecraft, unless said imagery is taken under scientically controlled conditions. ! The Trent photos are a great example to illustrate this point, for even if no evidence of a hoax is ever found, one still CANNOT scientically PROVE that the object in his photos show an alien spacecraft. ! To prove this point even further, even if one could show that the object in Trents photos is indeed a large, disc-shaped craft, tens of meters in diameter and thousands of meters distant, this still does not prove that the object in question is an extraterrestrial vehicle. ! While admittedly the proverbial odds greatly increase that it just might possibly be at this point, having rst started from the value of zero until all evidence of a hoax has been eliminated, there are still other possibilities which could explain the Trent image and this is where both this case and the general issue here of the limitations in photography, becomes excruciatingly frustrating. ! It is possible, for example, that the Trent UFO could be a Top Secret military aircraft? If this were the case, being able to identify it as such, without the American Governments cooperation, would be highly problematical and could break laws. ! Since the Paul Trent photos could have been faked by ways YET to be uncovered by analysis, although denitive, hard evidence that they ARE hoaxes has yet to be found. One is again in a quandary, stuck up against the limit inherent in the nature of UFO photographic evidence. What DO the Trent Photos REALLY Show? According to such prominent UFO researchers and academicians as Dr. Bruce Maccabee and Brad Sparks, the Trent photos show no evidence of a hoax. According to their detailed photogrammetric analyses, done both independently and together, densitometer readings and veiling glare effects (the atmospheric reection of light) measurements on the UFO in Trents pictures indicate a large object about a mile away, possibly as large as 50 feet! ! Incredible, and WTF? ! Dr. Maccabee and Sparks base their conclusions by using sound logic, hardcore science and optical physics. Although their conclusions are profound, if indeed true; the methods they have used are simply science at its best. Indeed, their work is a role model for other researchers to follow. ! When the Trent images were analyzed, Dr. Maccabee had managed to secure the original photo negatives for his study, and he still possesses them today. This author has personally seen these negatives, and obtained prints years ago from them via Stanton Friedman, who had acquired a set from Maccabee.

The McMinnville, Oregon UFO Photos of 1950

! When clear copies of the Trent UFO photos are viewed closely, it is incredibly easy to see very obvious veiling glare effects, especially on prints which are at least 8.5 x 11 inches in size, which is what this author rst started with. ! Not only are detailed items like the posts on the fence visible, but so are the hills in the background, and most importantly, the residences on those hills. By visiting the actual physical location where the pictures were taken and taking relevant measurements, including the size and distances of ALL identiable imagery in the pictures, one can then use the values of these numbers when measuring the amount of light which has scattered in the atmosphere in the photos, between the lens of the photographer (Trent) and the object in question e.g., a house 2.5 kilometers away on a nearby hill, a series of fence posts both nearby and hundreds of meters away; trees, bushes, cars in the background, or, theoretically, the UFO in the picture. ! In photography and reality, objects which are further away will have more light and atmospheric haze obscuring them compared to objects which are small or nearby. ! Using a densitometer, one can measure these values on the photo of objects and their optical densities, and create a curve to project and calculate distances and sizes of imagery in the picture. Known objects can be used as a scientic control, since their existence is beyond dispute, as well as their physical attributes and locations.

Fig. 1: This hoax photo was taken by Swiss UFO Cult leader Eduard Billy Meier in 1975. Meier says this is a seven meters beamship, which is 22.75 feet in size. Unfortunately, basic optical physics PROVES this is a SMALL MODEL, with the focus close to the camera. Notice that the UFO is in focus, yet the background trees are NOT. If this were a large object, several meters away, BOTH the trees and the UFO would be in focus! The bottom of the object is dark, since its small size prevents much light from scattering around on its surface. (Credit: Phil Langdon/Kal Korff.) 3

The McMinnville, Oregon UFO Photos of 1950

! The scientic formula for calculating distances and the true sizes of objects in any photo, are as follows: these were rst published in my book, Spaceships of the Pleiades: The Billy Meier Story (Prometheus Books, 1995).

Si/Fl x D = As
! Si represents the SIZE of the image as measured in millimeters on the original negative or slide. ! Fl is the value for the FOCAL LENGTH of the camera lens which was used. ! D is for DISTANCE, the reported distance to the object from the photographer, either known or hypothesized. ! As is for the ACTUAL SIZE of the object, either theoretical or real. ! When the relevant values in the Trent photos are worked into the right formulae, some surprising numbers pop up: based on densitometer measurements and the amount of veiling glare or haze present on the object, the Trent UFO may be as large as FIFTY feet in diameter, and about a MILE away!

