Hollow Hill » Moisture

Sprinklers and false ‘ghost orbs’

Fiona Broome — Mon, 06 Nov 2006 17:50:46 +0000

Fake ghost orbs and researcher error can be problems for all ghost hunters. We regularly test sources of false orbs, to see if we can learn anything new from them. The photo at left shows how a lawn sprinkler looks from a distance of about three feet, with a flash camera. For our experiments, we used a FujiFilm FinePix A345, which rates highly for low-light photography.

Nobody is likely to think that those dots of light are ghost orbs.

Out of about 20 photos taken around the sprinklers, only one produced ghostlike orbs. That picture is shown at right.

The orbs could be from the water. They could also be lens flares from the lamp. Or, the orbs may be a mix of both… or something else altogether.

(We recently heard a rumor that these condos were built over an old Indian burial ground. It’s probably a joke.)

In general, these lawn sprinklers produce fine, regular-sized water droplets that are easy to distinguish from ghost orbs.

With the exception of the orbs in our second photo, above, the water did not produce ‘orbs’ at all. We see only a fine pattern of small, irregular water droplets.

It’s always important to avoid water sources when taking ghost research pictures.

However, even in the full-size image–shown at right–the water droplets aren’t large or round enough to confuse with ghost orbs.

We believe that it’s far more important to watch for lights such as the lamp in the second photo, above. And, ghost researchers routinely avoid reflective surfaces as well.

Light sources are far more likely to produce false ghost orbs.

Ghost orbs and rain

Fiona Broome — Fri, 21 Jun 2002 22:40:28 +0000

To demonstrate how humidity can create false orbs in ghost photographs, I took these photos at dawn on a dark, damp morning standing on a bridge. A stream flowed under the bridge from a large pond.

In addition, light rain was falling.

The film was a grocery store’s house brand, ISO 200, and a flash was used. While some of the orbs are more opaque than what we observe among genuinely anomalous photos, many of the look almost exactly the same. Some of the orbs appear in a line, obviously refracted within the camera. That’s one way that we can spot ghost photos that aren’t real, or even photos that were deliberately faked. However, others appear in more random locations in each photo.

The point is, a “ghost photo” is only as good as the integrity and skills of the photographer.

Until further analysis can prove visual differences between genuine anomalous orbs and those created by humidity in the air, we have to trust the photographer to notice weather conditions and reflective surfaces that can cause false anomalies. And, we must trust the photographer to report them, too.

For a study of false orbs in a downpour at night, see our other page, False Orbs and Heavy Rain.

False orbs and heavy rain

Fiona Broome — Fri, 14 Jun 2002 22:43:56 +0000

False “ghost orbs” occur in humidity. We’ve shown that on our Ghost Hunters Guide pages, These are not ghost orbs and This is Not a Ghost Portal. However, some people think that rain should photograph as lines, not orbs. We showed otherwise in Ghost Orbs and Rain, with photos taken in the daytime during a very light rain.

These photos show false “ghost orbs” in a downpour at night:

These are two versions of the same “ghost orbs” photograph. The picture was taken from the shelter of our porch during a heavy tropical downpour, using a digital camera.

To identify rain, look for tiny, dense white dots of reflected light, not streaks of light from rain.

Also, seeing this volume of orbs–especially in the enhanced photo on the right–it’s a good idea to look for natural explanations.

Of course, we want to avoid the extreme of saying that no orbs taken in rainy conditions can be ghost orbs.

However, even if there are some real ghost orbs in pictures taken when it is raining, we can’t use those photos as evidence of a haunting. When there are normal explanations for orbs, we must be very cautious about suggesting anything paranormal.

Ghost orbs, lenses and humidity

Fiona Broome — Sat, 01 Jun 2002 22:39:00 +0000

Ghost orbs can be one of the most reliable ways to tell if something odd is going on at a site that’s supposed to be haunted. However, all ghost hunters must be cautious about calling something a “ghost orb” when humidity is present.

The problem with humidity in the air is that, at a certain level, the teensy particules of moisture reflect the flash when I take a picture.

Even with a “good” camera, these reflections can look almost exactly like orbs. (With lots of study, you can often tell the difference.)

For an extreme example–on a night that was obviously misty–see our photo taken at Gilson Road Cemetery, Nashua, NH. Because of the moisture, we can’t claim that those orbs represent ghosts. (Some may, but we’d rather err on the side of caution.)

However, when I’m ghost hunting on humid or foggy nights, I’ll also use my budget-priced Canon camera, a Snappy LX//, because it has a funky refraction system.

With the Canon, when the damp air reflects my flash, the resulting images are bell-shaped on the film. Genuine, ghostly anomalies show up as mist or actual orbs.

For example, in another photo, the eerie mist rising from Rufus Lawrence’s grave at Gilson Road Cemetery (Nashua, NH) is anomalous, while the damp air around the grave is not.

How can I tell? Take a look at “vampire” photo taken at Rufus Lawrence’s grave at Gilson Road Cemetery.

Moisture produced the bell-shaped “orbs” throughout the photo. However, the rising mist from the grave–which we did NOT see when the photo was taken–does not reflect the same bell shapes.

We’ve tried several experiments with this, using different cameras, in different weather conditions, and even with a hand-held spritzer of water.

So, the Canon is my film camera of choice on damp nights. Ghostly anomalies are easy to separate from normal moisture.

However, I also carry an Olympus camera, for another purpose.

OTHER GHOST HUNTING USES FOR CAMERAS

Something about the flash on my Olympus camera produces “sparkles” in settings where we’ll find other manifestations/anomalies.

