dust water or spirit energy you judge yes a ORB p

people call in investigators because something creeps them out about their space so if an investigator proves/debunks orbs, etc you raised their comfort zone and IMO did their job. If there is an entity, again IMHO, it is usually a personal experience hardly ever recorded on photo or voice recorded. An intelligent entity seems focused on certain people and will not respond on command by others

crystalcross wrote: Which I think all relates back to the fact that even if you've caught the most unbelievably fabulous event ever on a photograph, and it was real as real can be. If that photograph can be duplicated by other means, then its not a reliable means of documenting an event.

I think that really is what we're all basically saying. It's not a reflection of the validity or invalidity of the event itself, but rather the means of recording it.

When you get right down to it, the only person or persons who really have first hand of a paranormal event are those who were there when it happened. Where the real trick comes in, is in documenting that event in such a way that it minimizes the possibility of contamination. This in turn is compounded by the fact that most true paranormal events don't happen on queue. So its seldom a situation where you can say "Lights, Camera, Action!" and record a paranormal event. If only it were that easy at times.

Another key factor (and I think this is where a lot of people steer in the wrong direction) is that you want to do exactly that "DOCUMENT A PARANORMAL EVENT". So often I see photographs taken in hopes of spotting something paranormal which was not there at the time of the recording of the photograph. I personally think that's the wrong approach.

Actually Norman, I think what you're trying to do in some of your other photographs taken of you when you are contacting spirits, is amazing. I think you're basically on the right track with that and I'm totally fascinated by that line of exploration. You have a verifiable paranormal event taking place that you're merely trying to photograph in some way. And that is the perfect way to go about it. Then its just a matter of finding the optimal method for trying to record that event in a way that gets you the clearest definition.

But as for the practice of taking pictures, with a flash, and looking to see what appears. I personally can not get on board with that. Its basically fishing, and there are too many possibilities for false positives to make the real positives valuable.

I'm in the IT security field (among many other things). And I can relate this to that field in many ways. Especially to the aspect of "SPAM" detection and removal from E-Mail. There are many filters out there that attempt to identify spam but the balance of detecting valid E-Mails that just look like spam, to real spam that looks like valid E-Mails is just so difficult it renders that method of detection almost useless. I think the same happens here with Orb pictures.

Our efforts could be spent so much better by going down a path which would yield better positive evidence. And that evidence would in turn be accepted by more individuals.

The orb factor is making headlines here on G & H once again. I say you and I get together for a short workshop video to show what we're talking about.

norman glasser wrote: the fact of the matter was no I didn't take a temp. and yes it was a cheap digital camera go back 15yrs I didn't think it was cheap then. and I didn't create alog but I will tell you this we would go out there and we could take pictures from the road and not get even one Orb and as soon as I would call spirit to come out this is the pictures we would get. I have no reason to lie. What there was or is to gain I have already done that. I was sharing some of my experiences does rejection bother me use to actually it intrigues me. knowing the truth is more important to me. scientific research in the paranormal. most professionals think its a joke.I look at it as more of a spiritual enlightenment.and I have hundreds of letters from people thanking me for sharing this enlightenment. I suppose that would also be up for debate on the sincerity of the letters.that I don't think I will put out for debate.the house still stands if you are interested in it. Hunted houses are fun to explore but in the end most houses that are hunted the ghosts belong where they are and if they are demonic why would you want to try to remove them if they are imprisoned in a house ?

Norman, I'm not doubting what you've done. It seems you've made many people happy, or at least feel at peace, and that's commendable! With BHPI, we don't claim to be able to cleanse a location, we explicitly state that. We don't try to rid any area of any potential paranormal activity. Our aim is to educate our clients about what's going on.

Which I think all relates back to the fact that even if you've caught the most unbelievably fabulous event ever on a photograph, and it was real as real can be. If that photograph can be duplicated by other means, then its not a reliable means of documenting an event.

I think that really is what we're all basically saying. It's not a reflection of the validity or invalidity of the event itself, but rather the means of recording it.

When you get right down to it, the only person or persons who really have first hand of a paranormal event are those who were there when it happened. Where the real trick comes in, is in documenting that event in such a way that it minimizes the possibility of contamination. This in turn is compounded by the fact that most true paranormal events don't happen on queue. So its seldom a situation where you can say "Lights, Camera, Action!" and record a paranormal event. If only it were that easy at times.

Another key factor (and I think this is where a lot of people steer in the wrong direction) is that you want to do exactly that "DOCUMENT A PARANORMAL EVENT". So often I see photographs taken in hopes of spotting something paranormal which was not there at the time of the recording of the photograph. I personally think that's the wrong approach.

Actually Norman, I think what you're trying to do in some of your other photographs taken of you when you are contacting spirits, is amazing. I think you're basically on the right track with that and I'm totally fascinated by that line of exploration. You have a verifiable paranormal event taking place that you're merely trying to photograph in some way. And that is the perfect way to go about it. Then its just a matter of finding the optimal method for trying to record that event in a way that gets you the clearest definition.

But as for the practice of taking pictures, with a flash, and looking to see what appears. I personally can not get on board with that. Its basically fishing, and there are too many possibilities for false positives to make the real positives valuable.

