I go to other boards and ponder the topics I find posted in metaphysical forums. Everyone ponders the ‘orb’ phenomena and how they feel it is captured as evidence on ‘images’ with film.
I have more than average experience dealing with orbs. I also worked with my own hobby of photography from the age of 18 to the age of 27. I had a camera bag full of equipment beyond novice range. My camera of choice was a Konica 35mm SLR Autoreflex T3. I had a wide range of lenses in my bag from telescopic range to regular special effects. I picked up my hobby from my Dad who had introduced me to his hobby as a child. So – I had a background that went beyond your simple ‘kodak’ instamatic that relied on a different type of replica in film production. I worked with various light angles and different apertures to create special effects.
For a short time, I worked in a photo lab which developed film for print. It was associated with the Eckerd Pharmacy and film from a wide range of locations nationwide were sent to our lab for processing. (Photo Services Article.) If I ran one certain machine – a part of my job was to scan 1000′s of prints as they passed before my trained eyes – looking for imperfections in the photo processing and developing. I was trained to look at 100′s of thousands of photographs that passed by me at a very fast pace. A part of my job was to look for (with a trained eye) imperfections that would come out like ‘orbs’ on the images. If I found a photograph with this sort of abnormality on it – we had to set it aside and send it back to developing to match the ‘negative’ and assurethat we hadn’t damaged the product in our handling. A special form had to be filled out for the customer to explain what had occurred to make the print appear to be abnormal. I was involved in a department that had to take a forensic approach to find out the cause and manner in which these ‘blotches’ appeared and give the customer a sound and logical explanation.
This was the job I was working prior to meeting Kurt and Andy in 1986. Up to that time – on the personal side of my life – as anyone can read by my writings – I was dealing with metaphysical entities, spirits, ADC’s and all sorts of apparitions on my own time.
From 1978 to 1981 – I had encounters that were witnessed and verified with over 100 eyewitnesses other than myself. During the phase from 1980 to 1981 – I introduced the ‘three musketeers’ to the concept of ‘orbs’ of light that would flash before their eyes and tell them,
“That is how they appear sometimes.”
Several of my friends had encounters with the ‘orbs of light’ which were actually the spirits of the friends of mine who had passed away. My camera was always in the closet. One of my friends suggested that I pull it out and take photographs. I told them,
“That is impossible. They are not physical. You are not seeing them with your physical eyes. You are seeing it with your inner heart which is attached to your soul. A camera doesn’t have a heart or a soul like humans do.”
Many times during that period when I was around others who caught sight of the ‘orbs of light’ I dealt with in mystical fashion – people would suggest using a camera lens to capture it for proof. I never bothered with it because I felt it was impossible. If it had been possible – I would have had the chance to capture 1000′s of posed images from the ‘orbs’ many times over. They (spirits) are the ones who remarked of the impossibility of this. The orb was of a very high frequency range. The ‘shadow’ image was (from what I was told) a slight possibility but there was a protocol to it. (Shadow image being a human type figure masked in a light reflection.) Even then, I was told it was a ‘slight of hand’ using light from this realm to reflect an image on film. It wouldn’t a direct image as much as what it is called. A ‘ghost image.’
Any time an SLR uses a flash – there is the chance it is going to reflect light off of tiny dust particulars that are always in the air we breath. It is like a raindrop that hits a windshield at night and reflects light in a distorted manner. It the light bounces off the dust partial and ‘splats’ back on the lens of the camera – it is going to cause a ‘blotch’ on the negative.
When I see people posting images on the net claiming they have photographic evidence – they never include the appropriate material to make a determination of the cause and effect. What sort of camera, what was the lens involved, the type of film in use, the type of flash involved – etc, etc, and etc. (In my job – they type of film would make a difference because not all film is produced the same. I preferred Konica or Fuji over Kodak because they color reproduction on Konica was based in a blue tone. Fuji was in a green tone. Kodak had a base in a yellow or orange tone. The type of setting and the color of the landscape of the photograph and how it was reproduce in print would depend on the type of film. Different film types would produce would produce different tones in color and even that could led to unexplained blotches.
When it comes to the ‘battleline’ between skeptics and believers – I feel people who get carried away and producing ‘false evidence’ for something – is actually hurting the cause of belief – instead of helping the cause. I know for a fact for myself (as well as the 100′s of eyewitness who saw what I saw) that there is such a thing as spiritual orbs that can and do manifest itself to the ‘human eye.’ But I feel it is a fallacy to believe that something ‘spiritual’ can be caught on a physical image and reproduced in a material manner.
Of course – this is just my opinion and it is based on my own years of experience dealing with the paranormal as well as a very down to earth material hobby of photography. Others are entitled to their own opinion base on their experience with it – or – their lack of experience with it.