So, I use my Olympus as the barometer. If I snap a photo and we see “sparkles,” there’s a good chance that we’ll witness–or at least photograph–anomalous activity.

When I use the Olympus, about 80% of the people with me will see the sparkles, if anyone does. They look like the drifting, fading sparkles of light as a firework descends. They fall slowly, from the moment of the flash and for about a second afterwards.

My Olympus is the classic AF-Twin. I have no idea why its flash produces consistent sparkles if the setting is “haunted,” and the Canon flash doesn’t.

We’ve seen the sparkles with other cameras, including digital cameras. I suspect that the effect relies mostly on the particular psychic abilities of the ghost hunter, and the sparkles are enhanced better by some cameras.

DIGITAL CAMERAS AND GHOST HUNTING

Digital cameras are great, and produce more and better results… which I assume is a good thing. Frankly, ghost hunters aren’t sure.

With a digital camera, we can tell if we’re getting “orbs” immediately, too.

However, with digital images, we don’t have negatives to analyze. That’s why many ghost hunters are opposed to digital cameras as a research too.

With a photo such as the one below, you have to trust the integrity of the photographer:

This looks like a great photo, but rain was moving in. Humidity may have been a factor. Like it or not, we have to discount the orbs. That cemetery is haunted, and we usually get great orb photos when we’re there. But, because of the approaching rain, we can’t say that this photo indicates ghosts.

IS IT REALLY A GHOST?

It’s important not to put the cart before the horse. Often, people see a photo with an orb and then decide that the site is haunted.

It’s far better to work from the other direction: Start with a site that you suspect is haunted, and then look for anomalies. Just keep in mind that photographic anomalies may be symptoms of a haunted site. We don’t know what the anomalies are.

Please do not ask me if something is a “vortex.” I’ll use that word to describe the physical appearance of an anomaly, but–beyond that–your guess is as good as mine. (Also see our study, Hair test – false vortex photos.)

I’ll use words such as “orbs” to mean the clear/milky translucent circles we find in photos taken at “haunted” locations.

I’ll talk about “portals” when it’s a location with a saturation of anomalous activities.

However, I won’t claim that an orb is definitely a ghost, or that any of this is hard evidence of hauntings, life after death, communications from the Otherworld, etc.

We find unexplained orbs at locations that are supposed to be haunted. We know that we don’t find orbs in other locations, except when they can be explained by reflections, etc.

That’s all we can claim.

As a psychic, I’d love to be able to prove that ghosts exist and hauntings are real. I can’t. Not really.

That’s one reason why some of us keep visiting sites that are supposed to be haunted. We’re looking for hard, scientific evidence. Will we ever find it? Maybe. Maybe not.

FILM SPEED FOR GOOD “GHOST ORBS”

My primary camera is digital. It picks up more orbs and anomalies than my film cameras do. However, I also rely on film to support the evidence in my digital photos.

For my film camera, I use the grocery store’s “house brand” film, 200 or 400 ISO, 35mm. (When I use a digital camera, I set it for about 400 ISO.)

200 isn’t great at night for details, but it’s okay. I especially like it for sorting out what might be a paranormal anomaly… and what definitely isn’t.

400 is better for details, but it can look too grainy in prints to determine if something is actually an anomaly. In my experience, anything over 400 is nearly worthless, because it’s too grainy.

But, some other ghost hunters swear by film speeds of 800, 1200, or higher. I’m sure it depends upon what you’re looking for, and how well you can sort through the various lights and flickers on film.

These are not ghost orbs

Fiona Broome — Tue, 14 Aug 2001 22:48:58 +0000

I wish I could say that these nice, clear orbs are evidence of ghosts. In this photo, the night looks clear, the wall in the foreground appears crisp (even in ISO 800 film), and so on.

Unfortunately, this picture was taken earlier on the same night as the photo in This is not a Ghost Portal. This photograph and the one below, were taken at about 4:30 p.m. and the not-a-portal photo was taken at about 9:30 p.m. on the same night. The weather was very different at the two sessions, but it was still a damp night.

Here’s a second, very convincing photo from the early, drier part of the evening:

Yes, that one looks like any of the “real” orb photos at this site. However, when the air is damp — as you can see in the not-a-portal picture — you have to discount all of the other photos taken within several hours.

And yes, a less-scrupulous or “green” ghost hunter might post these pix and claim that they’re ghosts. Who would know the difference, unless the researcher was honest enough to say that it was a damp night?

These are fakes. These orbs are created by nature, not by ghosts, as far as we know.

I wish these photos showed ghostly orbs. This is an amazingly haunted cemetery at Gilson Road in Nashua, New Hampshire. (See my Gilson Road Cemetery pages for genuine ghost photos.)

However, no matter how crisp these two photos (above) look, I just don’t know if those are “real” orbs or not. So — until someone finds a way to analyze these photos better — they’re in my file of false anomalies.

This is not a ghost portal

Fiona Broome — Sun, 12 Aug 2001 22:45:13 +0000

This is NOT a portal, hundreds of orbs, or a ghostly mist…This photo is not evidence of a haunting.

I’d love to claim those are a bazillion orbs, coming and going through a portal in this haunted cemetery. This is a photo taken on a very misty night. It didn’t look ultra-misty if you were standing around in the dark at Gilson Road Cemetery, in Nashua, New Hampshire.

However, a flashlight showed that the air was thick, and this is one of about a hundred photos that proved that the air was pretty saturated. Tiny droplets of moisture in the air reflected the flash on this camera.

Yes, some of them could be real, ghostly orbs, but… we’ll never know, for sure.

When photos turn out like this, you have to discount every picture taken at that same approximate time.