Underwater Imaging

[itmaiden]

Every once in a while on this board, a question comes up about an underwater image. And underwater images can be deceptive, and at the same time we can totally miss something. For instance, I was looking at an image posted on this site of a diver looking for treasure. And right beside him appeared to be a possible silver pie wedge that he swam right by. I privately mused and thought how I would like to go down to that spot and grab that thing. Might not be silver, but might be.

If anyone has images that are difficult to identify and that they think are interesting or possibly deceptive to the eye, I would like to invite them to post and describe what it is, as sort of some underwater image recognition training for the board. And if you don't know what something is, but think it may be something post it.

We have had occasional posts on such, but would be nice to have a number of images to look at.

Or if you have something just of interest, feel free.

I pick up a lot of odd items on the beach, you just never know until you examine something more closely.

itmaiden

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Family Maps of Hinds County, Mississippi, Deluxe Edition - Grab it through Amazon!

[itmaiden]

Can you identify the objects in this photo ?

 

[pcolaboy]

Is this an image of an X-Ray'ed item? Is it a photo you took or scanned from a newspaper? The shape is sort of vague without any sort of reference for scale.

The first thing that popped into my head was that of an X-Rayed box or chest. There was a similar image I saw of a wooden container found intact from the 1705 Rosario wreck in Pensacola Bay. A local hospital offered to X-Ray the container for the archaeologists and it clearly showed that it contained fasteners such as nails, tacks, etc.

 

[wwace]

Can you identify the objects in this photo ?

not much of a photo, sorry but that could be anything

 

[comfortably numb]

It is a piece of black paper with a slot cut in it placed over another object, and then a closeup picture taken of it.
You already said in another thread that your avatar is an "illusional" image of a shipwreck.

 

[lurediver]

Looks like a 2nd grader's art project. Nothing to do with shipwrecks.

 

[itmaiden]

Actually, this is a real shipwreck, most likely 1715 by it's location. In the lighted area, you can see some cannon and with a good magnifying glass what appears to be some cannonballs. There is a large square type item to the right center (the lines are faint). In the lower right of center you can see some timbers. The ballast is the shipshape shading in the center length of the lighted area.
To the east of the lighted area, with a magnifying glass you can make out some square/rectangle type containers of some type. You will notice the surrounding "aura" to the lighted rectangle which has somewhat of a ship shape to it as well. (this same effect occurs on another ship image I have) Some of the other items such as on the east of the lighted rectangle area, I cannot quite make out totally, but I have a good definition on one thing which I am going to research.

In the darker area, on the North side of the lighted rectangle and to the right of center with a magnifying glass of good quality you can see a piece of the ships' railing (somewhat similar but different in design than the one I have seen associated with the Capitana of the 1715 fleet that lays amid shattered wreckage)

itmaiden

Is this an image of an X-Ray'ed item? Is it a photo you took or scanned from a newspaper? The shape is sort of vague without any sort of reference for scale.

The first thing that popped into my head was that of an X-Rayed box or chest. There was a similar image I saw of a wooden container found intact from the 1705 Rosario wreck in Pensacola Bay. A local hospital offered to X-Ray the container for the archaeologists and it clearly showed that it contained fasteners such as nails, tacks, etc.

 

[inletsurf]

Its the skeleton coral formation in Aruba. What do I win?

 

[itmaiden]

Sorry to disappoint you. This wreck is off the the East Coast of Florida.

<some of you "divers" clearly need to team up with some salvage crews for some real experience on wrecks>

There is more to life than diving for crawfish in the bayou.

itmaiden

Its the skeleton coral formation in Aruba. What do I win?

 

[inletsurf]

Sorry to disappoint you. This wreck is off the the East Coast of Florida.

<some of you "divers" clearly need to team up with some salvage crews for some real experience on wrecks>

There is more to life than diving for crawfish in the bayou.

itmaiden

Its the skeleton coral formation in Aruba. What do I win?

LOL...I take it you don't find the irony in my point that the sidescan interpretation test, as nebulous as it is, was presented to us by the same person who thought they found Holloway's body in a published aruban reef photo... Just sayin'.

