The Big Orb Thread

[kiel_d]

If an image is manipulated well (not just 'cut and pasted') it can be very convincing, so photos and video are unreliable sources of evidence in isolation. If two or more cameras show the same result, or if a camera event can be cross refereced with an EMF, temp or other reading then "proof" could be built up.

Its this lack of detail that ultimately makes me decide if an image/video is genuine or not.

I've also heard things about digi-cams and their exellent ability to pick up orbs and other pheonomena (the sony mavica range being especially good) but with this technology still in its relative infancy i would trust an image on good ol' 35mm over a digi-cam any day.

--kiel--

 

[Anonymous]

Using the filters in Photoshop can reveal details that you might not notice otherwise. You can identify pretty bad fakes this way. Doesn't help so much with photos that have been doctored the old fashioned way.

 

[mikelegs]

There are innumerable ways to doctor real, live film photos. Sometimes it's even done unintentionally. Sometimes cameras capture something you weren't looking at at the time and which may appear odd when viewed in the photo. What strikes me most is that whenever I do a casual search for 'ghost' or orb photos, most of what is offered up is either obvious fakery or standard glitches with either film or camera - and I'm just a novice. A pro would have a *very* difficult time tracking down something which wasn't easily identifiable as a fake or error.

I also agree that no matter how good the pic and how credible the witness, a single still photo can never be accepted as proof of anything. Capturing a ghost or orb on video would be much better, but go watch any current feature film to find out that's not impossible to fake either.

No offense to all the ghost hunters out there (I want to do it myself!) but in order to make any 'scientific' conclusions, there will have to be multiple, independent, repeatable observations by 'real' scientists - not just a few Forteans with some camears and a free weekend.

 

[rynner2]

Well, FT didn't want our article, so it's now up as a webpage -

Make Your own Orbs!

(This arose from a MB/email collaboration between Mike_Legs and myself.)

 

[mikelegs]

Well, FT didn't want our article, so it's now up as a webpage...

Yes, thanks to rynner for doing all the hard work. I just took a few pics. For anyone interested in this particular study, rynner (I'm sure) and I would be happy hear thoughts/field questions any of you board members may have. We'll also keep you updated as to any future endeavors.

 

[Anonymous]

Good article there Rynner. Its a shame that FT didn't want it. I'd be on the look out for similar articles over the next few months.

I did get in trouble for shaking Pepper all over the Kitchen though

It's a pity that this will not put an end to all the boring globe photos knocking around the internet.

 

[Anonymous]

Orbs and Vortices

Well they wouldn't let it lie would they. Despite massing evidence of Orbs being dust or other particles near a camera lense (Not to mentions instructions on how create orb pictures) and similar evidence of Vortices being camera straps or mist these orbs/vortices are apparently still ghosts. Well according to Phantom of Fraud anyway.

My favourite part of this articles is this:

Tests with clairvoyants, have been able pinpoint where these orbs will show in photographs

In that case it must be true then. No details of said tests or indeed how accurate the results were. Photos not bing that big and difficult to match up with the 3d environment after the fact.

This part was most interesting too:

This breakthrough in research is backed by the fact that survivors of NDE's (near- death experiences) have also identified these brightly coloured orbs as EXACTLY what they saw at the point of their death experience.

A human brain starved of oxgyen and on the verge of ceasing to function of course being the best evidence to prove anything.

Yet more of their Vortex theories/pictures are here

They vortex images look suspiciously like a photo I took on a night when there was a very light mist. Yet with all their evidence they haven't convinced me of anything. Well except that they maybe a touch paranoid. Sorry if I sound a little sarcastic with this post I couldn't find any other way to write it.

Thoughts?

 

[Anonymous]

I have seen loads of 'orb' photo's and many have been spoken of in the UK Horizons GHOST DETECTIVES programme but I just do not believe that they are evidentce of soul forms. I have looked back at old family photographs and seen loads of these orbs, many appearing in different sizes, but they seem more natural than supernatural.

