Within IFOs
When Cameras Invent Extra Lights
Lens flare and internal reflections can create moving or repeating lights that track the camera rather than the sky.
On this page
- Flare patterns
- Camera movement tests
- Why night videos mislead
Page outline Jump by section
Introduction
Lens flare and optical artefacts are a common way for cameras to invent extra “objects” in UFO reports. A bright source such as the Sun, Moon, streetlight, aircraft light, headlamp or infrared heat source can reflect and scatter inside a lens system, producing ghost lights, blobs, polygons, streaks or haze that are recorded by the camera but are not separate things in the sky. The key clue is behaviour: these artefacts often track the camera, mirror a bright light source, rotate with the optics, appear diagonally opposite a lamp, or vanish when the angle changes.
This does not mean every strange light in a video is “just lens flare”. It means camera footage is not a neutral window onto the sky. In UFO investigation, the first question is whether the apparent object behaves like an external target or like an optical product of the imaging system. NASA’s UAP study stressed that analysis is often hampered by poor calibration, missing metadata, few simultaneous measurements and lack of baseline data, which is exactly the kind of weakness that lets optical artefacts look more mysterious than they are. [Wikisource]en.wikisource.orgPage:UAP Independent Study TeamWikisourcePage:UAP Independent Study Team - Final Report.pdf/5 - Wikisource, the free online library…
How cameras invent extra lights
A camera lens is not a single transparent hole. It is a stack of glass or plastic elements, coatings, apertures, filters, cover glass, a sensor and sometimes stabilisation hardware. Light that follows the intended path forms the ordinary image. Stray light can take other paths: it can reflect between lens surfaces, scatter from imperfections, bounce off the sensor or cover glass, or reflect from a filter. The result may be a false light in the image, even though no separate light existed at that position in the real scene.
Optics manufacturers and imaging specialists describe “ghost images” as faint secondary images caused by reflections within optical components. Edmund Optics defines a ghost image as a faint second image produced by such internal reflections, while Ansys describes smartphone stray light as multiple reflections from polished lens surfaces that can produce ghost reflections and lens flare on the imager. [Edmund Optics]edmundoptics.comEdmund Optics Video Tutorial: What are Ghost Images? | Edmund OpticsEdmund Optics Video Tutorial: What are Ghost Images? | Edmund Optics [Ansys Optics]optics.ansys.comOptics Stray Light Analysis – Smartphone Camera – Ansys OpticsOptics Stray Light Analysis – Smartphone Camera – Ansys Optics
For UFO reports, the important point is not the photographic terminology itself but the geometry. A ghost light can sit on the opposite side of the frame from the real light source. It can move when the phone tilts. It can seem to “accelerate” when the camera pans. It can repeat the shape of a lamp, LED cluster or aperture. It can also brighten or fade as autofocus, exposure, digital stabilisation and noise reduction try to manage a dark scene with one very bright point in it.
This is why night-time phone videos are especially vulnerable. A dark sky gives the camera little texture to lock onto, while bright lights overload small optics and small sensors. The viewer then sees a luminous point or “orb” against a featureless background and naturally interprets it as an object in the sky. In reality, part of the apparent motion may belong to the camera, not the light.
Flare patterns that give the game away
Lens flare is not random. It often has repeated shapes and relationships that point back to the optics. A line of discs or polygons, a green or purple orb opposite the Sun, a faint duplicate of a streetlight, a wash of haze around a bright lamp, or a dancing dot that mirrors a real light are all warning signs.
Several patterns are especially relevant to UFO videos:
- Opposite-side ghosts. A false light may appear across the optical centre from a bright source. In phone cameras, sensor reflections can appear diagonally opposite the light source because light reflects off the sensor, back through the lens or cover glass, and then back onto the sensor. Metabunk’s technical discussion of phone-camera sensor reflections notes that these reflections are “essentially a type of lens flare” and are often mistaken for UFOs. [Metabunk]metabunk.orgDestabilized Sensor ReflectionsDestabilized Sensor Reflections
- Aperture-shaped blobs. Ghost images may take on the shape of the aperture or lens opening rather than the shape of any real object. That can turn a point of light into a polygon, disc, oval or flattened form.
- Repeating lights. A single source can create multiple internal reflections. A row of lights in a UFO clip may therefore be one real lamp plus several optical ghosts, not a formation.
