Digital Imaging vs. 35mm Photography
We recently received a substantial number of inquiries concerning the relative merits of the digital camera vs. those of the "standard" 35mm camera. In answer to those inquiries, make the following observations...
We feel that the "standard" 35mm camera is superior to the digital camera in most applications with regard to paranormal related photography. ( For the time being ). The principal reasons for this are:
The very best quality "pocket" 35mm camera is currently selling at retail for less than 1/2 the price of the "low end" digital of the same size. ( Update ) This is beginning to change, as you can now get a digital for as little as $40.00, with added features, for example; it can be used to take small 'movies' and as a web cam.
The 35mm camera has a far wider variety of function than the digital, due to the availability of specialized (such as infrared and ultra-high or ultra-low speed) films.
( Update ) This is still true, but maybe soon to change with the popularity of the digital. Many Ghost Hunter's use the digital when they notice high level reading's of an EMF Meter or other equipment, to see right away if anything may be there, or within the area.
Higher level of quality in enlargement. To put it plainly, with the proper film, a 35mm negative may be "blown" up to literally "wall size" without significant distortion. This is simply impossible with a digital image, as they will rapidly be reduced to a bmp.
Wider variety of shutter speed and aperture opening. A 35mm SLR camera is operator variable... This means that the photographer may alter the lens opening and shutter speed of the camera at will to compensate for lighting conditions. This is impossible with a digital camera. ( Update ) As time progresses, this is beginning to change as well.
Print is less subject to tampering or "doctoring". It is extremely difficult and time consuming to "doctor" a 35mm print effectively. Most common attempts at tampering are easily detectable, and quite obvious. Anyone with an over the counter copy of "Kodak Imaging" or "Photoshop Pro" can alter a digital image, almost at will.
Positive Prints may be compared to the negative for purposes of analysis. This is impossible with a digital image.
Digital images are far more susceptible to dust, water vapor, small insects and particles showing up as "orbs", mists or vortexes. This is due to the fact that the image is recorded as a bmp, and the area of light dispersion resulting from a reflected flash is exaggerated, while the actual outline of the object reflecting the flash is lost completely in the bmp pattern. ( Update ) The sensitivity of the digital hasn't changed, but has captured images because of this same sensitivity which a 35MM will not.
-Digital cameras have a more limited depth of field than a "standard" 35mm camera, and therefore have a far more limited target area.
-Digital imaging is more susceptible to distortion by movement at very high speed.
-It is impossible to use a digital camera for night time or low light photography without the use of a flash.
Now, we are not saying that you should not buy, or use a digital camera. As the state of the art in this technology increases, the digital camera will get better, but for the moment we strongly advise against the use of only digital's in paranormal work.
Orb Photography
What is an Orb?
Orbs have many names including globes, globules, balls of light, and hovering round balls. They appear in all ranges of brightness from bright, glowing to faded, and barely-visible. They are usually quite fast and follow an erratic pattern of flight. Positive orbs are believed to be the spirits of the dead by many. However, other theories suggest that they might be separate life forms or even nature spirits. The problem is that many orb photos are simply false positives, or developing/processing flaws.
What percentage of orb photos are false?
There has seemingly always been a controversy concerning orb photography, with regard to authenticity. ( Why many Web Site's won't accept or post orb pictures ). Although a lot of orb photos are believed to be authentic, there are still many showing up as a result of airborne particles (dust) at the time of the flash, airborne droplets of water, small insects, or simply flaws in the processing of the film. This happens in both indoor & outdoor shots. Because of this, it's making it really hard to disassociate the false positive orbs from the real ones. An example of airborne particles would be like opening a heavy curtain inside of a dark room to let in the light. Have you ever done that and seen all the dust in the beam of the light? Well dust can show up in pictures as orbs, especially when dust is close to the lens, and most especially with digital cameras. That's just one example, moisture (humidity), mold, & pollen are also contributors of false positive orb photos. It is also important to mention that in the case of "standard" film, it is not unheard of for the processor to improperly dry negatives or prints, leaving a flaw in either, or both, that will resemble an orb. Because of this, there is no real way to confirm authenticity with our present knowledge, therefore the consensus would have to be that most orb photos are false positives. It is possible that as many as fifty to ninety percent of orb photos are nothing more than the conditions at the time of the flash.