 

[Anonymous]

Yep. It always rains when I'm on holiday and if I thought every drop of water I've ever had on my camera lens was a ghost, I'd be afraid to turn round by now! It's like the ones with my hair/thumb/whatever in the way, and those horribly surreal double exposures you sometimes get at the end of the film. I have a double exposure snap somewhere that I'd have sworn was a genuine ghost if it wasn't for the sad fact that I remember taking both photos...

 

[harlequin2005]

At the risk of seeming to be posting to thread where virtually everyone is agreeing...

I have tinkered about with 0-Lux video and photography, and normal dust motes fo look decidedly ephemeral, not to say ghostly when illumined under IR Light. Some systems notably use a low intensity visual light source in conjuntion with IR, so the result on the video/photo is sort of an 'extended sensory' reality, but if your eyes get accustomed to the dinge, you can see the motes reflecting the low lux light source as the IR flares on the monitor. Obviously, since I did this stuff for my own entertainment, its not documented, but easily reproduced with an IR video camera and a hand held torch

8¬)

 

[Anonymous]

Right I have a torch. All I need now is a IR video camera! Damn!

I presume that dust creates a similar effect on a video camera as on stills camera?

What I don't understand is why people really get excited about orbs and votices. Neither myself or anyone I know as ever got anything but annoyed (a good photo spoiled) when these anomalies have croped up on our photos. When did it become popular that they must be ghosts/spirits/demons/phantoms/sprites/faires anyway?

I'm still waiting to see more info from Phantom or Fraud about their tests.

 

[harlequin2005]

Sad Techno posting

I was using a Sony TRV11E, which can pick up IR in daylight shots

8¬)

 

[dr wu]

Orbs and camera errors

Hello to everyone....

I know very little about orbs or cameras and wish to make that clear. I do have a friend though who claims her farm is haunted and she has many photos taken there of these orbs as well as arcs of light and pics of these little blobs with wings she calls 'fairies'. I asked her if others get these pics also and she said yes but it varies from time to time. This has ben going on for some time and she claims there have been physical manifestations also such as objects moving and people being touched by ghosts. I of course asked her if she has had experts ck her film and camera and she said yes they are fine. She uses a new digital camera which connects with her computer..etc. but she says regular cameras also get orbs on her farm.
What's going on here? Are these all camera mistakes and errors?
My personal opinion is that they are just mistakes but she's convinced they are real.
How can one rule out errors completely in her case?
BTW, I have been invited out to see for myself this summer and when I get the chance I'll let all know what I experienced while there.
I'll post a link to her pics when I can.

 

[wonderfulme]

Orbs in Moscow suburbia

 

[Anonymous]

Strange. Could be the compression algorithm doing odd things to little anomalies like moths and the like. Interesting though. Have you tried the camera in other low light conditions?

Perfect English. Have you been trained at one of those special secret villages, set up to resemble Godalming, or Akron, Ohio?

 

[James_H]

These look better than most orb photos, http://fotki.oboronimpex.ru/gallery/orbs/IMG_0375 this one even looks like a UFO photo. they don't look like the photos got from flash reflecting off dust to me

and andro, not perfect english, but better than mine, certainly. surely "Last night me and my two friends met after work..." should be "last nite my two friends and I met, after work..." oh well it surely doesn't matter

 

[wonderfulme]

AndroMan,
there were no moths or other flying bugs whatsoever, as far as I noticed. Besides, the quantity of orbs on some pictures suggests it would take A LOT of insects to achieve a comparable effect.

And judging on my previous experience with this camera (Canon Digital IXUS 330), it's very reliable and prone to glitches of that amount, even when shooting in low light conditions.

Speaking of forementioned villages... No comments on that

Faggus,
the "UFO" photo should probably be attributed to my smoking habit But then again, I'm not 100% sure. The light in the distance is just that -- a light.

 

[James_H]

if you were smoking, then is it not possible that some of the smoke had got onto the lens and caused the "dust on the lens"? you see photo #8 looks like an impressive version of one of those "ectoplasm" photos (shows how easily fooled i am)

 

[Jerry_B]

I've also had the same problems with SLRs and digital cameras - sometimes even when you're convinced that the lens is clean, motes can show up. This is also in combination with the refracted light from the flash. I don't think there's anything strange about it all, it's just that sometimes dust motes or very small droplets of moisture can collect on the lens even between cleaning. You won't always spot them.