Fig. 2: In this recreation of Billy Meier hoax UFO photos, notice how DARK the underside of
the Pleiadian beamship model is, despite it being close to the camera and sunny outside. This is because there is not enough surface area to reect much light. Many of Meiers UFO photos show DARK undersides, as do many other hoax images. (Credit: Phil Langdon.)

The McMinnville, Oregon UFO Photos of 1950

Fig. 3: Notice that when the Meier model Pleiadian beamship UFO is even far away from the camera, its undersides are still DARK. This is again because the surface area of the object is small, and there is no room to reect nor refract much light. The Trent UFO does NOT show this pattern, instead the underside of the object is much brighter. " To further prove this point, a normal silver-colored Christmas bulb was used and photographed for comparison, which is even smaller than the Pleiadian beamship UFO model. Notice that the undersides of BOTH objects are dark for the same reason: lack of surface area via which to reect light. " Another way that the relative distances in various photos can be estimated and measured is by comparing the sharpness of their edges on a computer or in the negatives or in enhancements or enlargements. Generally speaking, the closer an object is to the camera, the sharper its edges will be. Conversely, the further away an object is, the less in focus its edges will be, or they will contain proportionately less detail. These measurements can also be affected by the type of surface which exists in the foreground or background, its color, and lighting and distance factors. " Notice in the inset photo, the white arrows show the relative edges for the Pleiadian beamship UFO model, which is much closer to the camera, than the tree which is located behind it many meters behind. Notice that both the nature of barren tree branches, combined with the greater distance, produces an edge of this object which is less distinct, and is less in focus, indicating that it is FARTHER AWAY than the UFO seen visually which is supposedly hovering above the tree but really isnt. " While VISUALLY in this hoax Billy Meier UFO photo recreation, it might APPEAR as if the UFO is ying above the tree, analysis of the trees edges compared to the UFO images edges would prove otherwise, and establish that the model is closer to the camera, and that the tree is located much further in the distance. (Credit: Phil Langdon/Inset: Korff-Langdon.)

The McMinnville, Oregon UFO Photos of 1950

Fig. 4: In another successful recreation of one of Billy Meiers iconic hoax UFO photos, by shooting into the sun, it can throw densitometer and veiling glare readings off, or render them meaningless, while the extra brightness helps hide any supportive device or shing line which might be used. This, combined with a cool star effect thanks to the optical properties inherent in camera lenses, makes for a very powerful visual combination. " One skeptic of the Trent photos voiced the opinion that the image could merely be a painting on a piece of transparent glass. While this is certainly true, if it were done well enough, the odds are very unlikely. " The veiling glare effects and densitometer readings which exist in the Trent photos are wholly consistent. For the Trent UFO image to be a photo-realistic painting on a piece of glass, the hoaxer would have to know exactly how to paint the UFO using the right colors and densities to mimic the characteristics of a large object a mile away which is seemingly tens of meters in diameter. " While it is theoretically possible that a hoaxer could be this clever, just like a professional animator might be, Oregon farmer Paul Trent has no such skills and there is no evidence which proves his photos are a hoax. The Trent photos show no densitometer aberrations nor suspicions, unlike Billy Meiers, which have been easily duplicated for the only reason which matters: they are hoaxes! (Credit: Phil Langdon/Inset Kal Korff.)

The McMinnville, Oregon UFO Photos of 1950

Other Verdicts that the Trent Photos are Real The Trent photos have an admirable, credible history to them. Both Paul Trent and his wife are considered only to be honest people, and even the much-hated Colorado Condon Committee report concluded that there was no evidence of a hoax when they examined the original negatives and prints. ! In fact, photo expert Dr. William K. Hartmann (for the Condon Committee) even praised the photos, writing that this was one of the few cases where all factors were consistent with a large object ying far away from the camera. ! While the Condon Report stopped short of declaring the Trent photos to be authentic, they made it clear that the case is credible, and that no evidence of a hoax was ever found, and that none is known to exist. ! In addition to the Condon Report, private UFO organizations such as Ground Saucer Watch, had various computer enhancements done on the Trent photos. GSW even cooperated with Dr. Bruce Maccabee in his work, assisting with computer processing of the Trent imagery. GSW concluded that the Trent photos were real, and agreed with previous opinions of no evidence of trickery nor manipulation.

