Just recently found this thread. I am the author of the article in the OP. I wrote this a few years ago after quite a lengthy examination of the case as well as working with investigators in Australia who went on site to take recent pictures of the location.
I have been interested in UFO research since the age of 8 (back in the sixties) and was always suspicious of the UFO pictures I came across in books and magazines. I would say that, over the years , I have come to the conclusion that most of the UFO pictures we see in the media are hoaxes.
But the Kibel picture is one that got me to take a second look. At first I was pretty sure it was fake. Another UFO researcher had shown me a picture he had taken of a metal bowl that looked pretty close to what we see in the Kibel picture. And he claimed that the reflection might be of a house behind the photographer. But we got aerial pictures of the house from that time period and there was no other house behind it. The challenge is not only to try and throw an object in the air or suspend it on a wire but to have it reflect the roof of the house. Keep in mind that were you to suspend an object like this on its side you would have a hard time keeping it still. So the likelihood of taking a picture just when it is reflecting the roof of the house is minimal. Furthermore, for that object to reflect the roof of the house, it would have to be on the other side of it (as I show in my article) and therefore would need to be quite large.
I am not saying this picture is 100% proven authentic but that it would be extremely difficult to reproduce it using a Polaroid camera of the type he was using.