I'm in the IT security field (among many other things). And I can relate this to that field in many ways. Especially to the aspect of "SPAM" detection and removal from E-Mail. There are many filters out there that attempt to identify spam but the balance of detecting valid E-Mails that just look like spam, to real spam that looks like valid E-Mails is just so difficult it renders that method of detection almost useless. I think the same happens here with Orb pictures.

Our efforts could be spent so much better by going down a path which would yield better positive evidence. And that evidence would in turn be accepted by more individuals.

norman glasser wrote: the fact of the matter was no I didn't take a temp. and yes it was a cheap digital camera go back 15yrs I didn't think it was cheap then. and I didn't create alog but I will tell you this we would go out there and we could take pictures from the road and not get even one Orb and as soon as I would call spirit to come out this is the pictures we would get. I have no reason to lie. What there was or is to gain I have already done that. I was sharing some of my experiences does rejection bother me use to actually it intrigues me. knowing the truth is more important to me. scientific research in the paranormal. most professionals think its a joke.I look at it as more of a spiritual enlightenment.and I have hundreds of letters from people thanking me for sharing this enlightenment. I suppose that would also be up for debate on the sincerity of the letters.that I don't think I will put out for debate.the house still stands if you are interested in it. Hunted houses are fun to explore but in the end most houses that are hunted the ghosts belong where they are and if they are demonic why would you want to try to remove them if they are imprisoned in a house ?

Norman:
I myself have never accused you of lying. I just state what I believe from a photography standpoint; not to mention the fact that I do have a little experience in this area. But in the end, it is opinion, although most of my comments on orbs can be backed up with facts IMHO. That being said, I have not rejected you, but my position on orbs remains the same for 99% of them. And this is why I encourage people to use something better than a cheap digital camera. You and I could debate until the end of the world [Dec. 21, lol], but in the end, it's still better to try and eliminate the possibilities of creating orbs. Orbs are almost never the evidence of anything spiritual, so the conditions for their creation should be eliminated. They aren't a presence that educates people on the presence of the paranormal; they only create opinion(s)with nothing [in most instances] to back them up.

People are educated based on visual evidence in photography, not feelings; which is why I approach the photography side of this field the way I do.

the fact of the matter was no I didn't take a temp. and yes it was a cheap digital camera go back 15yrs I didn't think it was cheap then. and I didn't create alog but I will tell you this we would go out there and we could take pictures from the road and not get even one Orb and as soon as I would call spirit to come out this is the pictures we would get. I have no reason to lie. What there was or is to gain I have already done that. I was sharing some of my experiences does rejection bother me use to actually it intrigues me. knowing the truth is more important to me. scientific research in the paranormal. most professionals think its a joke.I look at it as more of a spiritual enlightenment.and I have hundreds of letters from people thanking me for sharing this enlightenment. I suppose that would also be up for debate on the sincerity of the letters.that I don't think I will put out for debate.the house still stands if you are interested in it. Hunted houses are fun to explore but in the end most houses that are hunted the ghosts belong where they are and if they are demonic why would you want to try to remove them if they are imprisoned in a house ?

BHPI Josh wrote: To me it looks like dust or moisture.

I'm adding more to this because I feel like I should. Someone on here called me out on this and I want to clarify. Why do I think it's dust or moisture? Simply because I've seen a very similar effect created by non-paranormal events. Seriously people if us in BHPI can recreate something under normal circumstances, we can't call it paranormal. I know there's people who don't want to hear opinions that are different then theirs, but c'mon here, I'm not discrediting anyone. I blatantly stated this as an OPINION. I'm not saying it's a fact.

To be sure, we are entitled to our own opinions; but we are not entitled to our own facts. Having said that, as a photographer, I can say that I've seen orbs where most can be explained and I still maintain that 99% are explainable with 1% or less non explainable.

I still maintain that if we shoot a scene with OFF CAMERA FLASH, that will be a better set up as we should always try to take away the "orb factor". Why take away the "orb factor"? We don't need it for one; secondly, if there is something paranormal in the scene, it will manifest if it wants to as it doesn't need to come through the use of a cheap digital camera.

I've even noticed a difference [may be nothing] in my work camera that I use; a Canon P & S where I normally use F 2.8 aperture. I almost never get orbs in my shots. Methinks it may have something to do with a wider aperture, but I could be wrong. Also, I increase my ISO speed, but don't know if it's a factor or not.

To me it looks like dust or moisture.

I'm adding more to this because I feel like I should. Someone on here called me out on this and I want to clarify. Why do I think it's dust or moisture? Simply because I've seen a very similar effect created by non-paranormal events. Seriously people if us in BHPI can recreate something under normal circumstances, we can't call it paranormal. I know there's people who don't want to hear opinions that are different then theirs, but c'mon here, I'm not discrediting anyone. I blatantly stated this as an OPINION. I'm not saying it's a fact.

I have no ideal

kitty wrote: how old is the house? spirits remain in homes - live in new orleans and more often than not you live with spirits in your home - my apt is over 150 years old - imagine how many people lived here - experince residual hauntings on a daily basis and intelligent hauntings not as frequent - i am not afraid nor freaked out - it's all a part of our existence

NOLA is amazing, the activity is everywhere. Walking on the street you get feelings, either coming from the building or just people that past that enjoy walking among the tourists