40 replies to this topic

[lone wolf2]

http://www.microscop...g/ccdintro.html

[jaguarsky]

I have seen BOLs with the naked eye. They look nothing like "orbs". I have caught many orbs by camera, all easily explainable as dust, bugs, camera artifacts, etc. I would love to catch a BOL on camera but the appearance of them is so rare I fear I never will.

I find the best rule of thumb is just to accept that all "orbs" are artifacts and move on. Unless of course you capture one while not using a flash.

[lone wolf2]

I would half to figure one of the best cameras to not capture dust particals. Would be a Niconus.  Its the underwater division of Nicon.    There better designed to eliminate particals because water holds more of them in suspension than air.

[Imaginarynumber1]

This topic should be renamed "Dust in photos".

[DBunker]

Orbs has been debunked... please hang up and try again.

http://en.wikipedia....#Example_images

[scowl]

Imaginarynumber1, on 20 December 2012 - 03:26 AM, said:

This topic should be renamed "Dust in photos".

Not all of them. I took shots of beautiful orbs last weekend just like I do every year around Christmas.

[Overdueleaf]

I have said this before.. unless there are defined parameters that distinguish what constitutes an "orb" and what is said to be dust/partciles/lense refraction just by simply looking at the picture........they are all "orbs"... or they are all"dust particles/something else"... you can not pick and choose which you want them to be based on a anecdotal story when they are indistinguishable by the naked eye

[Timonthy]

scowl, on 20 December 2012 - 11:37 PM, said:

Not all of them. I took shots of beautiful orbs last weekend just like I do every year around Christmas.

Other particles then. Why around Christmas? Lighting conditions optimum?

[Ghostsstory]

Personally I feel that 99% of Orb photos are natural occurring ie: dust, condensation, bugs at a distance, light reflection. Though in some instances, where all of the natural, easily explained "natural orbs" are ruled out...something un-explainable is actually happening. With that said though, no matter how much of what you captured you feel is proof, someone will always be there to point out how it's dust, condensation, reflection and just generally be skeptical. I say steer away from Orb photos. I just the same could be said with any photo, but I find it's most prevalent with Orb pictures.

[JesseCuster]

Timonthy, on 21 December 2012 - 03:21 AM, said:

Other particles then. Why around Christmas? Lighting conditions optimum?

I'm guessing either snow or Christmas lights.

[Chrlzs]

OP, talk to someone who knows forums, computers, imaging and get them to help..  While reduced images will help a little, the best way to offer your images for analysis is to post them somewhere like a photo hosting site, where they can be at full resolution and intact (which means they include information recorded when they were taken - 'exif').

Another way is to zip the images (select them, right click, Send to.. Compressed ZIP file or similar) and send them by email to someone who might offer to analyse them for you.

I'm happy to, but you should be aware that I am known here as a skeptic.....   I can PM you an email address if you want.

[JesseCuster]

ZIP is handy for sending a whole bunch of photos without having to attach multiple files to an email, but because JPEG is a highly optimized lossy compression algorithm, you really don't gain anything (a few % in my experience at most) in the sense of file compression by trying to zip JPEGs.

[acute]

I am a believer, and I know some people aren't, so there's no need to call me crazy, you can just think it.


Many orbs are flying insects, 'features' of the camera, or tricks of the light. Discount those, and the many borderline cases, and I find I am left with a hard core of genuine orbs. I like to think I can tell which is which.

What is less easily explained away by sceptics is the 'stage up' from an orb, which I have heard called a 'veil'. Instead of a symmetrical round blob, it is a loose glowing mesh, like the shape of a twisting hand, with a definite 3rd dimension to it. Much more interesting!

[JesseCuster]

acute alan, on 19 February 2013 - 10:06 AM, said:

I am a believer, and I know some people aren't, so there's no need to call me crazy, you can just think it.

Ok.

Quote

Many orbs are flying insects, 'features' of the camera, or tricks of the light. Discount those, and the many borderline cases, and I find I am left with a hard core of genuine orbs. I like to think I can tell which is which.

Examples of such "genuine" orbs and methodology of how you separate the "genuine" orbs from the others?

Quote

What is less easily explained away by sceptics is the 'stage up' from an orb, which I have heard called a 'veil'. Instead of a symmetrical round blob, it is a loose glowing mesh, like the shape of a twisting hand, with a definite 3rd dimension to it. Much more interesting!

Again, examples of what you are talking about?

[acute]

Archimedes, on 04 March 2013 - 03:33 AM, said:

Examples of such "genuine" orbs and methodology of how you separate the "genuine" orbs from the others?

Again, examples of what you are talking about?

Obviously, spotting genuine orbs is very subjective.

What is easier to show you is the 'veil'.
See 4:51 (bottom right of the screen) and 5:39.