- Glare rather than a crisp body. Some artefacts are not distinct dots at all but broad regions of haze or glare. In infrared footage, a hot object can bloom or smear into a larger shape, hiding the real source and making a plane, drone, bird, balloon or other ordinary target look more solid or exotic than it is.
- Movement tied to the frame. A real distant object should move in relation to the world. A flare often moves in relation to the camera’s optical axis. If the light keeps the same relationship to a streetlamp, the Sun or the edge of the frame, the “object” may be inside the camera system.
A useful example is the familiar “green orb” in phone photographs. It is often reported as a strange light near the Sun or a bright lamp, but a simple reproduction test shows it moving opposite the bright source as the camera angle changes. The value of such a test is that it turns a mysterious one-off image into a repeatable optical behaviour. [Metabunk]metabunk.orggreen orb dresden how to demonstrate an orb is lens flare.13732green orb dresden how to demonstrate an orb is lens flare.13732
Camera movement tests
The simplest test for lens flare is not a database search. It is movement. If the suspected UFO is still visible, the observer should gently move the camera while keeping the bright light source in view. A real object should remain fixed in the sky relative to trees, rooftops, clouds or stars. A flare will usually slide, pivot or mirror the bright source inside the frame.
The most useful tests are practical:
- Pan slightly left and right. If the “object” moves in the opposite direction to a lamp or the Sun, suspect a reflection.
- Tilt up and down. Internal ghosts often drift across the frame as the light source moves relative to the optical centre.
- Block the bright source. Use a hand, wall, roofline or lens shade to stop the bright light entering the lens. If the “UFO” disappears with the source, it is probably flare.
- Change zoom or lens. On multi-lens phones, switching from wide to telephoto can make a flare jump, vanish or change shape because the optical path has changed.
- Record reference scenery. Buildings, stars, poles and cloud edges reveal whether the strange light is moving through the world or moving with the camera.
Metabunk’s analysis of a drone-footage case illustrates the principle well: ghost images do not remain fixed like real objects because they are internal reflections, so they drift in the frame with optical parallax when the camera pans or tilts. [Metabunk]metabunk.orgInstantaneous AccelerationInstantaneous Acceleration
This is also why very short clips are weak evidence. A three-second video may show a dot apparently darting across the sky, but without the moments before and after the movement, it may be impossible to tell whether the dot moved or the camera did. Modern phones also add digital stabilisation, sharpening, frame blending and exposure changes, which can make motion look cleaner, faster or stranger than the raw optics would.
Why night videos mislead
Night UFO videos are persuasive because they feel direct: a dark sky, a bright light, a witness reacting in real time. But technically they are poor measurement devices. The camera is trying to expose a mostly black scene while handling tiny bright sources that may be thousands or millions of times brighter than the background. That combination exaggerates glare, blooming, compression noise and autofocus hunting.
A point light at night can also lose all context. Without a known distance, a small close light can look like a large distant craft; a stationary aircraft approaching head-on can look like a hovering object; a reflection inside the lens can look like an independent target. Once the image is compressed by a phone, messaging app or social media platform, edges and gradients may be simplified into shapes that invite over-reading.
This matters because many UFO clips are not raw evidence packages. They are cropped, stabilised, screen-recorded, reposted, slowed down, brightened or sharpened. Each processing step can strengthen an artefact. A faint ghost reflection may become a clear “orb”; a smeared aircraft light may become a “disc”; a sensor reflection may become a “formation”. Without original files and metadata, investigators lose exposure settings, lens choice, focal length, timestamp precision and sometimes location.
NASA’s UAP FAQ makes the same broader point about future investigation: the agency’s study was not a review of past incidents but a roadmap for evaluating UAP with better data, technology and scientific tools. That emphasis matters for lens flare because the artefact question is often answerable only when there is enough context to test camera geometry against sky geometry. [NASA Science]science.nasa.govScience UAP FAQsScience UAP FAQs
Infrared glare and the Gimbal lesson
The most famous modern example of an optical-artefact dispute is the U.S. Navy “Gimbal” video. The clip shows an infrared-bright shape that appears to rotate, prompting intense debate. A prominent sceptical interpretation argues that the visible shape is not the body of a craft rotating in the air, but infrared glare from a hot source, with the apparent rotation tied to the aircraft’s gimbal-mounted camera system rather than to the target itself.