What to look for:
As mentioned above there is no "official" way to determine authenticity of an orb within a photo. Authenticity is determined by a combination of factors, most of all, by first eliminating any demonstrable errors, or flaws in photography or processing There are, however, a few key elements to keep in mind:
-A bright orb is more likely to be real than a faded one.
-Multiple orbs in a single photo are most likely dust motes.
-Orbs that are bright and show a vibrating effect within the photo are likely to be real.
-A slight trail is also something to look for in determining true orbs.
Proof:
To demonstrate this, take your digital camera (for fast results) outside and throw some dust out in from of the lens and presto, multiple orbs will appear in the picture! Note; the dust has to be within 4 inches of the lens to appear as orbs in the photo. You can also take a spray bottle to simulate humidity and spray directly out in from of the lens the result will once again be multiple orbs. Dust particles reflect light from the flash and appear as perfectly round balls of light in the photo.
Here is a great example of water droplet's as 'orbs,' taken with a digital.
Conclusions:
For best results orb photography should be done by using a 35 mm camera and not a digital. Although digital cameras are a useful tool in ghost photography, at the current state of the art, they simply cannot be entirely trusted when it comes to orbs. 35 mm cameras are FAR LESS LIKELY to create dust mote orbs on film which makes them the camera of choice.
*Note: Both types of camera's, ( 35MM & Digital ), have been useful tools in their different ways. Being that the digital IS more sensitive than a 35MM, we have gotten results on it that wouldn't show on a 35MM. Try them both out, and use what best suits you and your needs. If you can, have two people, ( or more ), with different cameras, ( all types you may have available, including both digital and 35MM ), taking the pictures of the same area and then comparing.
Orbs | Anomalies & Other Examples
You can view many pictures in our Galleries that show examples of optical illusions, bugs mistaken for orbs or streaks, fog, mist, water mistaken for orbs, sun spots or glare mistaken as other anomalies. We provide these pictures to use for comparison, and for viewers to see how easy something actually normal - can be mistaken for paranormal.
Here are some answers ( feedback ), to some questions presented to us about orbs and other spirit phenomenon, ( and anomalies ), with examples:
We have said it time and time again, when it comes to orbs, most Paranormal Investigators will shy away from them, or avoid them altogether.
With technology growing and more and more equipment coming out, the sensitivity of said equipment will bring out things never before captured, noticed or seen.
We don't use digital cameras, period. Digital's save the images in a Bitmap form and if you try to manipulate, ( enlarge ), the image gets pixilated and distorted. We prefer a regular camera that will provide negatives to compare, ( and are harder to hoax ), besides you can enlarge without any, or little, damage to the image.
We have used the 'throw away' cameras, ( yuck LOL ), to a more expensive 35 MM which we currently have and adore. In the last 3-4 years, we have captured TWO orbs in ALL pictures taken, which we believe were simply dust motes.
( Perfectly round and transparent ).
'True Orbs' are claimed to appear dense and bright on film, while 'False orbs' tending to be perfectly round and transparent, white or light blue in color.
See:
Here are shots of what many may claim as 'true orbs' or possible apparitions
Since the Digital camera, more and more 'orbs' are captured. The sensitivity of the camera helps it pick up even the faintest of objects within it's view. ( Why we don't agree with them on Paranormal Investigations - or at least not to be used on it's own ). We can understand people liking to see what may be there at the moment, and not having to pay to develop film, but we think the extra cost worth it to get actual pictures that are harder to hoax and or be tampered with, and a negative to back you up. ( Even Kodak will check it for you! ).
So, to say that you can capture Orbs with a regular camera as easily as with a Digital we tend to disagree.
As another example, see this picture here:
This is of a wild bird, sitting on the ground, in fog, playing in a small puddle of water. The picture was taken from *in* the house, while it was outside, and believe me, the window was dirty on the outside! I wasn't sure if I would actually get the bird - or the mud at the bottom of the window. In the end, as you can see, all I got was bird and surroundings - no glare, no reflection of myself, no mud - all done with a 35 MM.