 

[Salvor6]

Looks like we found someone to take Dell's place.

 

[lurediver]

Yep Dell Jr. it is.

 

[pcolaboy]

Guys...let the man express what he wants to express. Mel Fisher didn't wake up one day with all of the expert knowledge that he ended up with. It all starts with a dream and enthusiasm. Give the guy a break.

In terms of the Dell bashing, just remember he did find much more in his active years than most of his critics will find in a lifetime.

 

[Salvor6]

No Dell bashing intended there Pcolaboy. Dell is a good friend of mine and I am a firm believer in his research. Also itmaiden is not a he.

 

[itmaiden]

I guess you and aquanut don't want the coordinates to this wreck ?

1715 artifacts have already been found associated with this general vicinity.

That is all I will say about this wreck for now. Those who found the artifacts never found the main wreck.

Because like many on this board they probably didn't do their research, and #2 need to seriously make an appointment with the eye doctor.


itmaiden

Looks like we found someone to take Dell's place.

 

[itmaiden]

Nah did'nt get your "irony", but took it as you are not a believer because you do not know what you are looking at when you look at the photo.
But why should I destroy your "bliss", if you understand the irony of "bliss".

Dell has dived more ships and seen more treasure in his lifetime than many could hope for.

Todays metal detectors are just modern day dowsers. With metal detectors you get either trash, treasure or nothing. What's the difference ? Either way one is hoping to get lucky.

They both employ sticks, hope, and luck , and supposedly rely on some type of scientific attributes with physics.

I've seen metal detectors register gold and you dig up a Budweiser can. Go figure.

itmaiden

Yep Dell Jr. it is.

 

[pcolaboy]

No Dell bashing intended there Pcolaboy. Dell is a good friend of mine and I am a firm believer in his research. Also itmaiden is not a he.

I may have gotten a little carried away with my statement and I apologize. I'm still a little pestered about the events leading up to Dell leaving the site - whether voluntarily or involuntarily.

 

[inletsurf]

I liked Dell. He may have been too imaginative with the crystal dousing sticks and all, but on the contrary I'm too practical and realistic. Having he and Peg leg around kept the imagination alive and the mind open to new possibilities. One thing is for certain, he wasn't just a keyboard treasure hunter...apparently from his photos and stories he was in the water quite a bit. I hope Dell returns.

 

[FISHEYE]

Aerial photographs from 50 years ago that are now on the web at the university of florida website were scanned from negatives and some prints.There is dust,fungus,scratches,pencil/pen/majic marker marks,finger prints and smudges on the scans.You may think you see a shipwreck or anomaly but its not.You have to look carefully at the scans and know how to read them.And know the difference between a piece of dust on the surface of the aerial photo or a wreck in clear water.

 

[itmaiden]

The photo above is clearly a shipwreck. If you didn't think so you wouldn't have emailed me and asked for the coordinates.

The photo above clearly demonstrates that those who criticized over the Aruba photo, do not know a shipwreck when they see it, which severely dampens their credibility to judge such.

And yes, some photos from the source you are citing do contain ink smears, and smudges. But there are also markings to indicate shipwreck sites, if you compare it to known shipwreck locations.

Fisheye, you are not stupid and either am I. That is why anyone doing research will look at a source and if the data possibly indicates something, will check it against other sources, or photos.

It is said "2 out of 3 ain't bad", but I look for 3 confirmations from at least 3 sources that something exists in a particular location and sometimes there are other indicators. If unsure about something I will send something to an experienced mariner/salvager/diver and ask their opinion.

When I go out to the beach or refer someone to a location, I don't like to waste my time or theirs being in a bad spot, so I try to research an area first.

If I want to crap shoot, I'll play the lottery.

itmaiden

Aerial photographs from 50 years ago that are now on the web at the university of florida website were scanned from negatives and some prints.There is dust,fungus,scratches,pencil/pen/majic marker marks,finger prints and smudges on the scans.You may think you see a shipwreck or anomaly but its not.You have to look carefully at the scans and know how to read them.And know the difference between a piece of dust on the surface of the aerial photo or a wreck in clear water.