Post by Darren on Aug 12, 2010 13:30:57 GMT 10
There are viable reports of "orbs" being visible to the naked eye.
The generally accepted term of an "orb" is taken to mean the circles of light that ARE NOT observed with the naked eye but appear in photographs. The bulk of this area of the forum concerns those photographic orbs - almost all of which can be attributed to natural causes. However seeing "orbs" with the naked eye is different and of much greater interest.
The term "ghost lights" is often used to refer to this phenomenon. While ghost lights can also be photographed one has to be sure that the image on the photograph still isn't coincidental particulate matter, again the best way to ensure this is not to use a flash. If indeed the ghost light is a ball of energy giving off light which enables it to be seen visually then there would be enough light to allow it to be recorded WITHOUT using a flash - it would also be a more credible form of evidence.
If you look at most orb photographs the "orbs" appear much fainter than they should if they were actually emitting light. Any actual light source will usually overwhelm the camera and show it as a point of light against a darker background with little detail visible. Try it - take a few photographs of lights, torches, candles and such - you'll begin to see how the camera reacts to sources of light within its focal range, rather than out of focus particulates reflecting the flash.
Ghost lights therefore are generally a different phenomenon than what appears in most orb photographs. They have been reported throughout history and in many cultures, other names include "will-o'-the-wisp, corpse candle, jack-o'-lantern, friar's lantern, hinkypunk, wisp, earth light, spook light and min-min light.
More information on ghost lights, including possible natural causes can be found in the links below:
inamidst.com/lights/earth
www.physorg.com/news192952150.html
www.ghosts.org/ghostlights/ghostlights.html
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marfa_lights
The generally accepted term of an "orb" is taken to mean the circles of light that ARE NOT observed with the naked eye but appear in photographs. The bulk of this area of the forum concerns those photographic orbs - almost all of which can be attributed to natural causes. However seeing "orbs" with the naked eye is different and of much greater interest.
The term "ghost lights" is often used to refer to this phenomenon. While ghost lights can also be photographed one has to be sure that the image on the photograph still isn't coincidental particulate matter, again the best way to ensure this is not to use a flash. If indeed the ghost light is a ball of energy giving off light which enables it to be seen visually then there would be enough light to allow it to be recorded WITHOUT using a flash - it would also be a more credible form of evidence.
If you look at most orb photographs the "orbs" appear much fainter than they should if they were actually emitting light. Any actual light source will usually overwhelm the camera and show it as a point of light against a darker background with little detail visible. Try it - take a few photographs of lights, torches, candles and such - you'll begin to see how the camera reacts to sources of light within its focal range, rather than out of focus particulates reflecting the flash.
Ghost lights therefore are generally a different phenomenon than what appears in most orb photographs. They have been reported throughout history and in many cultures, other names include "will-o'-the-wisp, corpse candle, jack-o'-lantern, friar's lantern, hinkypunk, wisp, earth light, spook light and min-min light.
More information on ghost lights, including possible natural causes can be found in the links below:
inamidst.com/lights/earth
www.physorg.com/news192952150.html
www.ghosts.org/ghostlights/ghostlights.html
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marfa_lights