It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The truth about Near-camera reflection "Orbs"

page: 1
5
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 20 2011 @ 03:02 AM
link   
I like to think I am open minded about most things paranormal , except when I see people writing endless threads about the subject of Orbs.

Orbs are nothing more than Near-camera reflections and are captured during low-light instances where the camera's flash is used , especially when compact or ultra-compact cameras are used . The short distance between the lens and the built-in flash decreases the angle of light reflection to the lens, directly illuminating the aspect of the particles facing the lens .

It is known that the CCD or CMOS sensors in digital cameras are more sensitive to infrared than human eyes. In fact, human eyes cannot see infrared lights but digital cameras can. CCD or CMOS sensors are the elements in digital cameras that are equivalent to film in traditional cameras.

In underwater conditions, particles such as sand or small sea life close to the lens, invisible to the diver, reflect light from the flash causing the orb artifact in the image. A strobe flash, which distances the flash from the lens, eliminates the artifacts. Same is true of low-light photography , only in these cases the reflected particles are usually dust , pollen or water droplets .

In conclusion, in order for an orb photo to be classified as potentially paranormal, it needs to meet the following criteria:

1) A film SLR camera with a lens hood is used
2) No flash is used
3) There are no circular patterns inside the orb
4) The "Orb" is partially obscured by a DISTANT object
5) No compact or ultra-compact camera was used

I have never seen a picture of a "orb" that was taken with a film camera and I defy anybody to show me one .

So come folks , lets lay this silly subject to rest , once and for all .




edit on 20-1-2011 by gandalphthegrey because: (no reason given)

edit on 20-1-2011 by gandalphthegrey because: (no reason given)

edit on 20-1-2011 by gandalphthegrey because: (no reason given)




posted on Jan, 20 2011 @ 04:11 AM
link   
reply to post by gandalphthegrey
 


I absolutely agree with you.

I always wondered what Orbs actually were until one day, I was doing touch ups in a bedroom which required sanding drywall in small areas and it just so happened I had the camera in the room with me...
You know, before and after pics.

Anyway, when I reviewed a few pics with my girlfriend, we noticed a few shots had Orbs in them.
We were both like, wtf because they seemed to be in the same location on different shots from different areas in the room.
So thats when I decided to take a look at the lens.

Well, there were a few dust particles on the lens and the fact that they were causing an out-of-focus image and the reflection of the flash from the walls was enough to put the ORB theory to rest for me.



posted on Jan, 20 2011 @ 04:18 AM
link   
reply to post by Bartibog
 



I get so pissed off with people devoting books , threads and TV shows about a subject that is clearly NOT paranormal .

I have set the criteria for a shot of an "orb" to be even remotely considered paranormal . Let's see if their are any takers . My guess is NO

Star for you , buddy

edit on 20-1-2011 by gandalphthegrey because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 20 2011 @ 08:37 AM
link   
I also agree with this very much. I may not have any experience with anything paranormal, but I have never understood how orbs are at all relevant to the topic. Then again, I've not actually read up about them, so I'll be interested to see what people who do believe in them say in defense of orbs being somehow related to the paranormal.



posted on Jan, 20 2011 @ 09:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by Agkelos
I also agree with this very much. I may not have any experience with anything paranormal, but I have never understood how orbs are at all relevant to the topic. Then again, I've not actually read up about them, so I'll be interested to see what people who do believe in them say in defense of orbs being somehow related to the paranormal.


I absolutely agree . Read up as much as u can and then ask yourself " Why has nobody ever spotted an orb with the naked eye " ?



posted on Jan, 20 2011 @ 09:35 AM
link   
Great breakdown of the technology involved.

However, I bet this thread will fall on deaf ears. I'm bookmarking the thread so I can easily link and reference it the next time I see an "OMG What's this Orb in my photos" thread, lol.



posted on Jan, 20 2011 @ 09:37 AM
link   
reply to post by gandalphthegrey
 


I suppose that is a decent point, but I'd hardly consider seeing something with the naked eye very good proof either, considering what tricks the mind can play. And the same goes for formless shadows and "faces" in smoke and all of those tricks of both light and the eyes.

As you seem to have, perhaps, read up on the subject yourself, perhaps you could also include the paranormal "reasoning" behind orbs? To compare, if nothing else.



posted on Jan, 20 2011 @ 09:42 AM
link   
reply to post by Agkelos
 


That is the point of the OP. There is nothing paranormal about orbs in digital photos. The OP clearly has defined what they are, why they are and the science behind it.



posted on Jan, 20 2011 @ 10:17 AM
link   
Yes, but I still think it's worth at least mentioning the alternative/opposing theories when you are trying to prove or simply state your own theories/facts, even if you don't feel those theories have any real credibility. I am also curious as to how anyone would think that orbs are paranormal, or what part of paranormal they are seen to relate to, regardless of whether this is fact or opinion.



posted on Jan, 20 2011 @ 10:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by Agkelos
Yes, but I still think it's worth at least mentioning the alternative/opposing theories when you are trying to prove or simply state your own theories/facts, even if you don't feel those theories have any real credibility. I am also curious as to how anyone would think that orbs are paranormal, or what part of paranormal they are seen to relate to, regardless of whether this is fact or opinion.


The point of the thread is to debunk "orbs" once and for all . Why would I want to even consider giving an opposing view.

Try a search using ATS' search option .



posted on Jan, 20 2011 @ 10:48 AM
link   
I do agree with what you've said op, and im glad you have posted cos i hate them programs on the tv that get excited when they go into an old dusty cellar, and im quite sure you are right about 99.9% of the stuff taken with Digital camera's but.....
Im sure there must be pics out there taken with film camera's without using the flash, maybe not but what would you make of them? and what about security camera's, my daughter used to have a pub and we could see them doing amazing manouvers (not just gliding) and this was day and night, seen them also on my own security cam outside the house but that's infra red so that would pick up the dust and moisture. Now i've never thought that orb's were "paranormal" as i would think that they are just dust/moisture/pollen/germs ect but once my mother said that an orb floated towards her in the hallway and she could clearly see the face of a friend on/in it, maybe that was a type of obe or a thought! or maybe she just thought she saw a face the way people can see faces in wood or fire or people claim to see things in pictures of mars.
Let's hope someone has a few old pictures that show orb's, or maybe not



posted on Jan, 20 2011 @ 10:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by indianajoe77
Great breakdown of the technology involved.

However, I bet this thread will fall on deaf ears. I'm bookmarking the thread so I can easily link and reference it the next time I see an "OMG What's this Orb in my photos" thread, lol.


Cheers Joe . I see nobody is comming forward to challenge my points ?



posted on Jan, 20 2011 @ 10:52 AM
link   
Thank you OP.



ATS is TRULY the last refuge for critical thinking and denial of ignorance... thank you posters.


I was starting to think I was going mad when I have to argue this each time a photo is presented or someone provides PROOF with orbs elsewhere and in person. Thank GOD for ATS.. he orbs with smiley faces were laughing at me and mocking me so much I was losing it...



posted on Jan, 20 2011 @ 11:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by Advantage
Thank you OP.



ATS is TRULY the last refuge for critical thinking and denial of ignorance... thank you posters.


I was starting to think I was going mad when I have to argue this each time a photo is presented or someone provides PROOF with orbs elsewhere and in person. Thank GOD for ATS.. he orbs with smiley faces were laughing at me and mocking me so much I was losing it...


I know exactly how you were feeling . I got to a point where I wanted to scream in disbelief at some of the absolute nonsense written on the subject



posted on Jan, 20 2011 @ 11:25 AM
link   
Thank you for the great explanation and quite pertinent information. Would a photo taken without flash, but with some other sufficient light source, generally be able to produce these orb-artifacts?



posted on Jan, 20 2011 @ 11:43 AM
link   
So many paranormal investigation teams have lost my support by citing orbs as evidence. It's absolute nonsense and I'm glad to see so many like-minded folks on this thread.



posted on Jan, 20 2011 @ 11:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by tetsuo
Thank you for the great explanation and quite pertinent information. Would a photo taken without flash, but with some other sufficient light source, generally be able to produce these orb-artifacts?


Good question and the answer is YES . You see it all depends on how close the light source is to the lens and the type of particle .



posted on Jan, 20 2011 @ 11:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by thewesticle
So many paranormal investigation teams have lost my support by citing orbs as evidence. It's absolute nonsense and I'm glad to see so many like-minded folks on this thread.


We have a paranormal investigation program on British TV called "Most Haunted" . Most of their evidence for the case of there being paranormal activity in a given area was a couple of photographs of "Orbs" . It was infuriating to watch .



posted on Jan, 20 2011 @ 12:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by gandalphthegrey

Originally posted by thewesticle
So many paranormal investigation teams have lost my support by citing orbs as evidence. It's absolute nonsense and I'm glad to see so many like-minded folks on this thread.


We have a paranormal investigation program on British TV called "Most Haunted" . Most of their evidence for the case of there being paranormal activity in a given area was a couple of photographs of "Orbs" . It was infuriating to watch .


I love most haunted.
David Acorah is a hoot.. we used to all pretend we were consulting Sam or if we screwed up, broke something, lost something, etc it was ALWAYS Sams fault.



posted on Jan, 20 2011 @ 12:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Advantage

Originally posted by gandalphthegrey

Originally posted by thewesticle
So many paranormal investigation teams have lost my support by citing orbs as evidence. It's absolute nonsense and I'm glad to see so many like-minded folks on this thread.


We have a paranormal investigation program on British TV called "Most Haunted" . Most of their evidence for the case of there being paranormal activity in a given area was a couple of photographs of "Orbs" . It was infuriating to watch .


I love most haunted.
David Acorah is a hoot.. we used to all pretend we were consulting Sam or if we screwed up, broke something, lost something, etc it was ALWAYS Sams fault.


And what did you think of his brother , Derek Acorah ?



new topics

top topics



 
5
<<   2 >>

log in

join