Free Skins
© Fisana

Jump to content


Very Nice Orb Capture By My Friend

orb

  • Please log in to reply
15 replies to this topic

#1 Dman

Dman

    Ghoul

  • GS Member
  • Pip
  • 219 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Akron, Ohio

Posted 17 May 2016 - 07:49 PM

Take a look at 6:12 in this video. This has got to be the best orb I've seen from this place where he does his recordings. I've captured some on my camera but not this clear and smooth-roaming! What do you guys think? Orbs are all over the place in this video but this one is the best.Attached File  orb.jpg   49.95K   15 downloads


https://www.youtube....=12956:orb.jpg]

#2 VlawdeGStudy

VlawdeGStudy

    Board Manager

  • Root Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,547 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fair Oaks Ca
  • Interests:Music, games, movies, the paranormal

Posted 17 May 2016 - 08:23 PM

Gotta say, typical dust IMO
Posted Image

#3 Dman

Dman

    Ghoul

  • GS Member
  • Pip
  • 219 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Akron, Ohio

Posted 17 May 2016 - 10:38 PM

View PostVlawdeGStudy, on 17 May 2016 - 08:23 PM, said:

Gotta say, typical dust IMO
I'm done

#4 Woodsmann

Woodsmann

    Banshee

  • GS Member
  • Pip
  • 153 posts

Posted 18 May 2016 - 06:03 AM

IMO, both the shape and movement of the objects suggests they are not paranormal, quite likely dust.

One of the most famous paranormal movies is the Patterson-Gimlin Bigfoot sighting.

https://en.wikipedia...ro;"Gimlin_film

The film was not shot in the comfort of their home/garage or other hang-out.  It was by pure accident, they never set out to film a bigfoot or anything else paranormal.  The same goes for UFO's, ghosts and paranormal orbs.  Such paranormal entities are very rare.  If you want to take pictures of them you have to go where they are.  And that's where many people fall prey to the skeptics, they will buy the camera most suited to film such objects, travel to where they assume such entities exist, and never have any luck.

My point is that Bigfoot film was pure luck.  An accident.  The same goes with the most believable UFO pictures and other such entities.  People being at the right place at the right time by pure accident filming the critters with whatever camera happens to be in their hands.  That's why many paranormal pictures are of unacceptable quality to skeptics, because the best camera and the most suitable lighting was not used.

#5 Dman

Dman

    Ghoul

  • GS Member
  • Pip
  • 219 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Akron, Ohio

Posted 18 May 2016 - 08:09 AM

View PostVlawdeGStudy, on 17 May 2016 - 08:23 PM, said:

Gotta say, typical dust IMO
What about pulsating dust?

#6 Woodsmann

Woodsmann

    Banshee

  • GS Member
  • Pip
  • 153 posts

Posted 18 May 2016 - 08:37 AM

View PostDman, on 18 May 2016 - 08:09 AM, said:

What about pulsating dust?

Dust would not be paranormal, but an anomaly that pulsates that also fits the general description of an orb could be paranormal.

Of course in a still picture you would never know if it pulsates.  In a video I seriously doubt if anyone could detect pulsating.  However a video broken down frame by frame would show pulsating.  By pulsating I mean changing it's size and/or shape and going in and out of visibility.  IMO, this would make it probable paranormal, but the original footage as it came from the camera would have to be studied.  Then I'd venture the probability of it being found paranormal would be less than 1%.

Do you have such a video?  If so keep it in it's original unedited format.  Do not run it through any other program.  Keep the file exact as it came off the camera.  Software can be used to break it down into individual frames.  You cannot pass this on to anyone via Youtube or any other internet method as the original file is altered.

Edited by Woodsmann, 18 May 2016 - 08:39 AM.


#7 VlawdeGStudy

VlawdeGStudy

    Board Manager

  • Root Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,547 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fair Oaks Ca
  • Interests:Music, games, movies, the paranormal

Posted 18 May 2016 - 08:50 AM

Dust can pulsate..well, kind of. When i first began investigating with video at night with IR I was sure I was catching pulsating orbs. Learned through trial and error, that the pulsating effect was the IR light hitting the dust, as the dust moved the light would hit it at different angles and cause that flicker effect. I'm not saying every single orb is dust, but paranormal orbs are few and far between. They can be seen with the naked eye and emit their own light.  In your video you can see all the dust on an air current in an upwards motion
Posted Image

#8 EVP

EVP

    Earthbound Spirit

  • GS Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,132 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling

Posted 18 May 2016 - 10:30 AM

View PostWoodsmann, on 18 May 2016 - 06:03 AM, said:

That's why many paranormal pictures are of unacceptable quality to skeptics, because the best camera and the most suitable lighting was not used.

