Mist Anomalies:Ghosts or Not?
Posted 20 November 2003 - 02:13 PM
Posted 20 November 2003 - 08:18 PM
Posted 03 December 2003 - 09:04 PM
JimTheBrit raises a good point. Before a paranormal explanation should be considered, we should eliminate all other reasonable natural explanations. In response I ask kcrguns: Did any other pictures that were processed with the picture you posted reveal a similar "mist"? I assume that all the pictures were processed in the same manner. I would think that, if the "mist" is the result of photo processing, other pictures processed in the same manner from that roll would exhibit the same error. Photo processing labs used to stick a label on photos in which common errors, such as "thumb obstructing lens," occur. Did you develop these pictures yourself or rely upon a photo lab? Is the "mist" visible on the negative? If so and the mist is not visible on other negatives, you have eliminated the possibility of defective film.
Posted 04 December 2003 - 02:33 PM
Is the "mist" visible on the negative? If so and the mist is not visible on other negatives, you have eliminated the possibility of defective film.
Just a question, but what does it matter if the mist appears on other negatives? I think that would be BETTER. Assuming that the photos with the mist are all from the same location, and not from totally different places. (e.g.: one here, another in my livingroom at home.)
I have been in photo proscessing for a while, and I have never seen a mist anomaly caused by defective film. This phenomenon is usually caused by atmosperic conditions or cigarette smoke. The one that krcguns posted (although I have my doubts about the mist part of it, simply because it IS a mist) is obviously not smoke, and to my trained eye it is also not a film error. I don't know what the conditions were when he shot that, but I am taking his word for it that they were favorable.
Posted 04 December 2003 - 08:36 PM
Posted 04 December 2003 - 08:39 PM
Posted 04 December 2003 - 09:40 PM
Your van is DIRTY in those pics. LOL... I wouldn't be able to resist writing "wash me" in your back window when you weren't looking and blaming it on a ghost.[smiley=cwm4.gif] Immature? Yep. Funny? I think so.
Ok, sorry. On to more serious subjects.
If anyone is interested in seeing a false orb, there is one in all four of these pics. You may have to turn up the brightness on your monitor a little bit, but it's there. Look at the top of any one of the photos, in almost the dead center of the frame. It looks like there is something on the lens causing this. I know it's false because it looks exactly the same in all four frames, not to mention being in the same place in the pic despite the pic being taken in different locations.
One other thing to say before I go is that it looks like the mist is right in your face in the last photo! cool! Thanks for sharing!
Posted 06 December 2003 - 03:38 AM
I did see a few dust orbs in the pics too, the only "true" orb that I captured in these shots was in the third pic (which was the first posted of course). I just have to ask myself...why would only 4 pics in an entire roll taken at one location on the same night (within about 15-20 minutes) end up with this mist? The weather didn't change, etc. and the only thing I can come up with is paranormal. I am glad to see that you are warming up to the whole mist thing because I think that they are (not in all cases of course) a very real part of the paranormal. [smiley=cwm39.gif]
Posted 06 December 2003 - 05:40 AM
How do you know an anomalous mist from a normal one? Did you study large quantities of mist-pictures of any type systematically? Are you an expert in meteorology? And if so, what are the rules by which you distinguish normal from anomalous? If I put 200 pics of mists of all kinds in front of ten experts on paranormal mist anomalies, would they all pick out the same pictures as being of a supernatural nature? Has something like that ever been tried? If they would agree, I would find that a least a little bit more convincing than random postings of blurry pics, offered including their ´explanation´ - even though their agreement would still not prove these anomalies are ghosts. Neither does getting chills. I get chills under all kinds of conditions. I´m sure I would get a few walking around graveyards at night. Power of (self)suggestion has been known to induce far more spectacular symptoms than a mere chill.
Also, wouldn´t it be better to install a sensitive camcorder and record live footage instead of making flashpics under conditions that are totally unsuitable for good photography?
Posted 06 December 2003 - 06:41 PM
Posted 19 December 2003 - 12:48 PM
Posted 19 December 2003 - 07:33 PM
I can't tell you what that type of mist is, or any of the other kinds of mists that are in these pics because I've never been around when that happened. I also know almost nothing about that kind of thing. But that doesn't mean it's ghostly.
Posted 19 December 2003 - 10:17 PM
By the way there were a few clouds but it was a very dry day and no moisture was there.
Posted 20 December 2003 - 09:20 AM
I still would have to get some first hand experience I think, and I'd like to hear what skeptics with more experience in photography have to say, but that's certainly the most convincing pic of an orb that I've ever seen.
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users