| View previous topic | View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
YB
Moderator
Joined: 26 Nov 2006
Posts: 2167
Location: Pennsylvania, USA
|
 Posted: Fri Dec 19, 2008 11:24 pm Post subject: You decide... |
 |
|
I'm sure we have all taken pictures that were out of focus, we should know how the out of focus item resembles the in focus item. (following me so far?)
I was surfing Google for ghost pics and came across one that caught my eye, it was the dreaded ORB pic passing as spirit energy.
I know orbs are mostly out of focus dust and things and this one reminded me of something. So I did a google search, found a pic and I present both of them to you for your concideration.
You decide.. spirit energy or out of focus pollen in front of the camera lens...
  |
|
|
... |
|
 Back to top |
mrx3010
Joined: 18 Nov 2006
Posts: 579
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 20, 2008 1:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
| I kind of doubt the camera lens could have picked up any detail from a pollen grain or even have recorded it, it's just way to small. But wow the similarities are pretty amazing! |
|
|
... |
|
| Back to top |
andyw
Joined: 13 Nov 2008
Posts: 215
Location: Caterham, Surrey
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 20, 2008 10:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
I believe that 99% of orbs are nothing more than specs of dust and pollen floating about on air currents that are just far enough away from the lense to be seen. People say that they move in odd ways which i think is air currents moving about in different directions...
BUT
Some that have odd shapes and don't look right i think are real spirit energies. Like all this paranormal stuff, you have to sift through loads of crap to get to the real deal! |
|
|
... |
|
| Back to top |
Baruc
Joined: 07 Dec 2008
Posts: 24
Location: East Anglia
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 20, 2008 11:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
It is pollen as YB has stated.
Another clue to look for is that the 'orb' will usually have a green / brown tinge to it.
If it helps, any 'orb' with a pattern that resembles the surface of a human brain is pollen.
These are very common at certain times of the year for obvious reasons.
Kind Regards
Baruc. |
|
|
... |
|
| Back to top |
mrx3010
Joined: 18 Nov 2006
Posts: 579
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 20, 2008 4:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Ok I'll bite.
Although it may resemble pollen there is not enough proof IMO to speak in any absolutes on this matter. We do not know the camera model, location, light condition, nor most important here, the lens used. It really makes no difference though as the picture YB posted (left) is from an electron microscope and those are not standard issue in ghost hunting, nor are they mobile.
"Pollen observation with a microscope
Pollen grains are very small; therefore the use of a light or electron microscope is required to observe them. Here below examples are shown of various types of microscopical views: "
http://www.vcbio.science.ru.nl/en/virtuallessons/pollenmorphology/
Even out of focus there is no way IMO that this image or any "orb" image could be pollen grains due to the physical characteristics and limitations of current camera optics. This does not however rule out a natural cause. |
|
|
... |
|
| Back to top |
YB
Moderator
Joined: 26 Nov 2006
Posts: 2167
Location: Pennsylvania, USA
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 20, 2008 5:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Pollen comes in different sizes. I just posted this here to show that there is more "scientific" explanations for orbs than saying they are ghosts. |
|
|
... |
|
| Back to top |
Baruc
Joined: 07 Dec 2008
Posts: 24
Location: East Anglia
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 20, 2008 6:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I was going to eloborate on what I wrote earlier to explain that trees are the worse offenders and different trees are 'active' throughout the year and produce different effect, but I thought that it would be labouring the point a little.
Pollen do produce results such as this.
The whole digital camera experience is not just about optics. If it were we probably wouldn't have orbs in the first place.
Kind Regards
Baruc. |
|
|
... |
|
| Back to top |
mrx3010
Joined: 18 Nov 2006
Posts: 579
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 21, 2008 3:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
| I do not doubt for one minute that there is a "natural" non paranormal explanation for about 99.5% of all orb photos . It has everything to do with optics, it could be that the optic in most cameras today are flawed, it could be a minute scratch in a lens, it could be any number of things, but I just dont think pollen can be photographed with a non-microscopic lens. If standard cameras can take pictures of object that small, then I agree that these images would easily be explained away as pollen grains. |
|
|
... |
|
| Back to top |
Baruc
Joined: 07 Dec 2008
Posts: 24
Location: East Anglia
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 21, 2008 10:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
Then try it. I have.
'Orbs' as we refer to here are due to the design flaws in digital technology.
This was well known by the manufacturers before people started claiming (for some reason) that they were of paranormal origin.
Another irony is that they were 'claimed' by the UFO fraternity before the paranormal community got hold of them but, because the UFO guys are more technically minded, they soon recognised the 'orbs' for what they were.
For almost four years now I've been making the 'Baruc Challenge' on forums. To date, no one has risen to the occassion and I doubt that anyone ever will.
Kind Regards
Baruc. |
|
|
... |
|
| Back to top |
mrx3010
Joined: 18 Nov 2006
Posts: 579
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 22, 2008 4:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | 'Orbs' as we refer to here are due to the design flaws in digital technology. |
That is speculation based on personal bias as I see it.
