An observation comes before an explanation
The most useful account is not necessarily the most spectacular. Editors need a record with a traceable origin and a clear description of the observer’s uncertainty. Separate what you saw directly, what the camera recorded and the explanation you proposed afterwards. If a light looked enormous, that describes an impression; it becomes a size measurement only when distance and scale are established.
Keep the original and a working copy
Preserve the file as the camera created it. A separate copy can show an enlargement, slower playback or annotations, but list those changes and do not substitute it for the original. A social-media screenshot often loses timing and camera information, while repeated compression can obscure faint details. Note who recorded the material, the device used and how it reached you. If someone else owns it, establish your right to share it before sending it to us.
Time, location and direction
Give the date, local time and time zone. If your phone clock may have been wrong, say so: apparent precision is less useful than an honest uncertainty range. Observation duration and a delay between a flash and sound may help, but do not replace missing information with a confident guess from memory. A region and a recognisable landmark are sufficient for location. Describe direction using compass points, a road or a prominent building. Do not publish a home address or another witness’s precise position; relevant private details can be given to the editors separately.
Describe conditions and the limits of the recording
Note weather, cloud, wind, lighting and obstructions between the camera and the object. Was there a window? Did you use digital zoom or change the exposure? These details help test ordinary explanations and do not mean the editors have already dismissed your account. Say whether you watched the event directly or noticed it only afterwards in the file. A single frame and a continuous sequence allow different kinds of motion reconstruction. Do not fill missing seconds with assertions that the recording cannot support.
Preserve independent accounts separately
If several people witnessed an event, ask each to record their impressions before discussing possible explanations together. Their times, directions and sequences can then be compared. Matching accounts after repeated shared viewing are not equivalent to independent recordings from different positions. A similar internet story can provide a lead, but does not yet establish that both accounts concern the same object. Keep original links, publication dates and author names, without treating reposts as independently produced evidence.
Sending material to the editors
You can attach images, video and PDF documents. The site accepts up to three files totalling no more than 500 MB; individual-format limits appear next to the upload field. If the original is larger, preserve it and provide an accessible source link with an explanation of what it contains. Attachments first undergo private checks and are not published automatically. Do not send software archives, other people’s documents or personal information unnecessary to the investigation. Antivirus checks reduce risk; they do not establish that an image is authentic.
What counts as progress
A final identification is not the only useful outcome. Finding the original source, narrowing the time, correcting the location or discovering reuse of an older image already improves the record. End your account by saying which details you can clarify and how to reach you. Good material allows several hypotheses to be examined and remains useful even if the author’s first explanation turns out to be wrong.