The Big Orb Thread

[ArthurASCII]

The point I was trying to make (however poorly) that it seems very close minded to assume every orb on a photograph is dust.

Trouble is, one is obliged to kiss Sooo many frogs in the search for a prince that it leaves a bad taste in one's mouth

 

[Waylander]

The point I was trying to make (however poorly) that it seems very close minded to assume every orb on a photograph is dust.

Trouble is, one is obliged to kiss Sooo many frogs in the search for a prince that it leaves a bad taste in one's mouth

Very interesting Arthur...

Anyway here's a classic video of some heads ghost hunting and getting very excited about all the dust, hairs, insects and fibers floating around. They even start attaching names to the different forms of reflective air particles.

When you look at the video you will see everything is moving on and is directed by the air currents and breeze. It's all shot in a dusty and drafty old Airbase or something. Not sure about the EVPs haven't heard it very well yet, but the rest is pure filt.

If you have the time to watch it, maybe at home on your own pc for a good review, it is a good example of the cack people are willing to believe in.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xIvIWJbz ... ed&search=

 

[liveinabin]

Are they all a bit simple? 'Look some cobweb fell down from the ceiling, it must be a ghost'. 'Oh moths, must be a ghost'. I mean really.

 

[Kasper44]

Sorry, I did mean "clean room". The kind of area they IC manufacturing etc. The point I was trying to make (however poorly) that it seems very close minded to assume every orb on a photograph is dust.

A controlled room like that would have to be a vacuum i guess.

 

[lupinwick]

The point I was trying to make (however poorly) that it seems very close minded to assume every orb on a photograph is dust.

Trouble is, one is obliged to kiss Sooo many frogs in the search for a prince that it leaves a bad taste in one's mouth

Oh agreed, I just distrust the kind of statements which apparently leave no room for doubt. After all you've got to prove the orb is not dust (or some other artifact of the process).

 

[OldTimeRadio]

I assumed that was 'a clean room' rather than a 'clean' room....

Got you. That would make an interesting experiment and it shouldn't be all that difficult to carry out.

 

[OldTimeRadio]

Though perhaps an easier experiment would be to infuse a room with zillions of dust particles and then see if jillions of orbs result on photographs taken therein.

If no orbs result, it's time to start re-examining our assumptions.

 

[Kasper44]

Would you say that orb photo's are also linked to the amount of photo's taken on a digital camera as opposed to a film camera?
And also that the digital camera is more likely to use the flash?

In other words
If you took a standard room, gave one person a digital camera and another a film camera, would the person with the digital camera take more photos?
Would they capture more Orbs?

 

[Waylander]

Though perhaps an easier experiment would be to infuse a room with zillions of dust particles and then see if jillions of orbs result on photographs taken therein.

If no orbs result, it's time to start re-examining our assumptions.

Yes it would offer up multitudes of Orbs! I've done this before. It's a shame the forum switched there awhile ago, cause I lost one of the original threads on the subject. Were even I posted two pictures of a room in my apartment, one before and one after a good cushion busting and balnket shaking, and lo' an behold a dozen or so orbs, some even with faces in them, if you looked hard enough. It's all very silly! I assure you!

And in that video link I posted there, one guy says "hey I've got another orb right over ######'s head"; and the other camera person says, "I don't see that one...". Well of course you don't see it, your either at the wrong reflective angle, or the light from your camera is not reaching the spec of dust floating in that area of the room.

 

[Anome]

Also note that at UnCon 04, ASSAP were providing "Orb Photographs" by spraying water around the subject's head and taking pictures, which gave reasonably reliable results.

So it's known that orb-like effects can be reproduced by dust or water particles in the air, but what is unknown is whether they are ever the result of ghosts, spirits, aliens, pixies, etc. This latter is really hard to prove, since you first have to remove dust from the equation which is kind of hard to do.

 

[Waylander]

Accch!

Anyway, I found that old thread, unfortunately no Pictures, but the discussion continues about the pictures on the next page. I''ll have a look fo r the pictures later, I'm sure i have them on my machine at home.