 

[wonderfulme]

I guess I have to point out that we took a great amount of pictures later same night while driving home. Those pictures came out perfectly clean with no hint of orbs, dust, scratches, whatever you call it.

So basically it goes like that: we shoot some pictures at local bar (clean pics), McD drive-in (shame on me), then we go to some spooky place and voila: orbs. We drive home and again no orbs.

Coincidence?

 

[James_H]

ah, but there is no such thing as coincidence...

what were the conditions like? cold, wet, misty, anything? Were you or anyone smoking?

 

[Jerry_B]

I still don't think anything unremakable is going on, and instead continue to think (from experience) that it's simply dust motes, etc. When you took the later photos you mention, what were the lighting conditions like? Did you use the flash? My point is that these image artefacts are derived from very small particles, which you would have problems seeing on a lens in daylight with the naked eye, let alone at night. Their apparent size and opacity is because they lie on the surface of the lens and are not in focus. Ambient and refracted light from the flash also have an optical effect on highlighting the particles. And it is possible that more particles would accumulate from the surrounding air in one location and not another.

 

[wonderfulme]

Faggus,
it was very clean and warm (+20C, I'd approximate). Little or no clouds, no wind, no rain. Your typical summer night.

I was smoking occasionally. Had I known what was to appear on these photos, I would most certainly abstain

 

[Anonymous]

Orbs

This is when dust particles near the lens get lit by the camera's flash, right?
I'd laugh at things like this

But, me and my dad fell for it.
Theres a haunted bridge near our house, in Stowe, VT.
My dad took some pictures at night, sometime in the 70's, and one of them had a strange light on it. There was nowhere light could be reflecting, so he thought it was strange... but now I realize it was probably a peice of dust.
I took a picture at the same spot a few years ago with a digital camera, also with a ghostly dot. We were so excited about it. Too bad its just dust :-(

 

[Anonymous]

Re: Orbs

This is when dust particles near the lens get lit by the camera's flash, right?
I'd laugh at things like this

But, me and my dad fell for it.
Theres a haunted bridge near our house, in Stowe, VT.
My dad took some pictures at night, sometime in the 70's, and one of them had a strange light on it. There was nowhere light could be reflecting, so he thought it was strange... but now I realize it was probably a peice of dust.
I took a picture at the same spot a few years ago with a digital camera, also with a ghostly dot. We were so excited about it. Too bad its just dust :-(

Have you still got the photos? Could you post them as attachments? You went to the same spot twice and got anomalous effects, both times ?

Oooh! :yeay:

 

[Anonymous]

Right after I posted I realized I should have the picture... but I can't find it anywhere on my computer. I did a search for ever jpg, and searched through everything, and its not there. Maybe its a bmp.
But the orbs weren't in the same place or size. Spooky, but probably dust.

But to make up for it, I have this video of a strange creature that ALMOST ATTACKED AND KILLED ME AND A FRIEND.
Or, it could be a fisher cat that scared us off.
Fisher Cat or Demon Otter? YOU DECIDE! (realvideo)

 

[rynner2]

Bump! Several 'Orbs' threads have been merged here.

 

[rynner2]

Here are some orbs I photographed using the 'salt and pepper' method. I set the camera on 10 sec delay, and then, as flash time approached, started sprinkling salt or pepper in front of the lens.

(I have another which was too succesful - it shows a snowstorm of orbs!)

 

[mejane]

Ryn, you really need to sort out that bookcase

Jane.

 

[ruffready]

the art bell radio show

really pushes "orbs" as unusual "real" unknows--all the time--with "reporter "Linda Moulton Howe", at the front ..telling all her stories about crop circles and Orbs (she's even seen) it can really fuddle the brain..whittley Strieber, also he really pushes the Orbsas a factual phenomenon, on "his radio show". : :hmph: