Hello,
I am wondering if anyone can tell me the difference between orbs and dust? Is there a distict way to tell? I took a bunch of photos to use in my house for sale websight and I had to photoshop a bunch of them out but there were too many to worry about. This makes me assume its dust and I need to hire a maid! Have a look at the site please

web page[/URL]

[ October 19, 2005, 06:03 PM: Message edited by: mendy ]

Mendy,

That is a beautiful home! I'm jealous!

I read something on Ghoststudy.com that describes a true orb as having no cell wall and/or shows vibration or movement and/or seems to emit a light of it's own. All the others the attribute to natural causes and there aren't too many of them in the photo. That's not saying they are right, but they have studied the effects of the elements on photos pretty extensively.

I would post the link for you, but I can't find where I read it.

Oh...I found the link. Here ya go: GhostStudy, The Truth About Orbs[/URL]

[ October 20, 2005, 09:38 AM: Message edited by: Sandy the Seeker ]

Hi Mendy,

I've explored various theories and explainations out there in my own research of orbs and here is some of what I have learned. Along with airborne particles (dust, pollen etc), moisture, bugs, lens flare and reflection can also cause explainable orbs. It has yet to proven that certain orbs are spirit energy however at the same time it has yet to proven that they are not. Most orbs that appear in pics are explainable and multiple orbs usually indicates dust or moisture however it doesn't mean that it's not possible a spirit orb is amid the dust orbs so look closely.

Here are some of the characteristics of dust orbs that I've read about followed by those of real orbs. They don't have to have all of these characteristics (I'm sure there are others not noted here) but they are things to look for.

Dust Orbs may have rings inside (ripples), some sort of nucleus, elongation near the edges, might be transparent (barely visible even with flash), it's flat looking, no depth, might have an odd shape. Dust that is really close to the lens may blur so details may not be as evident so it may be harder to discern. Sometimes the flash will brighten parts of a dust particle giving part of it a more brighented appearance.

Orbs that cannot be explained (possible spirit energy) appears to have it's own light source, may show change of movement (contrail), they have depth and dimension, if it's partially obscured by another object it's not dust.

Hope that helps a bit, perhaps some others have things to add or may differ in opinion. It was helpful to me to read a variety of explainations and theories along with looking at lots of pics (including false positives). Another thing that may help is try creating dust and moisture orbs yourself to see how your camera shows them and keep them handy to compare all your pics to. =)

What a beautiful home, I'll bet it's going to be hard to part with it. =) Not sure if I noted all the orbs as to be honest I was busy admiring your home at the same time. lol From what I can tell it appears to me that these are likely dust orbs. Cat =)

short and simple

for me anything that can even be remotely considered a possible PN orb pic it needs to

1. emit its own light (if you can see through it its nothing)

2. show DEFINED movement (like a comet tail)

3. and be backed up by another piece of equipment.


anything else is just dust, moisture, pollen, or bugs and i dont really think its nessesary to go into the differences between those. (because basically on film theres not much if any difference.)

Hi Damien, thanks for your input with this. =) I know you have spent a lot of time looking at pics so I understand why you feel it's not necessary to go into the differences between the explainable orbs. Please keep in mind though ppl who are new to looking at pics may not find it as easy to discern between the explainable ones and those which may be true orbs. For example I've seen orbs that seem to be emitting their own light which I've come to learn is merely dust and it's the flash reflecting off it that gives that impression. I've also seen orb pics that have characteristics of a ture orb with the exception of a contrail (some had slight vibration and others were captured at the same time an EVP was). Does the missing contrail mean this is no longer a true orb, perhaps not? Rain can appear solid white, look like it's emitting it's own light (due to how bright it appears) and have a contrail which can easily be mistaken for a true orb if you are unfamiliar with how this looks. I have a cool pic of single bright orb that is shooting upwards (I was taking a pic of a dble rainbow), had I not known that rain can appear this way I may have concluded this must be a true orb because of the way it appears (plus it wasn't raining at the time). This is why I opted to provide Mendy with additional information that I found helpful.

I'm curious on your point 3 - in viewing some of your earlier comments on how you determined what is a true orb this was not one of the stipulations so I'm guessing this is new? Backed up by other equipment - can you share what you are referring to please? It would be helpful to understand what you mean by this. Thanks, Cat =)

its nothing new. if you have an emf meter that is going off, or you record a significant temperature drop, etc... and you get a pic of an orb it increases the odds that it is something paranormal or if you witness something ex. visually or if you feal something touch you etc... it will increase the odds. and i dont remember saying in my earlier comments that a pic was definately paranormal just that the pics in question looked like PN orbs. also i never take pictures outside in the rain or just after it rains because there is still moisture in the air. =)

Thanks for the reply Damien. =) Nope nothing new, I guessed that's what you meant regarding equipment, but thought I'd ask just to be sure. I wasn't certain on the other points though but good to see you noted being touched, seeing something visually etc as I've also felt those to be more notable than an equipment read. Simply because an equipment read like say an emf spike is still subjective as it doesn't necessarily prove an energy is present. Temp changes and emf spikes can both be attributed to common causes although certain temp drops in paticular indoors (without any explanation found) certainly suggest something is there, perhaps more so than a spike. IMO anyway.

I research a lot, as I'm always interested in reading different theories, opinions and views that others have with respect to various anomalies and investigating techniques. It seems many feel if an anomaly of anykind is captured if something else was noted at the same time it increases the probabilty the anomaly was pn related. Same with certain evp's. Though some will not rule out a pic as being possibly pn just because something else wasn't noted at the time (nor would I). I think discounting just on that premise is premature considering we don't even understand spirit/ghost energy yet. Not saying you do btw.

For example: If you captured two orbs at different times with identical characteristics and one was captured while say a significant temp drop or emf spike was noted and the other was captured without anything else noted it still doesn't change the fact the second orb demonstrates characteristics consistent with orbs believed to be possibly pn related.

Oh I wasn't referring to you stating a pic was definately paranormal, was referring to your comments on the difference between dust/moisture orbs and what are considered (true) orbs or as you say pn related orbs. So it's all good. I agree completely pics should never be taken in the rain or just after it rained (same for when it's snowing) and high humidity levels should also be noted even if no rain is in the air with outdoor shots. =)

The standards that Steve errr damien mentioned for orbs are something i came up with awhile ago to help eliminate the majority of questionable orb photos taken during our investigations. controversy will always follow orbs, there are simply too many non-paranormal reasons for them to appear in photos. probably the best thing to keep in mind when looking at a photo of an orb (or anything else for that matter) is the very definition of the word "Paranormal" which is "above the normal"... if there is any possible rational explanation for something then it can't be ruled paranormal. =)

Rick

[ January 05, 2006, 03:56 AM: Message edited by: berksghosthunter ]