Fig. 5: A False Color Contour enhancement of one of the Trent photos shows the different densities which richly populate the picture. Detailed measurements of the UFO in the Trent photos indicates that this is a large object, possibly up to fty feet in diameter, and as far as a mile distant! This admittedly profound conclusion is based on measuring the veiling glare or light density of the UFO versus other objects in the photo of known size and distance. As of this writing, the Trent UFO photos remain an unsolved mystery, though not for lack of trying. Soon, a 3D stereoscopic analysis will be done to resolve outstanding issues such as if this still could be a small model despite the images density readings as measured by scientists. (Credit: Kal Korff.) 7

The McMinnville, Oregon UFO Photos of 1950

Fig. 6: Veiling glare measurements on the UFO in the Trent McMinnville, Oregon image indicates that it is very bright, and is far away from the camera. If true, this automatically makes it a VERY large object, as big as FIFTY FEET in size, which automatically renders Trents pictures a bonade mystery. (Credit: Kal Korff.)

Enter UFO Debunker Robert Sheaffer Robert Sheaffer, a famous UFO debunker as his Web site describes him, disagrees with the conclusion that the Trent photos are real, and might show an extraterrestrial spacecraft. Sheaffer claims that the shadows on the East wall of the garage visible in the pictures proves that the time of day claimed by the family was false, and that it is a small model. ! While Dr. Maccabee and Sparks have convincingly refuted Sheaffer on this point, proving that ordinary phenomenon such as cumulous clouds and light refraction can account for the shadows issue and seeming discrepancy Sheaffer commendably noted and raised, the issue boils down to the veiling glare measurements in the photos, which ideally denote and are tied to distance. Cumulous clouds were present during the day when Trent took his images, according to weather records, but this does NOT prove they were present the moment he snapped his pictures, although they likely were. ! Sheaffer claims that the Trent photos could have been hoaxed by using a small model. To explain the veiling glare readings and their admitted credibility, which Sheaffer concedes are a problem for any hoax hypothesis, Sheaffer correctly notes
8

The McMinnville, Oregon UFO Photos of 1950

that something as simple as smearing vaseline on a lens will render any densitometer readings or professed veiling glare effects or light property measurements mute. ! While this is certainly true, so would shooting any UFO photo through a transparent or semi-opaque plastic bag, as shown in Fig. 7. Just because it could have been done, in the absence of any evidence that it was done, this is mere speculation. ! ! The point here is that although well intentioned, Sheaffer is merely speculating, and he has no evidence that Trent ever used vaseline nor any other gimmick when he took his photos. Sheaffers hypothesis is highly unlikely, due if nothing else to the evenness of the light which is distributed as it should be across all of the photos. NONE of Trents pictures show any signs of having been manipulated, nor the focus futzed with, especially via vaseline or shooting through a plastic bag. ! No one, including Sheaffer, has ever produced any evidence that vaseline was ever smeared on Trents camera lens, let alone was placed perfectly on the lens so that this vaseline only effected and brightened the UFO image and nothing else twice! since there are two photos in Trents series, the other showing the object on edge instead of its round underside. Density scans prove the object is bright in both photos. ! Further insights into the Trent case will emerge after a new 3D analysis is complete, undertaken with the proviso that UFO photo evidence is by its nature, very limited.

Fig. 7: Veiling glare effects can also be distorted by putting a plastic bag over a camera when taking a photo. The focus of a cameras lens can also be affected using this trick. (Phil Langdon.) 9

The McMinnville, Oregon UFO Photos of 1950

Kal Korff is an internationally known analyst, columnist and investigative journalist. Korff is President and CEO of CriticalThinkers.org, and is the author of the denitive expose book on the Billy Meier UFO hoax, Spaceships of the Pleiades: The Billy Meier Story, which was published by Prometheus Books. To email Kal, write him at: kalkorff@yahoo.com. 1.0v3

Copyright 2011 by Kal K. Korff - ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. No part of this content may be reproduced in any form nor by any means without the express, written consent of Kal Korff. Fair use, does NOT apply. By reading this document, you willingly agree to be legally bound by its terms and conditions. Violators of this policy will have a felony DMCA Copyright infringement notice filed against them with law enforcement. First time offenders may be fined up to $500,000, imprisoned for five years, or both. For repeat offenders, the maximum penalty increases to a fine of $1,000,000, imprisonment for up to ten years, or both. This is a DMCA protected document, illegal copying and/or reproduction of its contents are tracked on the Internet and reported to law enforcement for felony prosecution.

10