|
Post by spriskeptic on Nov 11, 2005 14:44:29 GMT -5
Do you believe that you can capture visual proof of a ghost? By that I mean an actual apparition on video tape? and Why? (I'd love to hear your theories)
Obviously, I believe that it can be done. There is something to be said about "sensitive" people being able to perceive more and thus see a ghost, but in the end I believe that if your eyes can see it then so can the camera.
What do you think?
Tom.
|
|
Kim
Junior Member
Tell your voices to shut up, I can't hear mine!
Posts: 73
|
Post by Kim on Nov 13, 2005 19:20:22 GMT -5
hey guys., i just wanted to let you all know that i went away this weekend to the Inn at Jim Thorpe.,room 211.,the one that is supposedly haunted.,all i can say is that i had some crazy experiences..,at one point duing the night my arms went numb and it felt like there was a cynder block on my chest..i actually had to leave the room for a bitb/c i couldnt breathe...i also had the really heavy door that goes into the room unexpectedly slam on my arm..,let me tell you that that hurt...i also got some great orbs...well i just thought i would let you know about my little trip..it was exciting but igot a nice bruise on my arm..haha..oh well..guess whoever was there didnt like me.lol Kim
|
|
Kim
Junior Member
Tell your voices to shut up, I can't hear mine!
Posts: 73
|
Post by Kim on Nov 13, 2005 19:25:09 GMT -5
Tom, yes ido believe that you can catch a ghost on camera or video..i have video of what i believe is something..,not afull aparition but something interesting..,but i have seen full aparitions that were caught on camera when I went to a seminar with Lorainne Warren..,i am sure that you know who Ed and Lorraine Warren are,,well she brought some really great photos that she and some of her colleagues have taken over the last 50years..,yes 50..lol..long time..,so yeah i do believe that you can.. Kim
|
|
|
Post by rojner on Nov 13, 2005 19:28:42 GMT -5
I think that if something is there in front of you, then why wouldn't it show up on film. I am skeptic, however, to things that show up on camera that you don't see with your eyes (meaning camera shots, not video). But, why do we think that our cameras or videos will see what we see or that they will see what our eyes don't? How much does our mind actually play into that? I guess the only truth to it would be to capture the vision on film that you saw with your own eyes. What are the chances of that happening! I guess that would explain why all aspects are taken into account (meaning vidoe, still, EMF, personal experiences, ect) to explain or help determine what was seen with the eyes. Interesting question, Tom. Ron
|
|
|
Post by spriskeptic on Nov 14, 2005 15:45:52 GMT -5
Kim,
Of course I know who the Warrens are. Our approach differs from their's and my personal beliefs don't quite jive with their's either, but, as you say, they have been doing this far longer than I have and therefore I definitely respect their opinions and persistence.
As for the video you have, we would absolutely love it if you would make us a copy to view.
We would love to see you pictures of you trip as well. I do have to say that I don't really get excited about "orbs", but my opinion is just that. Mine is obviously not the only one and I would love to see the pics and hear everyone's opinion on them. I know that Rick has a place to host pictures.
|
|
|
Post by Rick on Nov 22, 2005 11:30:14 GMT -5
let me know if you want to post the picts, I'll open up access for you.
|
|
|
Post by Rick on Nov 22, 2005 12:24:53 GMT -5
A lot of what Taps finds on video is with cameras that see outside of the normal human eyesight (infrared). This is why people think dogs and cats see apparitions when we don't. Cats can see far btter than people My thinking is the those things we don't see are in a different time frame that we are or on a different dimension
|
|
|
Post by Amy on Nov 26, 2005 15:28:49 GMT -5
A lot of what Taps finds on video is with cameras that see outside of the normal human eyesight (infrared). This is why people think dogs and cats see apparitions when we don't. Cats can see far btter than people My thinking is the those things we don't see are in a different time frame that we are or on a different dimension That's a good point. So if it appears on video using night shot or infrared, it might still not be visible in person at the time, since there would be very little light. But obviously if you see it in person then it should turn up on video. Some things are much easier to believe and catch on video, such as objects moving, but apparitions are very hard to capture on film. Like you said, they're the "holy grail" of parnormal evidence. But I believe it can be done. You just have to be in the right place at the right time, with a video camera ready. I am skeptical about things in regular pictures that I haven't seen in person. It seems most of it can be explained as dust, glare, flashes, reflection/ refractions of light. A polaroid is better evidence since you would at least know it hasn't been altered. But if you're looking at a digital form of the picture it could very easily have been edited. And since I'm no photoshop expert and am not able to easily tell what's been altered, I tend to take those pictures with a grain of salt.
|
|
|
Post by Michelle on Feb 25, 2008 18:25:32 GMT -5
I've never really captured any great evidence on camera. I can walk into a place and I might feel a presence. I often feel drained when leaving places that have a lot of activity. I think I can just "see" more since I'm a sensitive. However, I never get actual proof on camera. So I feel like a lot of people think I'm crazy.
|
|
|
Post by starfire on Mar 22, 2008 2:17:19 GMT -5
If you look at the very limited scope of what our eyes actually perceive on the electromagnetic scale, it really is a drop in the bucket.
If you look at how the rods and cones of the human eye function and take into account the amount of light that is required to process the chemical reaction that takes place from the optic nerve to the brain, it would logically make sense to me that if our eyes can perceive the vibrational level of paranormal activity then so too should a camera, as the camera "eye" doesn't have the limitations that our eyes do.
But, something I have thought about is, if paranormal entities vibrate at a frequency that most of the time is too high or too low for us to actually see, then truly photographing them is almost impossible, which may account for the fact that there are so few really good pictures that could definitively prove their existance. Many times we perceive spirits because of physical sensations we experience - not what we actually see. If this is the case, then trying to take a picture of a ghost would be like trying to take a picture of a gamma ray. You can feel the effects, but you can't see it with the naked eye.
I know I didn't really answer your question, but it's something to think about.
|
|
|
Post by impintraining on Mar 22, 2008 3:26:18 GMT -5
You have great points. You'd think that it would be possible to create a camera that would be more ghost-hunter friendly by opening up the upper / lower ends of the spectrum (whichever be the case) to allow photographing more to the extremes (and converting them to the visible spectrum).
The problem is, the market for such a camera isn't good enough for the developmental efforts apparently. But hey, if anyone wants to patent a camera designed for such a function, you never know, it could be a nobel prize winner.
|
|