PetaPixel’s account of Mick West’s analysis summarises the argument: the image may be infrared glare hiding a hot object, rotating because the camera rotates while tracking the target. The same report notes the central diagnostic claim: glare orientation is relative to the camera, so the object appears to rotate when the camera gimbal rotates. [PetaPixel]petapixel.comSource details in endnotes.
This interpretation remains disputed. A later arXiv paper by Yannick Peings and Marik von Rennenkampff reconstructed possible flight paths for the January 2015 Gimbal UAP and discussed the infrared-glare hypothesis as an alternative, while arguing that at the range reported by aviators the reconstructed paths raise questions about the nature of the object. [arXiv]arxiv.orgSource details in endnotes.
The useful lesson is not that every Gimbal-like case is settled by shouting “glare”. It is that infrared imagery can separate apparent shape from physical shape. A hot engine, exhaust plume or thermal reflection may bloom into a form that looks like a solid object. If that form rotates in step with camera mechanics, the rotation may be an artefact of the sensor system. If it rotates independently of camera behaviour and is corroborated by other calibrated sensors, the case is stronger. The distinction is technical, not rhetorical.
Not every artefact is a flare
“Lens flare” is often used too loosely. A UFO clip can be misleading because of several different camera-related effects, and mixing them up can weaken an otherwise good explanation.
A bright blob may be flare from stray light scattering through the lens. A duplicate dot may be ghosting from internal reflections. A broad shape may be glare or blooming from an over-bright source. A triangular “craft” may be bokeh, where an out-of-focus point light takes the shape of an aperture or lens opening. A streak may be motion blur from camera shake or a long exposure. A dancing dot may be digital stabilisation trying to correct hand movement. A pale shape in a window video may be an ordinary window reflection, not a sky object at all.
This vocabulary matters because a good IFO explanation should match the evidence. If a light appears diagonally opposite a lamp and moves as the phone tilts, internal reflection is plausible. If a triangle appears only when the light is out of focus, bokeh is more plausible. If a streak follows the direction of hand shake, motion blur is more plausible. If the same object appears on two independent cameras at the same sky position, a simple single-camera artefact becomes less likely.
AARO’s public imagery page shows why investigators are cautious. Some official cases are resolved as birds or balloons, some remain unresolved, and some reports are limited because the available video is insufficient for a firm determination. In one unresolved infrared case, AARO states that it cannot determine whether the observed signature comes from a physical source, a thermal reflection, an environmental heat differential or a sensor display error. [AARO]aaro.milOfficial UAP ImageryAARO UAP Imagery…
That kind of wording is careful but important. It does not turn every video into a camera fault. It says the route from image to object is not automatic.
A practical reading of UFO footage
A strong UFO video should survive ordinary optical tests. It should not depend on a single bright point in a dark frame, a single phone camera, a missing original file or a crop that hides the light source causing the artefact. It should show stable reference points, clear timing, camera movement, and ideally independent observations from different positions or sensors.
For lens flare and optical artefacts, the most useful questions are:
- Where is the brightest light source in or near the frame?
- Does the suspected object sit opposite that source across the optical centre?
- Does it move when the camera moves, rather than when the sky changes?
- Does it vanish when the bright source is blocked or the angle changes?
- Does it repeat the shape, colour or structure of a real lamp or LED cluster?
- Is the clip too short to separate object motion from camera motion?
- Is there another camera, witness angle, radar track or raw file that confirms the same position in the sky?
When those checks point to an optical artefact, the conclusion should not be treated as an insult to the witness. The witness may have recorded a real light source and a real camera effect. The error lies in treating everything visible in the video as if it must have occupied the sky.
Why this IFO category matters
Lens flare and optical artefacts are especially important in UFO reports because they turn ordinary recording conditions into extraordinary-looking footage. They create extra lights, distort real lights, hide the source of a glow, and make camera movement look like object movement. They are also easy to reproduce, which gives investigators a practical way to test claims rather than merely argue over impressions.
The critical habit is to separate the scene from the recording system. A camera does not only record the sky; it records the sky filtered through lenses, glass, sensors, stabilisation software, compression and the operator’s movements. In many IFO cases, the “UFO” is not a lie, a hoax or a hallucination. It is an optical artefact that became persuasive because the video looked more objective than it really was.
Amazon book picks
Further Reading
Books and field guides related to When Cameras Invent Extra Lights. Use these as the next step if you want deeper reading beyond the article.
Understanding Exposure
Rating: 4.5/5 from 19 Google Books ratings
Helps readers understand how cameras create misleading visual effects.
