If I go there I won't put the camera down. I would sleep with the thing next to me. There would be nothing that I would not record on film. And one thing that I have learned from some of the posts on this thread is the importance of close-ups...clear...sharp...close-ups. The cross on Apparition Hill would be photographed through a microscope lens. Are there such lenses?

Hmmm, microscopic lens? Well, from what I've seen so far, there seems to be quite a few members in this forum who are giving the impression that they know a tremendous a lot about photography as indicated by their aversions toward any photo that not in the National Geographic quality range. So I'm sure those people would be up on the latest and the greatest out there in camera equipment.

But not having the best camera equipment would never keep me from taking photo's or movies with whatever I have available. In fact, if something extraordinary is taken with a low quality camera or videocam, I would think that those photos would pass the 'fake radar' simply because most people know that any kind of photoshop alterations on such low quality highly pixelized images would show up automatically when analyzed. So a low quality photo in this sense lends credence as to the authenticity and integrity of the image itself once it's been analyzed in some way to find out if it's been altered in someway. High quality photo's are much easier to add things to or alter where the resulting image is much more convincing -- the person who's doing those alterations does not have work around and fuss with all of those large pixels as they would if the image was of much lower quality taken by a cheaper camera or videocam. This is something people have to consider when evaluating images where the photographer is claiming that it's showing something that's extraordinary and or paranormal.







[edit on 27-11-2006 by Palasheea]

Originally posted by Palasheea
But not having the best camera equipment would never keep me from taking photo's or movies with whatever I have available. In fact, if something extraordinary is taken with a low quality camera or videocam, I would think that those photos would pass the 'fake radar' simply because most people know that any kind of photoshop alterations on such low quality highly pixelized images would show up automatically when analyzed. So a low quality photo in this sense lends credence as to the authenticity and integrity of the image itself once it's been analyzed in some way to find out if it's been altered in someway. High quality photo's are much easier to add things to or alter where the resulting image is much more convincing -- the person who's doing those alterations does not have work with the same number of pixels as they would if the image was of much lower quality taken by a cheaper camera or videocam. This is something people have to consider when evaluating images where the photographer is claiming that it's showing something that's extraordinary and or paranormal.

[edit on 27-11-2006 by Palasheea]

Wow! It seems like there's no way to win. The lower quality photos are more credible because they can't be photoshop altered as easily as the finer grade photos BUT being of lower quality they wouldn't show details as clearly. The better detailed higher quality photos would be easier to manipulate and so could be less credible because of this vulnerability. Then how are we to convince anyone? I know, drag people to Medjugorje and make them experience the miraculous for themselves. Actually, I think the time is not too far away when we won't need to convince anyone because the miracles will have spread over all of the globe and will do the convincing. Medjugorje is just the beginning.

Gotta dash for now!

Originally posted by SkyWay

Originally posted by Palasheea
But not having the best camera equipment would never keep me from taking photo's or movies with whatever I have available. In fact, if something extraordinary is taken with a low quality camera or videocam, I would think that those photos would pass the 'fake radar' simply because most people know that any kind of photoshop alterations on such low quality highly pixelized images would show up automatically when analyzed. So a low quality photo in this sense lends credence as to the authenticity and integrity of the image itself once it's been analyzed in some way to find out if it's been altered in someway. High quality photo's are much easier to add things to or alter where the resulting image is much more convincing -- the person who's doing those alterations does not have work with the same number of pixels as they would if the image was of much lower quality taken by a cheaper camera or videocam. This is something people have to consider when evaluating images where the photographer is claiming that it's showing something that's extraordinary and or paranormal.

[edit on 27-11-2006 by Palasheea]

Wow! It seems like there's no way to win. The lower quality photos are more credible because they can't be photoshop altered as easily as the finer grade photos BUT being of lower quality they wouldn't show details as clearly. The better detailed higher quality photos would be easier to manipulate and so could be less credible because of this vulnerability. Then how are we to convince anyone? I know, drag people to Medjugorje and make them experience the miraculous for themselves. Actually, I think the time is not too far away when we won't need to convince anyone because the miracles will have spread over all of the globe and will do the convincing. Medjugorje is just the beginning.

Gotta dash for now!

Lol, I'm awful at explaining anything that's remotely technical but you did a great job at re-phrasing what I tried my best to explain. At any rate, when trying to convince others that what's in the photo is real and not fake, I think the lower quality image is easier to use as evidence simply because it's next to impossible to convincingly manipulate such images to appear differently than what it started out as. It's amazing how easy it is to analyze photographs these days to tell if things have been added to it or not -- but this is not necessarily true if the photograph started out as a high quality photo taken by high quality camera's -- that's when it's really hard to tell if it's real or not especially if the person making those changes is really talented at that.
Probably it would be best to take along one low quality cam and another high quality one and then try to take photo's with both cams when something extraordinary is occurring. Probably best to have 2 people taking photos where one person is taking a photo with the cheap cam the the other person is taking photo's using the high end cam. Lol..... I guess there's no way around it but one really does want to take photo's where one has a chance to convince those unbelievers that this or that happened. On the other hand, is that even important... lol, probably not.