You claim that "orbs" are products of digital cameras, but I have seen and taken pictures of orb with everything from 35mm SLR to old 110 film. I have even seen them on video. It's not as easy as we would like, to throw a blanket of simple explanation over an entire phenomena just because it may fit or we don't like it.
BTW I have tried to create fake orbs and the only instance of success I had was in a dusty room during dry wall installation and sanding. These "orbs" were dust and nothing more. I have tried wet environment as well with no success except during a rain storm with flash active. These fake instances of "orbs" help to illustrate what to look for in orb photos. Again I have no idea how the poor optics in a digital camera could capture an object smaller than 100 micro meters. The focal length of most cameras is well beyond several feet, it just cant be done as I see it.
I will say this, as far as the whole anti orb movement goes, the reason serious researchers avoid them is because of the biased attitudes from debunkers of the subject. Should we throw out every single orb photo? No we should not, should we look at them as evidence? No we should not, we should look at all available evidence objectively and unbiased as possible. If an orb was photographed in conjunction with other "evidence" it should not be thrown out out of fear of what peers may think.
We do not have anything more than a fuzzy image captured by a camera. We have no idea if this image was from a digital camera or not. We have no idea of where the picture was taken, what lens if any was used and what model of camera was used. In short there is far to much unknown about the conditions that lead to the photo in question to ever draw a conclusion about the nature of the image in question.
| Quote: | | For almost four years now I've been making the 'Baruc Challenge' on forums. To date, no one has risen to the occassion and I doubt that anyone ever will. |
Why would you do this? It would seem to achieve nothing but focus attention to your personal theory. This is not what this field needs, it needs unbiased review by researchers who can evaluate evidence first hand. I have researched this field for decades and my biggest problem has been agenda oriented researchers and authors who think they have the one true answer to all things paranormal. You are entitled to your beliefs as we all are, and if you have some technical data that can show how it is possible for common digital cameras to capture pollen grain please post a link for us to see.
I have posted this question to some tech friends of mine who are working on getting me some serious data to share here as well.
Until then thanks for the input and do take care :)
Ron |
|
|
... |
|
| Back to top |
FAFFY
Joined: 07 Dec 2008
Posts: 20
Location: England
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 22, 2008 2:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Pollen, without a doubt. Dont think its anything paranormal though. |
|
|
... |
|
| Back to top |
bitterbuck1
Moderator
Joined: 18 Nov 2006
Posts: 3963
Location: Arizona, USA
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 22, 2008 4:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
This photo reminds me of "Horton hears a Who".  |
|
|
... |
|
| Back to top |
Baruc
Joined: 07 Dec 2008
Posts: 24
Location: East Anglia
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 22, 2008 7:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hi Ron,
Many thanks for your considered reply. I’ll try and reply as best I can, but apologies if I overlook any of your points.
| Quote: |
'Orbs' as we refer to here are due to the design flaws in digital technology.
That is speculation based on personal bias as I see it. |
In all honesty, this is incorrect. Even before the great unwashed got excited about ‘orbs’ the camera manufacturers were aware of the problem.
In a nutshell, it’s prevailent with digital compact cameras, primarily caused by design where the flash is too close to the lens and a speck of dust (for the sake of argument) is caught between the lens and it’s focal point. The software struggles to interpret this ‘capture’ and produces the ‘obs’ that we see.
What I find interesting, looking back, was that the UFO fraternity were the first to claim ‘orbs’ as their own, but, presumably because such people were more technically minded they soon established the reason as to why the ‘orbs’ were being produced and quickly distanced themselves from the situation, leaving certain sections of the paranormal community free to claim them as examples of paranormal phenomena.
I realise that you go on to discuss several related issues from this, but in the interests in keeping this post as short as I can I shall not dwell on these points here.
| Quote: |
For almost four years now I've been making the 'Baruc Challenge' on forums. To date, no one has risen to the occassion and I doubt that anyone ever will.
Why would you do this? It would seem to achieve nothing but focus attention to your personal theory. |
As I said above, this is not my personal theory and my challenge is only to make people use their brains and think more rationally about the situation.
To summarise, I have no real beliefs indeed, if anything I lean towards the paranormal. However, equally, I am not an idiot.
Hope that this has provided some clarification.
Kind Regards
Baruc. |
|
|
... |
|
| Back to top |
mrx3010
Joined: 18 Nov 2006
Posts: 579
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 22, 2008 10:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I don't think anyone called anyone an "idiot" nor do I think it apropriate to think that someone is an idiot because of his or her beliefs. I have said it many times, I have no doubt that most orbs are in fact dust, but I also can find 0 physical evidence to support the claim that pollen can indeed be photographed by conventional cameras without specialized optics. In my opinion this would be a great test to experiment with. |
|
|
... |
|
| Back to top |
YB
Moderator
Joined: 26 Nov 2006
Posts: 2167
Location: Pennsylvania, USA
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 23, 2008 5:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
No one here is an idiot.. Except me on occasion 
I have an idea to prevent (or hope to prevent) environmental orbs from showing up on digital photography. I guess since I started this discussion I'm going to have to defend it with some hard facts as best I can.
I will keep you all posted  |
|
|
... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Worldofghosts 24 hour chat room
