|
|
Post by mesmo on Oct 14, 2006 0:15:40 GMT
 The believers in all things paranormal must have thought their day had arrived with the introduction of digital photography! To those still not sure, please read slowly - 'Orbs' , 'Rods' and such like are the effects on the digital medium (no pun intended) when a small bright light source is captured on it a certain angle! IMO Orbs are dust and Rods are insects. E.g. I once took two photos of my Children in a darkened hallway of an old castle. One with flash, the other without. Guess what, the one with flash had lots of 'orbs' in it and the other one didn'nt. If Orbs are the etherial (hope that's the right word) beings that we are told by the believers, why do they need a light source to reflect to be seen? I.e. they would need to be solid matter. Think about it. Anybody out there with an 'Orb/Rod' picture taken on good 'ol 35mm in normal daylight?
|
|
|
|
Post by claire on Oct 14, 2006 7:28:12 GMT
ive got a "orb" pic that some deluded soul gave me, its refracted light but people were convinced. keep meaning to put it in the fakes r us section, will get round to it eventually  |
|
|
|
Post by Mr. Jon Donnis on Oct 14, 2006 9:18:30 GMT
Rods are great
|
|
|
|
Post by shazzz on Oct 14, 2006 9:37:24 GMT
but Orbs dont just appear on digital though.
We have pics took on a 35mm cam and thats not digital
Infaact it works in the opposite way, as them "orbs" that appear on digital cameras are in fact a pain in the arse to investigators... Especially when your looking for othert things and the pic is full of them dam orbs. Which are normally mist, dust, damp in the air.
|
|
|
|
Post by mamagpi on Oct 14, 2006 9:41:50 GMT
thats right shazz, digitals can be too flippin sensitive, we have an investigation to night and i am not taking my digital, for a change i am just going to take a cheap disposable 35mm camera. I am also thinking of going back to using 35mm, ok the down side is you have to wait for them being developed and if you havent got a scanner it can be a pain, but it will be interesting to see what results we get.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mr. Jon Donnis on Oct 14, 2006 10:00:31 GMT
I think it is very sad when anyone gets excited about getting an orb on a photo.
I know that there have been a few pics of Shazz where two giant orbs have appeared
|
|
|
|
Post by mamagpi on Oct 14, 2006 11:09:23 GMT
LOl@Jon.....
it isnt sad when ppl get excited over orb pictures Jon, especially if it s their first one or they get something on their first investigation, we all probably started out like that at one stage, then after a while you do tend to say " oh another orb woopppeee"
trouble is the digitals pick up everything and thats why i am going back to 35mm, who knows i might even get my first apparition, chance would be a fine thing ...LOL
|
|
|
|
Post by Mr. Jon Donnis on Oct 14, 2006 11:38:05 GMT
If you want to be a professional you need to use a camera with no built in flash, the flash must be a seperate device, held seperately
|
|
|
|
Post by mamagpi on Oct 14, 2006 11:56:48 GMT
I am thinking about that one too Jon, but it is a case of expense as well these cameras arent cheap or maybe the type you can get where the flash unit is seperate but can be attatched to the camera.
|
|
|
|
Post by quackersgpi on Oct 14, 2006 12:56:29 GMT
Digital cameras are the curse o the paranormal investigator. mesmo The believers in all things paranormal must have thought their day had arrived with the introduction of digital photography! Only those who want everything they capture to be paranormal. For those of us trying to sort the wheat from the Chaffe it has made it a nightmare. I still think there is a place for cameras, we have had some interesting pictures that have not been orbs, rods or anything else..we have proven what orbs can be, no-one now can argue that dust etc isn't the cause...but we shouldn't rule out cameras completely. Moving back from the technology however is a posisitve step IMO. One of the first rules of investigating supposed paranormal activity is to make sure we are ruling out logical explanation..by taking photographs with digital cameras we are causing our own problems because we already know the logical explanation for what we get in the way of orbs..but, there might be other things that we cannot explain. I always say when looking at photographs taken in this way.."look away from the orb, don't look at the orb, look around the orb". |
|
|
|
Post by tomm on Nov 2, 2006 0:38:05 GMT
Personally I believe most orbs are just spiders that spin a length of silk which they use to get airborne with, much like a parachute. That's how they manage to spin a web covering a large gap - they just use the silk strand to float across from one side to the other using a draft. In fact, some spiders can be carried for miles doing this, like the Orb spider does. Sometimes on Most Haunted, you can actually see the spiders leg's in the orb.
|
|
imapotato
Sperm
Victim of government created killer nano-robot infection
Posts: 58
|
Post by imapotato on Nov 6, 2006 7:54:29 GMT
I find it amazing that 100 years ago they got full bodied apparitions, but now that you can sniff those out as fakes...voila....ORBS
Pull the other one then
|
|
|
|
Post by diggergig on Nov 26, 2006 12:52:03 GMT
The apparitions will return in ghost programmes soon - they have run their course as they are now...wait for CGI-enhanced MH and carefuly constructed stills as part of their factual evidence.
Note: Paranormal Magazine in the UK has a great selection of orbs on their photo pages each month. When I say *great* I say it with toungue in cheek...
|
|
