DOW-UAP-D098, Film Analysis of Unidentified Objects, 1953
This file contains a memorandum relating to the U.S. Naval Photographic Interpretation Center’s assessment of two films allegedly depicting unidentified airborne objects, captured in Montana and Utah in 1950 and 1952, respectively. The file documents the Center’s analytic process, assumptions that constrained its confidence level, tentative conclusions, and recommendations for future research. The Center assessed, generally, that the objects depicted in the film demonstrated characteristics that were inconsistent with those of natural phenomena or commonly known aerospace technologies. The memorandum documents the Center’s recommendation for a more well-resourced investigation to corroborate its presumptive findings, citing a lack of funding and personnel. The accompanying charts compare the film’s luminosity with the apparent angular size of the phenomena, using contemporary mathematical modeling and photogrammetric analysis techniques.
The summary above is sourced from the released file metadata as published to war.gov. The analysis sections below are original to this tracker.
Text of the document
Machine-extracted from the PDF war.gov published (its text layer or OCR), so expect errors, especially in names, numbers and handwriting; the PDF is the authoritative copy. Lines that did not extract as readable text are left out. Showing about 990 words from pages 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 of 23.
PAGE 1
DEPUTY, ASS 1 T CHIEF Al RCRAFT LOG (Alf t::i<;F', F'ROGRA"' tEPl GUIDED MISSILES tGi,o) PUBLICATIONS IPBJ RESEARCl-i IRSI PLANS COORD. I PCI SHI PS INSiALL. !SI l SHORE ESTAB. tSEI ASS 1T CHIEF fOR Expedite Informat ion and return Prepa re repl/ tor slgna,u re of: 1. Tnis tore. is UfllC-U,SSJrlEO wnen Dlank arid 'llnAttac.ned.
PAGE 2
(Attach Correspondence Here)
I. In order that persons making cormients may be readily ident ifie
PAGE 3
U.S. NAVAL PHCYrOGRAPHIC INTERPRETATION CENTER U. S. NAVAL RECEIVING STATION SECURITY INFORMATION From: Off'icer in Charge To: Director of Naval I ntelligence (OP-322H4D) Subj: Interpretation of Movies of Unidentified Objects; progress report on enclosures thereto (b) Conf memo, Chief, Topical Division, USAF, AFOIN (d) Rest memo, Chief, Topical Division, USAF, AFOIN 1. Reference (a) is a request from u. s. Air Force for the i nterpretation of movies of unidentified objects taken in Utah, 2 July 1952. • I ncluded among the enclosures are approximately 30 feet of processed, 16mm color motion picture film and a list of questions for gui®nce in ,determining the type o-f analysis desired. Referenc.e (b) requested interpretation of additional movies taken in Montana, 1950. This report superced.es reference (c) and presents the test procedures and methods designed to ~nswer the questions contained in enclosure 7 of reference (a). The results and analysis were performed by the Photogrammetry Division, Evaluation Department of this Center and do not necessarily represent the official attitude of the Depart ment of the Navy or this Center. 2. Tests and Procedure. The film exposed in Ute.his i n very poor condition; dry, brittle, and With a tendency to break. Af'ter i nitial viewing, duplication of the film was performed in order to\preserve the frlm. In the duplication process some color correction ~s made to permit better Viewing of the objects. To prepare plots of the objects, a stop crame projector was rigidly mounted at a fiXed distance from a finel;-groW1d glass screen. The magnification was 22 times giving a format size of 14.2" wide. This proved very satisfactory and provided a shadow free image upon which overlay plots could be made. SECURITY INFORMATION
PAGE 4
SECURITY INFORMATION Subj: Interpretation of Movies of Unidentifiea Objects; progress report on A preliminary detailed studi of the Utah film was made and it was decided that: a. Brightly colored spots <;rf red and green lasting only one or tvo frames were not to be considered. b- Water spots could be detected easily and eliminated from the c. The color of the objects was fairly constant as blue-white. d. Size and luminosity of an object varied through-out the film. For convenience in interpretation, the film was divided into three parts, each part being considered an entity. Part I consisted of the footage taken at f8; Part II, the footage taken at fl6 with a panning motion; and Part III, the footage taken at fl6 during which the camera was held steady. Three det'inite groups of l i ghts were observed through out the film and plots were recorded as foll ows: PLOTS OF POSITIONS Utah Parts Control Chart I II III Holding to lower group Not enclosed I II Holding to one object 2 and 3 and ailinuth of another correction per frame for panning III Hol ding to frame outline 5a and 5b I One image held to base 6 line. Every tenth frame to show changes withih. apparent formations All Terrestial Objects 7a and Tb SECURITY INFORMATION 2
PAGE 5