Read This if You Want to Take Great Photographs
Explains optics, lighting, and image interpretation.
eBay marketplace picks
Marketplace Samples
Example marketplace items related to this page. Use the search link to explore similar finds on eBay.
Endnotes
-
Source: en.wikisource.org
Title: Page:UAP Independent Study Team
Link: [https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Page%3AUAP_Independent_Study_Team_-Final_Report.pdf/5](https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Page%3AUAP_Independent_Study_Team-_Final_Report.pdf/5)Source snippet
WikisourcePage:UAP Independent Study Team - Final Report.pdf/5 - Wikisource, the free online library...
-
Source: optics.ansys.com
Title: Optics Stray Light Analysis – Smartphone Camera – Ansys Optics
Link: https://optics.ansys.com/hc/en-us/articles/9273272641555-Stray-Light-Analysis-Smartphone-Camera -
Source: metabunk.org
Title: Destabilized Sensor Reflections
Link: https://www.metabunk.org/threads/destabilized-sensor-reflections-squiggly-lines-and-dancing-dots.12802/ -
Source: metabunk.org
Title: green orb dresden how to demonstrate an orb is lens flare.13732
Link: https://www.metabunk.org/threads/green-orb-dresden-how-to-demonstrate-an-orb-is-lens-flare.13732/ -
Source: metabunk.org
Title: Instantaneous Acceleration
Link: https://www.metabunk.org/threads/instantaneous-acceleration-wedding-photographer-toledo-drone-footage-lens-flare.13702/page-2 -
Source: science.nasa.gov
Title: Science UAP FAQs
Link: https://science.nasa.gov/uap/faqs/ -
Source: petapixel.com
Link: https://petapixel.com/2022/03/14/famous-navy-ufo-video-was-actually-camera-glare-evidence-suggests/ -
Source: arxiv.org
Link: https://arxiv.org/abs/2306.08773 -
Source: aaro.mil
Title: Official UAP Imagery
Link: https://www.aaro.mil/UAP-Cases/Official-UAP-Imagery/Source snippet
AARO UAP Imagery...
-
Source: metabunk.org
Title: page 2
Link: https://www.metabunk.org/threads/a-gimbal-glare-explainer.12230/page-2 -
Source: metabunk.org
Title: page 3
Link: https://www.metabunk.org/threads/night-sky-long-exposure-light-trail.13256/page-3 -
Source: metabunk.org
Title: whats your best guess on these sightings.13735
Link: https://www.metabunk.org/threads/whats-your-best-guess-on-these-sightings.13735/ -
Source: metabunk.org
Title: strange lights over las vegas april 25 2023.12946
Link: https://www.metabunk.org/threads/strange-lights-over-las-vegas-april-25-2023.12946/ -
Source: metabunk.org
Title: aaro 2024 annual report on uap.13762
Link: https://www.metabunk.org/threads/aaro-2024-annual-report-on-uap.13762/ -
Source: metabunk.org
Link: https://www.metabunk.org/threads/kent-uk-bright-squiggly-line-in-photo-of-night-sky-the-star-vega-partial-camera-shake.14169/ -
Source: metabunk.org
Title: what was it that i photographed.14676
Link: https://www.metabunk.org/threads/what-was-it-that-i-photographed.14676/ -
Source: metabunk.org
Title: the shape and size of glare around bright lights or ir heat sources.10596
Link: https://www.metabunk.org/threads/the-shape-and-size-of-glare-around-bright-lights-or-ir-heat-sources.10596/ -
Source: metabunk.org
Title: fox5 new york zip by orb.13779
Link: https://www.metabunk.org/threads/fox5-new-york-zip-by-orb.13779/ -
Source: metabunk.org
Title: page 3
Link: https://www.metabunk.org/threads/pr-38-the-chandelier-ufo.13307/page-3 -
Source: metabunk.org
Title: Wedding Photographer
Link: https://www.metabunk.org/threads/instantaneous-acceleration-wedding-photographer-toledo-drone-footage-lens-flare.13702/ -
Source: metabunk.org
Title: page 4
Link: https://www.metabunk.org/threads/pr055-corbells-u-s-military-films-huge-disc-hiding-in-the-clouds-new-video-06-17-25.14289/page-4 -
Source: metabunk.org
Title: a [gimbal glare]({{ ‘gimbal-glare/’ | relative_url }}) explainer.12230