And the example is of little or no particles in the air, and then loads. It was a very old house too, so a good place for some spirit visitations, but nothing spooky ever happened in that house. Except the visitation by a Rat! And an Amitiville horror moment, of swarms of bluebottle fly's after we killed the Rat.

And as you can see from the other thread we have discussed this at great length, 25 pages of babble, mostly due to Rynners large excerps and general meanderings!

 

[Kazza34]

If you have the time to watch it, maybe at home on your own pc for a good review, it is a good example of the cack people are willing to believe in.

I think its time for ghost hunting to adopt a new format instead of the stale methodology groups like this undertake with either no or very questionable results.

 

[krobone]

I AM a photographer, and the whole orb 'phenomena' drives me to madness.

When you use poor photography techniques and questionable lighting you can easily get these kinds of artifacts. Most 'orbs' don't show up on professional photos - because we know how to avoid them.

 

[jefflovestone]

Sorry, I did mean "clean room". The kind of area they IC manufacturing etc. The point I was trying to make (however poorly) that it seems very close minded to assume every orb on a photograph is dust.

A controlled room like that would have to be a vacuum i guess.

I'm intrigued by the thought of spirits, ghosts &c appearing in vacuums.

In space, no-one can hear you scream (or rattle chains and knock on tables).

 

[_Lizard23_]

A controlled room like that would have to be a vacuum i guess.

Actually the air pressure in a clean room is usually higher than usual, quite the opposite of a vacuum, so that any 'leaks' result in clean air escaping rather than potentially contaminated air getting it.

 

[UsedtobChrisFord]

I AM a photographer, and the whole orb 'phenomena' drives me to madness.

When you use poor photography techniques and questionable lighting you can easily get these kinds of artifacts. Most 'orbs' don't show up on professional photos - because we know how to avoid them.

My point exactly. It is garbage like this that causes forteana to be pushed to the fringe of science. The uneducated see something they don't know about and suddenly it's unexplained. Case in point, go over to cryptozoology.com and look through photo gallery. It is filled with pictures of normal everyday animals, insects, etc. that the poster couldn't identify or that their uncle/cousin/brother who is an "expert" couldn't identify. So they must be cryptics.

At what point was it decided that orbs were supernatural? It's funny because so many of the people I have encountered saying that orbs are supernatural also turn around and berate Christians for believing in a God that they cannot prove. :x

 

[alytha]

A little orb for you...

I just wonder what the light reflected off there. A friend of mine thinks it's the tree, but the photos taken immediately before and after that one don't show anything. Might be an insect.

I really wonder how people can take orbs seriously, as manifestations of supernatural powers. There's just too many coincidences there...digicams and "haunted" ie, dusty old houses, and voilà...

 

[Analogue Boy]

What you seem to have there is Middle Earth leaking into the picture.

 

[alytha]

It happens

Question is...is Middle Earth because of the orb, or the orb because of Middle Earth?

There was another one somewhere but it wasn't as nice as this one.

 

[Analogue Boy]

Orb zone theory and explanation of 'Circles of confusion' here...

A crucial question is - why did orbs suddenly appear when digital cameras arrived? The sensor chips in digital cameras are almost all physically smaller than the size of a 35mm film frame (most are less than half the size). This meant that lenses with a smaller circle of confusion were needed for digital cameras, compared to film cameras. As a design consequence of this, the lenses had a much greater depth of field. Depth of field is the area in front of a camera where objects are in focus. If objects are too close to the lens (and sometimes when they are too far away) they will be out of focus and break up into circles of confusion (see pic above). The increased depth of field in digital cameras meant that the closest distance where objects were in focus came much nearer to the camera. It also brought the area that was just out of focus much closer. Importantly, it brought these two zones much closer to the flash unit. In many digital cameras this created an Orb Zone. The orb zone is the area where the flash is strong enough to illuminate tiny particles, like dust, water droplets or small insects, that are just too close to the camera to be in focus. Such objects produce expanded circles of confusion or orbs! Since most bits of dust are tiny, they only have a single highlight and so produce individual orbs. Some larger objects, like small insects, may have several highlights and so produce multiple overlapping orbs.

http://www.assap.org/newsite/articles/O ... heory.html

 

[Waylander]

Orb zone theory and explanation of 'Circles of confusion' here...