Although I agree with much you have conveyed, the majority of paranormal images are so horribly blurred, the by product is pareidolia. The invesitgator then lacks critical thinking by applying a paranormal label to the "explainable" phenomena simply by their overwhelming willingness to believe without even exhausting natural explanations first.

Bigfoot has attempted to be replicated in front of a camera but from what I understand, the gait and movement hasn't been imitated perfectly and some suggest it can't be replicated by human body mechanics.

On the other hand, orbs have been successfully replicated with dirt, pollen, dander, human skin time and time again. Investigators that believe orbs are paranormal do not have a thorough understanding how their equipment works and the artifact that can be produced naturally.

The fact remains, much of the images are captured with cellphones with sensors the size of pinheads. I agree that only a small number have adequate equipment to capture the phenomena but expect it to be scritinized with natural explanations first which widely lacks in the paranormal community. I personally don't use a cellphone as I am a photographer and have stepped up using the proper photographic equipment along with controls. I understand that using a screwdriver to take off a car wheel is inappropriate.

Final Note - I don't believe still cameras are the best venue for capturing paranormal activity. They are fine for documentation purposes but video is paramount. What's the likelihood of capturing phenomena that conceivably last less than a second with a still camera. Being pointed at the right spot at the right time would equate to the odds of winning a powerball. Sorry that wasn't a good comparison. Winning a powerball is more likely :)

Edited by EVP, 18 May 2016 - 11:06 AM.

Posted Image
"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always
so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts.:"
----Bertrand Russell----

#9 Woodsmann

Woodsmann

    Banshee

  • GS Member
  • Pip
  • 153 posts

Posted 18 May 2016 - 01:02 PM

View PostVlawdeGStudy, on 18 May 2016 - 08:50 AM, said:

" - - - - the pulsating effect was the IR light hitting the dust, as the dust moved the light would hit it at different angles and cause that flicker effect."

I find that comment very interesting.  What is the theory behind it with regards to how IR lighting works? and/or How could I replicate this flicker effect using an IR camera and dust?

I have several examples of dust type orbs taken with IR lighting, and they do not pulsate.  I also have numerous examples of what I believe are insect orbs, and they do not appear to pulsate.  Why would light reflecting off of dust create a pulsating effect and not on insects, or does IR lighting create a pulsating effect off of insects?

Or possibly is there a website that explains this?

Thanks

#10 VlawdeGStudy

VlawdeGStudy

    Board Manager

  • Root Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,547 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fair Oaks Ca
  • Interests:Music, games, movies, the paranormal

Posted 18 May 2016 - 01:05 PM

It's easy to replicate. Just have a video running with IR and stir up some dust. You'll see it kind of shimmer as it passes through the IR light
Posted Image

#11 Dman

Dman

    Ghoul

  • GS Member
  • Pip
  • 219 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Akron, Ohio

Posted 18 May 2016 - 01:16 PM

View PostWoodsmann, on 18 May 2016 - 08:37 AM, said:

Dust would not be paranormal, but an anomaly that pulsates that also fits the general description of an orb could be paranormal.

Of course in a still picture you would never know if it pulsates.  In a video I seriously doubt if anyone could detect pulsating.  However a video broken down frame by frame would show pulsating.  By pulsating I mean changing it's size and/or shape and going in and out of visibility.  IMO, this would make it probable paranormal, but the original footage as it came from the camera would have to be studied.  Then I'd venture the probability of it being found paranormal would be less than 1%.

Do you have such a video?  If so keep it in it's original unedited format.  Do not run it through any other program.  Keep the file exact as it came off the camera.  Software can be used to break it down into individual frames.  You cannot pass this on to anyone via Youtube or any other internet method as the original file is altered.
The video is unedited

#12 siguie

siguie

    Residual Haunting

  • GS Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 980 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 18 May 2016 - 01:56 PM

Yup dust and possibly bugs :yes:

You have a very dark video with a couple of bright light sources in particular the bright red light that can cause orb effects in addition to any IR from your camera BUT one thing that is always suspect are burning candles. Off to the right there appears to be a flickering candle and even a smokeless candle gives off enough soot to generate orbs under the right conditions

As for pulsating dust keep in mind that dust is not necessarily spherical so as the particles tumble through the air it's possible to have more and less reflective areas turning in such a way to create a pulsating effect.