Link: https://www.metabunk.org/threads/a-gimbal-glare-explainer.12230/ -
Source: metabunk.org
Title: the gimbal ufo marik claims new findings falsify prosaic explanations.14839
Link: https://www.metabunk.org/threads/the-gimbal-ufo-marik-claims-new-findings-falsify-prosaic-explanations.14839/ -
Source: science.nasa.gov
Title: uap independent study team final report
Link: https://science.nasa.gov/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/uap-independent-study-team-final-report.pdf -
Source: science.nasa.gov
Link: https://science.nasa.gov/uap/ -
Source: nasa.gov
Title: nasa to release discuss unidentified anomalous phenomena report
Link: https://www.nasa.gov/news-release/nasa-to-release-discuss-unidentified-anomalous-phenomena-report/ -
Source: aaro.mil
Title: UNCLASSIFIED FY23 Consolidated Annual Report on UAP Oct 25 2023 1236
Link: https://www.aaro.mil/Portals/136/PDFs/UNCLASSIFIED-FY23_Consolidated_Annual_Report_on_UAP-Oct_25_2023_1236.pdf -
Source: aaro.mil
Link: https://www.aaro.mil/ -
Source: en.wikisource.org
Title: Responses to Statement of Task
Link: https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/NASA_Unidentified_Anomalous_Phenomena%3A_Independent_Study_Team_Report/Responses_to_Statement_of_Task -
Source: arxiv.org
Link: https://arxiv.org/html/2506.00125v1 -
Source: edmundoptics.com
Title: Edmund Optics Video Tutorial: What are Ghost Images? | Edmund Optics
Link: https://www.edmundoptics.com/knowledge-center/video/tutorials/what-are-ghost-images/?srsltid=AfmBOorOKbPGt3J_Yw7rqdvMHCeS983GPJnxj0t1INrI9q6PGnXRB01f -
Source: edmundoptics.com
Link: https://www.edmundoptics.com/knowledge-center/video/tutorials/total-internal-reflection/?srsltid=AfmBOoqMi_JhljiLQmarfUUaX3h3DmGnJshBF-im_5pd7uw6qsGY571k -
Source: Wikipedia
Title: Lens flare
Link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lens_flare
Additional References
-
Source: youtube.com
Title: Understanding Lens Flare: How Optics Create Fake Objects
Link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F3zWw4N0hX4Source snippet
How to Tell if That Light is Real or Just Lens Flare...
-
Source: boingboing.net
Link: https://boingboing.net/2022/03/14/navy-ufo-moves-with-camera-mechanisms-in-glaring-problem-for-alien-fans.html -
Source: aui.edu
Link: https://aui.edu/aaro-releases-report-on-unidentified-anomalous-phenomena-uap/ -
Source: openaccess.thecvf.com
Link: https://openaccess.thecvf.com/content/CVPR2023/papers/Dai_Nighttime_Smartphone_Reflective_Flare_Removal_Using_Optical_Center_Symmetry_Prior_CVPR_2023_paper.pdf -
Source: reddit.com
Link: https://www.reddit.com/r/aliens/comments/1t780yn/from_the_newly_released_videos_wtf_are_we_even/ -
Source: reddit.com
Link: https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/niz2mq/has_mick_west_addressed_how_his_hypothesis_on_the/ -
Source: instagram.com
Link: https://www.instagram.com/p/DV62t5XjCzo/ -
Source: reddit.com
Link: https://www.reddit.com/r/mildlyinteresting/comments/1hfnemk/my_phones_lens_flare_somehow_captured_the/ -
Source: facebook.com
Link: https://www.facebook.com/AstroAlexandraOfficial/posts/nasa-uap-ufo-report-released-today-offers-a-few-answers-but-doesnt-find-or-rule-/319484690604324/ -
Source: medium.com
Link: https://medium.com/%40omarvferro/nasa-ufo-releases-the-2-most-convising-images-if-youre-a-skeptic-who-still-has-eyes-67cefa567525
Topic Tree
Follow this branch
Parent topic
IFOsRelated pages 39
- A Head On Aircraft Can Look Like A Stationary Light Because It The Stationary Light That Is Moving
- AARO What Modern UAP Reviews Resolve
- Aircraft Lights Why Ordinary Aircraft Look So Strange
- Atmosphere When Weather Makes Shapes in the Sky
- Balloons Why Balloons Become Flying Saucers
- +34 more in sidebar