[edit on 27-11-2006 by Palasheea]

Perhaps it would be best to take plenty of video. I am only a beginner in photography and video so I don't know how many of the visual tricks are achieved but I would think that it should be much more difficult to manipulate a lengthy video of anything than the image on a single photograph. I guess we need to concentrate on video rather than photography. However, another possible approach could be to take the lower resolution photos but at close enough range so that important details show up enough to make it obvious what is there. For example, those photos of the cross at Medjugorje that have been posted on this thread could have been much more compelling if the attachments on the cross had been photographed at a range of 2 - 5 feet instead of the apparent 30 - 40 feet distance at which they were taken. If this had been done it wouldn't make any difference if the photos were of a lower res or quality. The images would have been clear enough to determine if the "nodules" are electrical lighting fixtures. I honestly don't think anyone will ever find a light-switch on the side of the cross to photograph though.

FlyersFan has been there and pointed out that there is no electricity supplied to that location. But it has been quite a while since she was there so things may have changed. Still, there are people going there all the time and there has never been anyone who mentioned anything about electrical fixtures to the cross. And if it were rigged with special lighting fixtures those lights would probably be turned on at regular times every day as is common practice everywhere with neons signs and streetlights, but from what I understand the firey cross does not appear regularly, but only occasionally at different times of the day/night.

[edit on 28-11-2006 by SkyWay]

Originally posted by SkyWay
If I go there I won't put the camera down. I would sleep with the thing next to me.

Not to preach or anything ... but ...

If you went there it should be for spiritual reasons first. Any physical evidence you wished to collect should be far down the list of why you would want to go. It is my opinion that you won't see the supernatural without having your intent in the right place.

Advice - if you do go ... do NOT stay on Cross Mountain or Apparition Hill during the night. People sometimes like to do that for various reasons - some for penitence and some to try to experience a supernatural event. It was allowed back in 1991 but I don't know about now.

Back then people would think that it would be a good sacrifice to stay up all night in prayer in those places. However, at night after everyone else leaves, those places become spooky. Where ever there are holy things happening, the evil will come in when it can to try to disturb the peace. Many evil manifestations have happened against people who decided to 'camp out ' in those two places during the night.



[edit on 11/28/2006 by FlyersFan]

Originally posted by Palasheea
maybe I will check out those current pilgrim packages

Excellent! I hope you get to go. My husband and I went before we adopted - when we had a little extra money. Now it costs too much for us.

Usually the cost is a bit lower then other vacations because you stay with a family in Medjugorje. At least that's how it worked back in 1991. If you go and if you stay with a family, be sure to bring a little gift for them from America. It's the nice thing to do.

If you go be sure to pack everything you will need in a carry on. You will be flying on airlines that aren't as modern as those in the USA. 1/2 the people in our group had luggage lost when we went over. Also - pack a flashlight with extra batteries in the check through luggage and be prepared for cold showers in the homes. Don't forget an umbrella and a change of shoes for rocky mountain climbing.

Originally posted by FlyersFan

Originally posted by SkyWay
If I go there I won't put the camera down. I would sleep with the thing next to me.

Not to preach or anything ... but ...

If you went there it should be for spiritual reasons first. Any physical evidence you wished to collect should be far down the list of why you would want to go.

To be quite honest with you, if I witnessed a miracle, even if I had tons of photo and video equipment with me, I probably would be so transfixed on what was happening that I wouldn't get a single picture.

Advice - if you do go ... do NOT stay on Cross Mountain or Apparition Hill during the night. People sometimes like to do that for various reasons - some for penitence and some to try to experience a supernatural event. It was allowed back in 1991 but I don't know about now.

Back then people would think that it would be a good sacrifice to stay up all night in prayer in those places. However, at night after everyone else leaves, those places become spooky. Where ever there are holy things happening, the evil will come in when it can to try to disturb the peace. Many evil manifestations have happened against people who decided to 'camp out ' in those two places during the night.

I have heard about that. Seems hard to believe that anything evil would dare to show its face at a place so holy. But there have been quite a number of people who have reporte such things.

[edit on 28-11-2006 by SkyWay]

[edit on 28-11-2006 by SkyWay]

Originally posted by FlyersFan
Advice - if you do go ... do NOT stay on Cross Mountain or Apparition Hill during the night. People sometimes like to do that for various reasons - some for penitence and some to try to experience a supernatural event. It was allowed back in 1991 but I don't know about now.

Back then people would think that it would be a good sacrifice to stay up all night in prayer in those places. However, at night after everyone else leaves, those places become spooky. Where ever there are holy things happening, the evil will come in when it can to try to disturb the peace. Many evil manifestations have happened against people who decided to 'camp out ' in those two places during the night.
[edit on 11/28/2006 by FlyersFan]

Possibly the people sticking lights up on the cross get annoyed....

i've seen it before on home videos i don't seen how u can call solar phemonina as miracles

I have pictures of myself sitting on the mountain at Medugorje. They were the only photos of me where i actually looked quite beautiful like it was not me. The sun always flickered there. I did feel a sense of peace and not wanting to leave.In Slavonija where we stayed and where some houses didnt have electricity, we witnessed candle lights floating in the air. Unfortunately The spiritual side of it did'nt stay when we returned home.

Never bought into the Medjugorje "miracles."
Neither did Malachai Martin, which says a great deal.