In any event looks like dust BUT even if it wasn't there are too many natural possibilities to rule out.
- siguie -

#13 Woodsmann

Woodsmann

    Banshee

  • GS Member
  • Pip
  • 153 posts

Posted 18 May 2016 - 04:14 PM

View PostVlawdeGStudy, on 18 May 2016 - 01:05 PM, said:

It's easy to replicate. Just have a video running with IR and stir up some dust. You'll see it kind of shimmer as it passes through the IR light


View Postsiguie, on 18 May 2016 - 01:56 PM, said:

As for pulsating dust keep in mind that dust is not necessarily spherical so as the particles tumble through the air it's possible to have more and less reflective areas turning in such a way to create a pulsating effect.

The non-spherical concept is easy to understand.   Like I said before, I have examples of what I believe to be dust, and I have examples of what I know is dust.  Last September I did several experiments in a garage that was turned into a dark room.  Among the experiments was creating dust orbs.  Two sources, one type where a pillow was slapped, and another type where vacuum cleaner dust was sprinkled in front of the lens.  Many of them were motion blurred, but the ones that were not were perfectly round and maintained the same size.  Now with regards to size, some of the did get larger that were moving towards the lens, however this is natural as any object will appear larger the close it gets to the camera whether it be a person running towards the camera or a particle of dust moving with the currents towards the camera.

I do find this concept fascinating enough to want to do more experiments for I would really like to try to replicate this concept.

#14 KlaineyGStudy

KlaineyGStudy

    Disembodied Voice

  • Root Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,984 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling

Posted 19 May 2016 - 12:24 AM

I still love orbs thanks for sharing :yes:
Posted Image

Visit us here: Facebook or Twitter

#15 Jim@GhostStudy

Jim@GhostStudy

    Forum Owner

  • Root Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,257 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Sacramento
  • Interests:Enjoy good people and wholesome activities.

Posted 19 May 2016 - 12:46 AM

There's a lot of scientific type people on the forums and skilled photographers.
So whether you're right or wrong I don't think you'll win, Dman. Maybe it's time to switch to a topic that doesn't include orbs.  Posted Image  

But let me say, I have personally seen orbs with my eyes more than once and taken a picture of one as it was harassing my dog.
So I know for a fact that true orbs do exist.  ;)
.
Posted Image
Check out the GhostStudy.com "YouTube Channel!" Click here

#16 Woodsmann

Woodsmann

    Banshee

  • GS Member
  • Pip
  • 153 posts

Posted 19 May 2016 - 03:50 AM

I Googled pulsating orbs, tumbling orbs, and oscillating orbs.  All I could find was information on the believers side of paranormal, nothing on the skeptical side that gave a natural explanation such as IR lighting causing tumbling particles of dust to produce a pulsating image.

The most believable natural explanation for orbs is on the order of what Sony puts out

http://sony-eur-eu-e...rded-image-when

I find Sony's explanation very believable because I have probably a thousand or more such examples taken outdoors where I believe dust or insects are creating them and as mentioned earlier I set up experiments using dust and created orbs.

But regarding the pulsating orb theory, of tumbling dust causing pulsating, yes, this does make sense, but until I can replicate this, or someone shows me a video replicating it, or evidence such as what Sony puts out is available, I will pass on that theory.

View PostJim@GhostStudy, on 19 May 2016 - 12:46 AM, said:

I have personally seen orbs with my eyes more than once and taken a picture of one as it was harassing my dog.
So I know for a fact that true orbs do exist.  ;)
.

I have had similar experiences as what Jim said which places me on the believers side of the argument.

I also believe the popular theory that 99% of all orb images have a natural explanation.

Because of personal experiences, I believe that 1% is out there, which is why I research natural theories to see if I can prove them by duplicating the theories in experiments.

I have a very interesting "orb" photo that will be posted on this forum later this year that I'd love to hear natural explanations for.  But before I do that I must conclude my "What Is It" thread from 2014, where I am now 66% certain as to what that object is.  Later this summer more experimenting will be done, then in Sep or Oct the final results will be posted.





Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: orb

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users