arac wrote: the dust in the extension theory is quite probable though the batteries in that camera were running quite low that night, as soon as I saw the alleged orbs, I got really excited and became snap happy!
mysteria wrote: Stevenmu, I've found photo/camera/battery/electrical problems occur in every place I've visited that had polterkinetic/ghost/spirit energy and I believe it is Energy that affects other energy sources in houses.
arac wrote: when I showed the pictures to my friend and told her what they might be a sign of , she didn't look surprised..she said her parents have often thought that they have heard people shuffling around in the attic, when there is nothing there...
mysteria wrote: My rational (left-brain) side says this is'nt logical, that physical structural work can release dormant psi Energy, but the intuitive right-brain theorizes that this is in fact the case.
arac wrote: What do you think of the pics?
arac wrote: as it was brand new and I think that was only my second time using it
arac wrote: it just seems funny because there were more pics, were no "orbs" appeared. If the room were very dusty, surely this would have caused orbs to appear in every photo..nonetheless I accept your logic!
SkepticOne wrote: I would say that although the dust thing explains most orb phenomena the ones that are not explained by dust are probably not ghosts. imho.
Wicknight wrote: TBH I agree. There are huge range of photographic errors and mistakes that can explain even the most strange photographic effects without bringing anything paranormal into it. Most errors on photos are simple things like dust and smudge on the lens, to more exotic and rare events, such as light getting into the back of camera, reflections in the lens, to errors the development process. A few months ago I produced a photo that seem to have a strange light around the two people in the photo. It looked quite spooky, like something from Ghost or Cocoon. But the effect was caused by turning the main light on by accident in the dark room and exposing the photo to light while it was being developed. It looks very strange, and it would be nearly impossible to reproduce on purpose, but it still was not paranormal in nature.
It seems unlikely that any paranormal form of energy could effect the silver chemical composite on film, or the electromagnetic sensors of a CMOS chip without also being visable to the nake eye, since a photon is a photon.
While some films and digital chips are sensitive to light outside of the visible spectrum, this would not produce the same effects as seen in these "orbs"
psi wrote: Now, please, back to the discussions on orbs and orb-related issues.
psi wrote: Please elaborate.
Wicknight wrote: Hey don't bite my ass, I know the purpose of the Paranormal forum I don't think the OP is going to be offended by post since he has already had the discussion on if his photos are paranormal in nature.
Not if I am going to be banned for breaking the charter for doing so .... :v:
psi wrote: I agree, however, the discussion is getting sidetracked into an assumption that ALL orb cases are photography based errors. This is simply not the case.