A crucial question is -

http://www.assap.org/newsite/articles/O ... heory.html

Well that seems to be that, well done JimV for finding that site, very well documented and explained.

 

[stu neville]

What if we're dealing with a UFO kind of thing again, where 95%+ of orbs are dust motes or moths or camera aretfacts, but not all of them are? One or two might be "spirits in the residual", or something akin to flying rods.

I'm not saying that's the case necessarily, but as always each case on it's own merit.

See that? I was all Fortean there. Just thought I'd daringly fly the flag for a bit.

 

[Analogue Boy]

In that case they would probably have been recorded through conventional photography surely. (And not those wrist strap drop in front of the lens pics). The site clearly explains the relationship between the beginning of the Orb thing and the technology squeeze of the digital camera.

EDIT__ I haven't checked yet but I was wondering if any Russian Telepaths have managed to fill a digital camera memory card by thought alone yet.

 

[stu neville]

In that case they would probably have been recorded through conventional photography surely. (And not those wrist strap drop in front of the lens pics). The site clearly explains the relationship between the beginning of the Orb thing and the technology squeeze of the digital camera.

They may well have been, just not picked up as such. My mum's got a drawer full of Truprint folders containing god-awful film photos, blurry and at odd angles, and loads of them have strange little blobs and reflections and crap on them. Perhaps pre-digital cameras people just put it all down to bad photography or scratched negatives or exposed film?

Again I'm not saying this is the case, just that it's a possibility to be considered.

 

[Analogue Boy]

Too right we should never rule anything out.

But if you look at the medium of traditional movie film, I couldn't even take a guess at the amount of miles of frames taken by the movie industry over the last hundred years. If there was going to be any spooky photgraphic anomalies brought up, we would have seen more of it here especially as it is scrutinised for defects by technicians and by the editor. Surely a film camera works on the same priniciple as a conventional still one.

Then, Lo! The digital camera arrives and we have orbs, rods and other anomalies popping up.

 

[lupinwick]

Perhaps its simpler for spirits to bugger up the CCD?

CCDs containing grids of pixels are used in digital cameras, optical scanners and video cameras as light-sensing devices. They commonly respond to 70% of the incident light (meaning a quantum efficiency of about 70%) making them far more efficient than photographic film, which captures only about 2% of the incident light. As a result CCDs were rapidly adopted by astronomers

 

[norton51]

What if we're dealing with a UFO kind of thing again, where 95%+ of orbs are dust motes or moths or camera aretfacts, but not all of them are? One or two might be "spirits in the residual", or something akin to flying rods.
[/size]

Don't you think it would be odd if there were just a few orbs which, though they looked exactly like all the others, somehow had a different cause? And if such things existed, isn't a bizarre coincidence that they just happen to look exactly like 'normal' orbs?

 

[Analogue Boy]

And what it the people you're photographing aren't really the people you know but an instantaneous doppelganger switch for the split second the shutter opens? :shock:

That would explain some of the weird expressions I see in my pics.

 

[welsh_rune]

Orb Theory

Are there any recent theories about what orbs are? I'm a volunteer in a local theatre and on stage, in the dark, I can and do photograph orbs on demand....not failed yet! Would love to know...


thanks.

 

[escargot]

Runey M8, we often discuss orbs on here. Whether they are evidence of ghosts or not is sometimes hotly debated.

I'd very much like to hear how you create them on demand. I've had 'orb' photos taken of me, with the help of bubbles and other props.

After a recent few days in Prague, I'm surprised to note that not one of my several hundred photos have any orbs. Could this be something to do with turning the flash off?