Paranormal Photography

[esselle]

Haha I didn't say the best explanation...but it is a plausible one. I understand the dust particle explanation...dust doesn't leave a trail ...orbs do. So...look back at your old shots and if there are "streaks" ...you could have captured a ghost.

Perhaps you should contact a paranormal expert to be sure!

Not serious.

Ok, Semi serious. :}

 

[runnah]

Haha I didn't say the best explanation...but it is a plausible one. I understand the dust particle explanation...dust doesn't leave a trail ...orbs do. So...look back at your old shots and if there are "streaks" ...you could have captured a ghost.

Perhaps you should contact a paranormal expert to be sure!

Not serious.

Ok, Semi serious. :}

I get streaks all the time. It could be a million different known causes before I considered it being something outside known causes.

 

[Steve5D]

As to whether or not such photos are "legit" (by "legit" I'm referring to the manipulation, or lack thereof, of the image), one of the things I look at is the intention of the photographer. If someone presents a photo and then tries to profit from it, whether monetarily or otherwise, I tend to be a bit skeptical. If someone says "I have a picture of a ghost", I'm a bit skeptical.

On the other hand, if someone presents a photo and says "This is weird", I'm a bit more receptive to it, and to the perspon presenting it.

I don't proclaim my photo to be that of a ghost. I'm nowhere near prepared to make such a statement.

I don't know what it is, but I know what it isn't...

 

[esselle]

All I'm saying is, show me an 'orb' picture where the flash didn't fire. I don't think I've ever seen one. It just just seems to me like that's the best way to prove that it's not caused by the flash.

I reckon the only sure fire way to prove this or discount the flash theory is...don't use a flash. Again, still photography is a hard sell but a trail will show with orbs in photos because orbs...move.

 

[cynicaster]

This thread has me thinking of this...

The ?Blog? of ?Unnecessary? Quotation Marks

 

[runnah]

All I'm saying is, show me an 'orb' picture where the flash didn't fire. I don't think I've ever seen one. It just just seems to me like that's the best way to prove that it's not caused by the flash.

I reckon the only sure fire way to prove this or discount the flash theory is...don't use a flash. Again, still photography is a hard sell but a trail will show with orbs in photos because orbs...move.

And dust particles don't?

 

[esselle]

This thread has me thinking of this...

The ?Blog? of ?Unnecessary? Quotation Marks

mine are necessary :}

All I'm saying is, show me an 'orb' picture where the flash didn't fire. I don't think I've ever seen one. It just just seems to me like that's the best way to prove that it's not caused by the flash.

I reckon the only sure fire way to prove this or discount the flash theory is...don't use a flash. Again, still photography is a hard sell but a trail will show with orbs in photos because orbs...move.

And dust particles don't?

They do BUT...they don't move *through* things. And another potential rebuttal is that dust mainly shows when you are taking the shot close to your subject.

Dont shoot the messenger. Lol I'm just sharing plausible explanations in favor of disproving the "it is dust not a spirit orb" theory. Question...do u believe in ghosts in general or are we more debating the "methods" as to how to prove their existence?

 

[runnah]

They do BUT...they don't move *through* things. And another potential rebuttal is that dust mainly shows when you are taking the shot close to your subject.

Dont shoot the messenger. Lol I'm just sharing plausible explanations in favor of disproving the "it is dust not a spirit orb" theory. Question...do u believe in ghosts in general or are we more debating the "methods" as to how to prove their existence?

I think you are missing the point.

What i am saying is that the thought process of, "well it's not a dust particle so it must be the visual manifestation of the spirits of those who have passed." is such a huge jump in logic that it baffles me. You are telling me that there is no other explanation for the "orbs" than ghost? You have evaluated and reject every other single KNOWN cause?!

 

[esselle]

They do BUT...they don't move *through* things. And another potential rebuttal is that dust mainly shows when you are taking the shot close to your subject.

Dont shoot the messenger. Lol I'm just sharing plausible explanations in favor of disproving the "it is dust not a spirit orb" theory. Question...do u believe in ghosts in general or are we more debating the "methods" as to how to prove their existence?

I think you are missing the point.

What i am saying is that the thought process of, "well it's not a dust particle so it must be the visual manifestation of the spirits of those who have passed." is such a huge jump in logic that it baffles me. You are telling me that there is no other explanation for the "orbs" than ghost? You have evaluated and reject every other single KNOWN cause?!

could be moisture, dirt, reflection, etc...

im not missing the point; I just leave my mind open to the idea of orbs in photos coming from spirits when ruling all else out.

 

[runnah]

im not missing the point; I just leave my mind open to the idea of orbs in photos coming from spirits when ruling all else out.

In my mind orbs is not a valid explanation full stop because it hasn't been proven to exist.

 

[Ballistics]

This thread has me thinking of this...

The ?Blog? of ?Unnecessary? Quotation Marks

mine are necessary :}

I reckon the only sure fire way to prove this or discount the flash theory is...don't use a flash. Again, still photography is a hard sell but a trail will show with orbs in photos because orbs...move.

And dust particles don't?

They do BUT...they don't move *through* things. And another potential rebuttal is that dust mainly shows when you are taking the shot close to your subject.

Dont shoot the messenger. Lol I'm just sharing plausible explanations in favor of disproving the "it is dust not a spirit orb" theory. Question...do u believe in ghosts in general or are we more debating the "methods" as to how to prove their existence?

There is nothing at all plausible in what you're saying, and it's by no means an explanation.

im not missing the point; I just leave my mind open to the idea of orbs in photos coming from spirits when ruling all else out.

But in every single scenario, you can never rule everything out. Especially dust. Tell me one environment that you have been in that is dust free?
Leaving your mind open is fine, I do it to, but there's a difference between an open mind and delusion.

 

[o hey tyler]

There is nothing at all plausible in what you're saying, and it's by no means an explanation.

But in every single scenario, you can never rule everything out. Especially dust. Tell me one environment that you have been in that is dust free?
Leaving your mind open is fine, I do it to, but there's a difference between an open mind and delusion.

Dust free? A sterile lab environment with negative ventilation. ;-)

 

[Ballistics]

There is nothing at all plausible in what you're saying, and it's by no means an explanation.

But in every single scenario, you can never rule everything out. Especially dust. Tell me one environment that you have been in that is dust free?
Leaving your mind open is fine, I do it to, but there's a difference between an open mind and delusion.

Dust free? A sterile lab environment with negative ventilation. ;-)

That you've been in.

And photographed. And it has orbs.

 

[runnah]

but there's a difference between an open mind and delusion.

Bingo. I get called closed minded because I don't believe in every psuedo-science/supernatural crap that comes down the pipe. But yet try to convince someone that Acupuncture or homeopathic remedies are BS due to that fact it has never been proven to work and they will go after you with all their might.

 

[PixelRabbit]

Dust is not the only variable, bugs are a huge one, granted this is taken outside but it's all bugs, near and far, no flash but nice strong backlight and a high shutter speed, move inside to a low light situation and shutter speeds get dropped, bugs move in an intelligent manner and voila a trail and intelligence. I'm not saying don't defend the possibility, just saying don't use easily explainable but impossible to verify things like orbs in a photograph... especially on a photography forum