ok lets see how clued you are. If it is dust then why are there not more??? When dust is photographed, the likelyhood of only having one dot come out is very very very very rare. It was taken on a warm night, not too hot, just nice as I watch my weather as I take alot of photos. Don't think its smoke, I think you need to think before posting reply's.
OK Lianna and zig864; I've now spent 13 years researching so-called 'Orb' photos, could you please let us know of your expertise? So called 'orbs' are nothing more than particulates (dust, smoke and moisture etc) being caught by the camera flash, they are 'captured' more frequently with digital because the CCD is more sensitive to light than film emulsion. Way back in 1993-1996 a group of us tried to capture such orb images with the camera flash disabled; curiously enough not one 'orb' appeared...
Firstly, I don't like orbs on digital because I feel that htey are too close in similarity to dust orbs etc. This however has been taken by a film camera and I have taken photos of dust pollen etc before with a film camera and nothing like this ever came from it. I know that for ppl like yourself who have been researching this sort of stuff for a while after a while of all the research, you will always put down orbs to dust etc the controversy of it all gets too much after a while so, its dust. easy way ...
Just thought I would share a qutoe with you from the website if Dave and Sharon... "dust orbs are transparent or the texture is broken up" I have been a regular to Dave and Sharons site and have read much of what they do etc. For those of you who know the whos who of paranormal investigations, then you will know who I am talking about. I have found them to be quite credited (if thats the right word) in what they do etc.
take all your photos from now on with No flash and see how many of these you capture. as for it being transparent, its due to the dust being at a distance from the lens which casts it to be out of the depth of focus, here your camera has focused on the fence, and due to it being dark i would say your camera chose a wideopen aperture (this creates the smallest depth of fous, look up more about it for better info) so its a small partical being hit by a very intense flash from what i can tell looking at how...
... well lit the fence is from a distance, so the intense flash bounces off this small airbourn item (small bug, pollen, moisture, dust, any crap) your film picks this up, and it burns into the film. You seem to be a typical stubborn believer and as this type of photo is the only type of evidence around i doubt you will take what i just said into account.
Not a member yet ? Click here to join - registration is free and only takes a moment!