| THE BRIDGES OF AVALON |
 |
| MISSION STATEMENT |
|
| THE FOUNDERS |
|
| PUBLISHED MATERIAL |
|
| PERSONAL WRITING |
|
| FIELD STUDIES |
|
| RESEARCH |
|
| RELATED SITES |
|
| RESEARCH LAB - SERVICES |
|
| CONTACT TAF |
|
| HOME PAGE |
Investigation of Photographic Orb Phenomena: Two Experiments N. Reiter, L.L. Schillig Orb Photography Experiment 1 On 24 November, 2000, we performed a statistical survey of digital photographs in order to determine if "Orb" images were found preferentially in a cemetery setting. One of the common claims of contemporary amateur "ghost-hunting" is that photographs taken in cemetery locations and reportedly haunted sites often show the image anomaly known as "orbs" or "globules". Both film and digital techniques have produced these images, and we ourselves have frequently encountered them in cemetery settings or on location at ghost investigation sites. The exact nature of this phenomenon has been discussed elsewhere, and is a topic we have covered in previous documents. Our position is that many orb images may have a likely mundane explanation in the form of retro-reflection of flash illumination from suspended small bodies in front of the camera lens, at a distance less than the minimum focus length. Candidates for orb image generators include raindrops, insects, suspended dust, and even large pollen. We have used all of these items to reproduce orb simulacra. However, we also acknowledge that some orb images seem to be of a higher strangeness, due to factors such as position, lighting, photographic context, or apparent density One criticism levied against those who take orb images at face value relates to location. If ghost hunters take pictures in cemeteries or purportedly haunted houses and get orb images, are orbs limited to these locations? Serious control comparison seems to be lacking. If orbs are related to ghosts, then there should exist a greater frequency of orb imagery in the aforementioned locations, as opposed to random outdoor locations where no reasonable basis exists for ghostly activity. The purpose of this experiment, then, is to test the location dependence of orb images, as captured by a commonly used digital camera. The Experiment: We performed the experiment between 2100 and 2140 hours, EST, near Gibsonburg and Helena, Ohio. The weather was cold, yet clear and quite dry. Local temperature was 32oF, and relative humidity was read at 43%. A few high hazy clouds partially obscured stars, however, the night sky was primarily clear. A light breeze (&;tl5mph) was out of the west. The experiment photographs were taken with a Sony Mavica FD85, set to a still photo resolution of 1024 x 768 pixels. Thus we are able to place 10 photographs onto a single 1.44M floppy disc. Flash was used for all photos. Four discs were used. Ten shots (one disc) were taken at locations on a side street on the south side of Gibsonburg, in a location known to have previously contained only tilled field, and before that, woodland. We then proceeded to a small country cemetery west of Helena, a few miles distant. The location, Metzgar Cemetery, had been a location previously found to produce not only consistent orb images, but also subjective feelings of dread and discomfort. Two discs worth of images were taken (20 shots), whilst meandering about the older portions of the cemetery. We were undisturbed during the operation, and the sensations elicited by the cemetery were certainly consistent! Finally, at several locations along Madison Twp. Rd. 80 and Co. Rd. 55, we took ten more control photos, in fields, front yards, and the Madison Township trash disposal center. For examination of the photos, we used the available Microsoft Photo-shop image software on our computer. For each photo examined, we set the gamma up to 1.98, to bring out low-level images on our monitor. We examine all 40 photos carefully, and make our comparisons. Results: The photos on the four discs were examined carefully. We counted orb images to the best of our ability on each photo found to contain them. If an orb image could be picked out from the background, and identified as not being a known physical feature, it was counted. In some photos, orbs were very thick, and we acknowledge that our count may be off by perhaps 10% on these. Essentially, orb images were seen to a high degree in all cases. The numerical breakdown is as follows: Disc A (Control - South side of Gibsonburg) Discussion: From these results it would appear as though we could make the following statements:
We acknowledge the large number of caveats associated with this experiment. The number of photos taken is admittedly small for good statistics to be applied. We plan on several further replications of this initial experiment, with both film and digital formats. One important aspect yet to be covered is the investigation of why digital cameras seem to be more prone to orb capture than film cameras. Other questions regarding orb images beg addressing. For example, on both cemetery discs, and one of the controls, we find individual shots where the orb images appear as diamond shapes instead of spheres. We also find several orbs of striking opacity, along with the dozens of the lighter more transparent sort. Clearly, far more experimentation is needed toward these ends and issues. Orb Photography Experiment 2 For this experiment, we repeated the essential four-disc protocol used for the previous experiment conducted on 24 November. Mavica camera settings were identical, and the locations used for the control and cemetery photos were the same. (Metzgar Cemetery, etc.) The weather conditions for this experiment were felt to be optimum for the objective at hand - to evaluate orb images in a deep winter setting. The prevailing conditions were very cold and dry. Local temperature was read at 5oF and RH was quite low, estimated at about 25%. The overhead sky was quite clear, and the air was nearly still (breeze too low to be observed in rising steam). A contiguous week old snow layer of 3 to 5 inches depth was present. In addition to the replication of the 1st experiment, an additional element was introduced to try to characterize any prevailing orb images. We had recently prepared a light absorbing card, or screen, for the purpose of determining lens-to-orb distance, and to try to determine if orbs were genuinely spherical objects at a distance or if they were out-of focus images of suspended light reflecting media that are actually quite close to the camera. Previous attempts at introduction of a physical distance gauge had failed, due to the enormous amount of glare from even dark objects held between 12 and 24 inches from the flash of the camera. Black felt, soot covered foil, and black paper screens have an inherent reflectivity that is high enough to appear pure white to the camera, from reflected flash illumination. It was only when we procured some fine grain black felt used for absorbing visible laser radiation that a material able to look fairly dark in close range flash light was found! Thus, we prepared an eight by six inch card made from a piece of laser absorber glued to construction paper. This card was then held out in front of the camera when photos were taken, so as to intrude about halfway into the photo from the left. The distance from camera to card was kept between 18 and 24 inches. The prediction was that if orbs were due to near-camera suspended media, then orb images should be seen against the backdrop of the dark card, thus giving conclusive proof of their nearby origin. This would also cast doubt on the validity of the popular impression of orbs being baseball or soccer ball sized objects at a further distance from the camera. In the majority of shots, both cemetery and control, the dark card was introduced. All shots were taken between 20:00 and 20:45 EST, on 28 December, 2000. We will also note that for viewing and counting of orb features, the gamma of all photos was set up to 1.98 to bring out faint images. However, we also viewed all photos where the dark card is present with both lowered and raised gamma, to look for evidence of orb images against the medium charcoal gray tone of the card. Results: Our prediction had been that in a pristine air environment, with a lower chance of suspended particulates such as dust, insects, and pollen, the number of orbs on all shots would be much lower. This was found to be not the case! A very high number of orb images were found, and some very surprising observations were made! Disc A (Control - South side of Gibsonburg) One rather difficult problem concerns an apparent diversity of "species" of orbs. In many shots, both control and cemetery, there is a thick scattering of very faint, featureless, and hazy circular orbs (diffused). These are typically not seen at a lower gamma setting. There are also a lesser number of very well defined or sharp (specular) orbs. A sub-population of this group seems to have something like a nucleus, or bright feature to the center. Then there are diamonds! One important feature of diamonds was noted, and our discs from 24 November were checked and found to conform as well: There is no mixing of diamonds and round orbs! In diamond shots, all apparent aero-forms are diamond shaped. In 34 out of 40 shots, we used the dark screen as a depth gauge. In all of these photos, gamma was adjusted to carefully search for signs of either round or diamond orb images against the gray of the card. Wrinkles in the felt, as well as recurring features such as bumps or dust or glue flecks were noted for position. In none of the 34 card shots were any discernible images seen contrasted against the card background. In the second photo from the 1st cemetery disc, we do, however, find a fascinating and potentially ground-breaking feature! In this shot, we observe at the lower right corner of the dark card a specular type orb half obscured, or occulted, by the dark card! This shot was clipped, blown up, and adjusted for brightness, contrast, gamma, saturation and sharpness. In no condition could any hint of the apparently occulted half be seen over the gray of the dark card. This photo is attached. The implications of this photo are far reaching, although should be interpreted cautiously. In essence, this photo seems to show that the specular orb lies at a distance beyond approximately 18 to 20 inches from the camera, out of the range that in the past we had determined could produce orb simulacra by reflection and de-focusing. Put another way, the orb would seem to have a real size - at least that of a medium sized marble. Discussion: Our second experiment would suggest the following:
The call for further experimentation is repeated here. Replications of the previous two experiments must be carried out again, in different weather conditions and seasons. The reasons for the discrimination of images into different species, especially "diamonds", must be determined. And now, most importantly perhaps, further definition of the distance and dimensions of orb images must be carried out. In fairness, we point out that no examples have yet come our way of orbs being occulted by more remote objects, such as gravestones, tree limbs, etc. Until such time, we therefore must tread very cautiously, and state that many orbs may still be due to near-camera reflections.
|