Subj: Interpretation of Movies of Unidentified Objects; progress report on b. Densitometric tests: Densitometric data vere obtained with a Densichron, Model 2150 manufactured b:r" the Welch Scientific Company. The ~nsichron has a scale range of 0-3. The procedure was to project each frame at approximately 22 times magnification onto a finely-grained-glass screen. The back ground (sky) was then measured at several places and the density set to 3.0 (variations in backgrouud densities were in the order of 0.02 and were regarded as uniform) . A set of three readings vere made of each of seven objects in Part I, and of the single object in Part III of the Utah Film. Readings vere ma.de of the entire Montana film. Enclosure (8a and 8b) are graphs of the density readings obtained of the two lower groups of objects in frames 1-129 of the Utah film. Enclosure (9) is a density graph of the siogle object (94 frames) in Part III. Enclosure (10) is a graph \l'here six successive Densichron readings were averaged and advanced one reading each deter 0£ the Montana film, densities were plotted as above and are The results of the density readings may be questioned in that these objects varied in size so that at the minimum sizes the densichron probe was measuring the entire object, and at the maximum size the probe was measuring only a portion of the objects. Because of this situation only the largest readings obtained b scanning the objects were used. It is understood that normal procedure would be to read the entire object. This was impossible with the equipment on hand. In addition the film, with which this investigation was conducted, is a duplicate of a copy . This raises the question as to whether the central portion of the objects were burnt out during the duplication processing. Density readings were made to compare the clear areas and the objects. It was found-that the minimum difference is o.4. This
Where this file fits in the PURSUE archive
This file is one of DoD's 257 files in the Trump PURSUE disclosure. Within the DoD agency block it ranks #155 of 257 by Anomalousness Index. Across the entire 450-file archive it ranks #279 of 450.
That places it in the lower-scoring band of the archive (279 of 450 by score), typical of investigative-record style files where the report is paper-based rather than instrumented.
Anomalousness Index: 56/100
Evidentiary weight that this encounter remains unexplained after conventional analysis. Not a probability of extraterrestrial origin - that number is not honestly computable from the released files and this tracker refuses to publish it.
🤖 AI-ASSISTED SCORING · methodology
The six rubric components break down for this file as follows. Each component has a weighted contribution to the final score; the per-component explanation below describes what this file's particular value on that component means in the rubric's framework.
Reported by a witness with no instrumented record. The lowest tier in the rubric's sensor axis. Eyewitness perception in field conditions, even when the witness is highly credentialed, scores below capture by any instrumented modality. This report reached the federal record through the Department of War.
Trained U.S. military personnel reporting from an operational mission context. A high witness-credibility tier, ranked in the rubric below astronaut, trained-aviator, and federal-agent testimony. This is the witness profile shared by the entire AARO-submitted infrared-capture cluster that anchors the 66-point score band.
Single-witness or single-instrument capture. This is the corroboration tier for the overwhelming majority of the PURSUE archive on the released metadata - the rubric records the honest limit of the underlying record rather than inferring multi-witness corroboration that the released summaries do not establish. A small number of files with an independent second witness or instrument score on the multi-witness/multi-instrument tier above this one.
No kinematic measurements - speed, acceleration, vector - are published in the released file with sufficient precision to score on the kinematic axis. The rubric does not infer kinematic anomaly from narrative observer estimates. Every file in the archive carries this value, which is itself an observation about the disclosure: kinematic-grade telemetry was not part of what was released.
A conventional candidate explanation has been considered but is not dispositive. Every file in the archive scores this way - reflecting that the underlying release metadata systematically caveats strong determinations in either direction. The released summaries warn against reading them as conclusive analytical judgments, and the rubric respects that.
Released as open after formal review by the originating agency. The file passed through a review process and was published in that posture - a stronger disposition signal than 'unresolved with no review,' because review has occurred and the open status is the agency's published conclusion.
Bottom line on the score: the Anomalousness Index of 56/100 reflects evidentiary weight that this specific file's encounter remains structurally unexplained by the rubric's six axes - it is not a claim that the underlying event involved anything non-conventional, and it is not comparable across rubrics that use different weights. For the full per-axis weights and the rubric JSON, see /methodology.
Related files in DoD
Other PURSUE files in the same category, ranked by Anomalousness Index.
DOW-UAP-PR024, Unresolved UAP Report, Middle East, 2023
DOW-UAP-PR072, "ADMINISTRATIVE REVISION: IIR 1777 J0032 22 Kazakhstan - UAP in the vicinit…
DOW-UAP-PR106, Unresolved UAP Report, Eastern United States, 2020
DOW-UAP-PR108, Unresolved UAP Report, Western United States, 2020
DOW-UAP-PR109, Unresolved UAP Report, Eastern United States, 2015
DOW-UAP-PR110, Unresolved UAP Report, Eastern United States, 2020
Verification
SHA-256:
This hash is the SHA-256 of the file body war.gov served on the verification date above. War.gov has re-processed some file bodies since first release (re-compression + OCR, no content removed - see /changes); we re-verify and record the change rather than silently serve a stale hash. How to check this yourself →