A bit about ORBS

[lotsapockets]

The anomalies currently known as "Orbs" have always been around, especially with smaller format cameras such as the old 110's and disc cameras, admittedly these cameras often had fewer lens elements so were less prone. The reason for this is mainly down to the size of the objective lens and how much light is entering the lens. A larger objective lens means more light and less orbs, the darker the inside of the lens, the more reflective the surfaces become despite fancy anti reflective coatings. Internal Lens Reflection takes place increasing the focal properties of the lens thus producing nicely visible particles like a microscope. Because of refraction through the lens elements you may end up with several different sized projections of the same particle. To reduce the chances of "orbs" with a SLR camera open the aperture slightly though you will sacrifice some depth of field.

[Darkghost]

In most of the Ghost hunting or Paranormal Investiating shows on TV, when they see "Orbs" they are small round particals of light. can they only be viewed by Video or Photography?

I ask because when i was young, about 10 maybe 11. I used to go to school in Rathfarnham. It was a Primary School, called "The South City School Project" I was in the classroom one day, and i seen a very bright ball of light, maybe the size of a golf ball or little smaller than a tennis ball. move across the ceiling, not like a 2D reflection, i remember it as beening round, and did not move like a reflection either. I remember asking someone "Did you see that?" and he replied "Yeah what was that?" of course being around the age of 10, i didnt even know what an orb was. was only untill later in life i remembered what i seen.

not to make this tread any longer.. but i had asked a Friend of a friend who works in lets say "The Paranormal Department" about it, he said it was most likey a Lighting ball. I dont believe that for a second. what do you guys think?

[lotsapockets]

That's a tough one to answer Darkghost, as a description is subjective to the person who observed it. In my opinion it is more likely to have been a projection from a reflective surface, such as a watch glass, rather than ball lightning unless it had been a stormy day. I remember when I was 10, I looked at things in a slightly different way than I do now. quite often if there was something that could distract me from a boring lesson, imagination would also join in and suddenly the shadow from the windows could become the bars of a cell in which I was imprisoned or an escape ladder. Could it be that imagination also has something to do with the way that you remember the odd light? I'm not trying to say you didn't see what you remember, just to offer a possible alternative.

[Darkghost]

yeah i have wondered this myself, it was along time ago and imagination can reform this memory into something i want to remember rather than what it was. i appritiate your honest answer, thanks :) i guess we`ll never know :P

[Witchy]

I read somewhere recently that 35mm cameras are better than digital for photographing orbs. Why?? Bear with me - I'm not the most technical minded but I'll try to make it clear.

When a digital camera takes a pic the camera (approx 5mpix) will actually only capture 30% of what it's photographing. The camera's 'computer system' (for the want of the correct wording) then takes the information and builds the rest of the picture - depending on the amounts of dark / light areas captured.

The author thought that occasionally there might be one pin point of light and as the camera tries to build the picture it cannot match correctly that pin point as it doesn't corrulate with the other information it has gathered. Thus it creates a foggy 'orb' that disappears eventually as other information being built meets it.

I hope that makes sense. If someone can decipher my ramblings to make it clearer to others, then please do. :)

[lotsapockets]

There will always be people who will claim digital photography is substandard compared with film, but film is also not without problems due to variations in the emulsions used in the film manufacturing process and also in developing techniques. The main factor in the choice between the 2 is cost. Digital photography is more cost effective and with more modern SLR digital cameras, there is little difference in quality.

[cormac]

there is a less likely chance of capturing an orb on a non digital camera as digital cameras have been known to create the orb itself, due to placement of the lens and various other bits and bobs. therefore people have suggested that an orb captured on a 35mm is more likely to be 'real' than one captured on a digital. reality sas the 35mm has a good chance, as much as the digital has, of capturing some nice flash reflections that people will then mistakenly assume to be some form of dead person reappearing as an orb of light.

[lotsapockets]

As stated at the start of this thread, the main cause of an "orb" is the size of the objective lens, which in most digital cameras is quite small. In older digital cameras the compression ratio used to store the image could result in anomalies being formed, this is less of a problem now with larger memory cards available, so less compression needs to be used.