orbs

crystalcross wrote: As I said, many of these exhibit classic dust features. I would say probably 80-85% of them do. And if there was a sudden plume of dust in front of the camera at the time the flash went off it would cause most of this.

But then if you look off near the far wall you'll see some really bright white ones that seem more like floating feathers. And some have the circle-in-circle string effect of a lens flare. Unique shot for sure. Is it paranormal in nature, I would probably have to tend towards no.

Hey there CC!
I agree with you. The extra brightness could also have been caused by the aperture set on the camera. If this is a digital camera [good chance], the brightness of the image, if it's set, say at F8; as opposed to F2.8 or F4 would change the intensity of the light.

I think we should rule on the side of caution and say there is nothing paranormal in the photo. I don't say that to offend anyone. I guess for me, regarding orbs; that ship has sailed. I'm not a big fan of orbs and when someone says "This is a spiritual photo", I say, "Who says so?" LOL. I do that with myself while at the same time knowing that if a spirit wants to be photographed, they will let you.

As I said, many of these exhibit classic dust features. I would say probably 80-85% of them do. And if there was a sudden plume of dust in front of the camera at the time the flash went off it would cause most of this.

But then if you look off near the far wall you'll see some really bright white ones that seem more like floating feathers. And some have the circle-in-circle string effect of a lens flare. Unique shot for sure. Is it paranormal in nature, I would probably have to tend towards no.

Same here. They might be orbs or they just might be dust particals but I can't be positive. There is only one way to find out take pics of the same spot.

Most likely not. We get caught up in WANTING orbs to appear. Almost everything we photograph is scrutinized for it's "orbiness." But it's a cruel game we play on ourselves - Im told they are far more infrequent than we imagine.

Ill go with that. Odds are best these are something else.

Well i don't believe these are orbs. Most often orbs can be explained by dust or numerous factors with camera light and so on.But with the amount of stuff in this picture i can't positively rule out the possibilty.

Well I have to say you managed to stump me. I have to ask some questions.

Was this a digit camera? I noticed the ITPC header said "FujiFilm" which makes me think this was a digitized copy from a standard photograph.

First off I don't think they're orbs, just because of the diversity of their location, dimension and properties. I don't think they're dust either, at least not all. Its possible some are dust. Some exhibit properties of lens flare, others exhibit properties of reflections from a mirrored ball or crystal, yet others exhibit the properties of dust. And some seem to be on the surface of the photograph itself.

That's why I'm wondering if perhaps this was a standard picture with dirt or degraded spots on it, that was scanned by a scanner.

Very strange image for certain. And apparently a complex combination of things.

Discuss photo: orbs