The 'Lens Flare' mentioned by many is so true - especially when taking pictures during the day depending where the sun is. It can cause all sorts of 'dots' or 'anomalies' one may consider as true anomalies, which we have seen mentioned as 'Orbs' to UFOs!'
See examples here:
Simply sun or light glare.
Bugs will leave a 'streaking' look which many may confuse with Paranormal phenomenon too, and the all so famous 'eye glare' in which the eyes of a person, or animal, may look red, ( or of a different color to actual eye color ), and has even been described to us as 'demonic'. It's flash glare, no exorcisms needed! :O)
Other 'streaking' can be caused by the camera not having enough time to capture light, or movement while the picture was taken.
Camera Straps, even though useful at not letting you drop your camera, can also be quite a obstacle when taking pictures - Why we remove and simply don't use them - and are the source of many acclaimed 'vortexes'. ( Hair, clothing, ( string ), can cause said effect as well ).
BUT, we also take the time to ask questions to the person who have captured an 'anomaly' on film, especially, if others ( friends - family ), have gotten the same effect of an area or around a specific person, or through different cameras etc. to try and get to the root of it - than to simply write them back dismissing their anomaly as a simple camera strap first time.
Here is a picture taken, with no strap on the camera, and it was an overcast day - no rain | mist, etc. - and no reflection was from the water either: This was the only picture, of various pictures taken, which came out that way. No movement, just snapped a few pictures and out of three, one showed this anomaly.
And this one, isn't sunlight, as it was tested by a professional photographer who couldn't even explain what it may be:
Here is one we made sure all was run on it, and we could still find no answer as to what it could be - and left as possibly 'Paranormal'
We are not saying every picture presented here as examples are true Paranormal Phenomenon, simply giving the areas they were taken in, and conditions, maybe experiences at the time they were taken, may place them in the Paranormal category. Many pictures in our galleries offer polls and other ways to voice your opinions as to what you think they may be - if natural phenomenon or paranormal, and we value all feedback.
After many individuals, like 'Myth Busters' and others proved the sensitivity of the camera to pick up 'orbs' through dust and water, the 'orb' phenomenon has gotten a 'bad rap.' At the same time, it does help people to know and understand not everything that may look like an orb may be of the Paranormal. What we tend to look for when seeing orb pictures, is not only the orb itself, but the situation when the orb was captured. Drop in temperature, any paranormal activity present, etc.
'False Orbs' are claimed to 'float through an area', twinkle, be transparent, ( usually meaning dust or possible bug ), etc. while a 'true orb' may appear when asking a question - as through EVP, seem to have a 'destined course,' and appear denser and brighter on film or recording.
So in the end, because there is no definite scientific method, or completely sure method of defining a 'true orb' from a 'false orb' ( though there are many similar explanations as to what each one may be ), it would be wrong to actually say, "This is what it is and that's final." And with so many pictures taken, as you can see by some of the examples, defining what may be truly an undefined anomaly is a hard task. It can get easier with time, you tend to recognize similar anomalies, though some are just plain hard to explain.
For example, Orbs are claimed not able to be 'seen with the naked eye' - yet many, including ourselves, have seen them, and it various colors ranging from white, yellow, black and red.
Just like those who may call themselves 'experts' in the Paranormal field. - If there were 'experts' then there would be solid proof already, and a scientific way of proving and explaining the Paranormal - which would cease to be Paranormal once that happens!
So to better say, "I have experience" because a person:
- Has seen, studied and analyzed many pictures
- Had had or studied, ( analyzed ), various experiences
- Has done many investigations
Is a difference to 'expert'. They may have a keener eye at analyzing pictures, know the difference in that noise you may think is paranormal to actually be an animal in the attic, or your pet kitty playing at night, to anything else they have been working and dedicating themselves at, thus providing them with more knowledge in the field, cases and subjects at hand.
We are still learning as we go along, and always make that fact loud and clear. We can say, through personal experience, that we get better results, simply using a 35 MM. :O)
For more information also see:
