Explaining the

Digital Myth in Ghost Hunting

Time and time again, you've heard either me or someone else say that Digital Cameras are no good for Ghost Hunting.

Here is absolute proof positive, with the explanation and given examples exactly WHY. These are things that show up on various "ghost sites" as "evidence", but they won't or can't tell you what it really is.

Digital cameras have become so popular mainly for the reason of cost efficiency, i.e. no film to buy or process, and the touted claim that they miraculously "get one every time"...Well, the "digital fanatics" are just too happy to have something on an image without going that one extra step further to find out just what it is...Isn't the whole purpose of our studies to find answers, and not just "Oooo and Ahhh" over every little thing without thoroughly examining the evidence first?

It all has to do with the Image Sensor, the CMOS Chip, and the Pixel Surface Area...

The CMOS chip is an inexpensive CPU that is used in the "affordable" digital cameras. Meaning, not the mega-buck Pro-Series types, but the kind everybody is buying up at their favorite retail store.

The CMOS can cause a variety of internal whoops glitches within the camera itself to produce spots on the image, or "orbs" as some will call them...or "Those damn white spots" as a Professional Photographer friend of mine calls them.

I got this information from one of the Photography Instructors at LCCC, who attended a professional photographer's seminar on "Correcting Digital Flaws". He explained to me all the ins and outs of the matter. So if such information comes from a reliable and professional source such as this, I have to go with it. It also backs up my own experiments and research...

These inexpensive chips excel in situations of ample light, such as outdoors on a sunny day, but they suffer in low to no light conditions.

The Image Sensor can not compensate color and light balance in certain low to no light conditions. This will cause areas of the Pixel Surface to over saturate an area making the pixels bleed over one another, causing the pixel area to bleach out.

This is called Anti-Alignment, and is a very common problem among digital cameras. This is the Low-Light-"Orb"...

Here is something you can do at home that will show you what I mean about over saturation of pixels.

Shine a flashlight through a piece of screen on the wall. Move the flashlight away from the screen until you can see it's shadow clearly...The shadow with all the little squares will represent the Pixels and the Pixel Area.

Now move the flashlight closer to the screen, i.e. more light to the surface area...The screen's shadow will begin to blend together and literally disappear. This is the exact same principle as Anti-Alignment.

There is also the Fill Factor.

Fill Factor refers to the percentage of a Photosite (pixel surface area) that is sensitive to light. If circuits cover 25% of each photosite, the sensor is said to have a Fill Factor of 75%. The higher the Fill Factor, the more sensitive the sensor. Their sensitivity to light decreases because part of each photosite is covered with circuitry that filters out noise and performs other functions.

The percentage of pixels devoted to collecting light is called the pixel's Fill Factor.

In other words, if the camera cannot "see" the image physically, i.e., by the collection of reflected light to the Image Sensor, the filter circuitry will omit a "white noise" from the captured image...meaning, it will not actually "see" a spirit energy, therefore the camera will disregard it as "noise".

The Image Sensor is also the main culprit in capturing and recording airborne particles into the memory. Add being illuminated by the flash, and Dust, Pollen , and Bugs instantly become "Trophy Orb Shots". (see The Orb Controversy section)

DUST:

POLLEN:

Try this at home, you'll see exactly what I'm talking about.

Take a pinch of Talcum Power in one hand, and your Digi in the other.

Blow the powder into the air and take a picture. You've just created a false positive artifact in the comfort of your own home. Notice the similarities in the image you've just taken to the ones seen all over the net?

This is one that I've created in front of a black background to make it stand out better. This is the "Powder Test"...

Digital vs. Film...In comparison...

Below are some test shots taken at OSR during a recent Ghost Hunt in June of 2002. We held the two cameras, digital and film (35mm) side-by-side to get as close to the same shot as possible. We even "stirred up" some dust for the purpose of this experiment...You'll notice that ALL of the "trophy orb shots" have the same characteristics as the above described dust. i.e., the same "ring" around the edges and misshapen form. The film camera wasn't as sensitive as the digital to pick up the dust that was reflecting the flash. The circuitry of the digital "saw" the airborne particles illuminated by the flash.

So, in conclusion...This is why Digital Cameras are no good for ghost hunting!

Have you noticed that the majority of digi pics all over the net are "orbs"? Aside from the obvious "breath/ecto" shots, "orbs" make up the general consensus...now you know why. It's the camera itself causing the "anomalies" due to the internal circuitry, and/or the flash reflecting off of airborne particles...not anything paranormal.

So unless I see a Full-Body shot of Abraham Lincoln holding up a big sign that says, "Other than that, the play was great!"...I don't buy any "ghost photo" that comes from a digital camera.

There are just too many factors involved that do produce False Positive Artifacts...They're too unreliable in gathering genuine evidence, and only serve to fool those who are just too happy to have something in a photo to brag about.

Stick to film for Ghost Hunting, and save the digi for special occasions...but make sure the lighting is good!

My buddy got married (5/5/02), and I took my digi to capture some memories. It was a beautiful day, and the shots taken outside came out perfect. The ones taken inside the Hall, where it was all nice and romantically dim, and people dancing and moving about, had "those damn white spots" all over them...

I seriously doubt or can even remotely say realistically, the "damn white spots" were deceased relatives coming to share the joy of the occasion...as some would try to make you believe.

6/5/05 **UPDATED**

My nephew got married, so I took my digi.

I almost yelled, "F***IN' DIGITAL!!!" in the church, as most of the shots were spoiled with "those damn white spots". Some were salvageable, but for the most part, I just went ahead and downloaded them as-is.

The Wedding Photographer had a decked out digital setup that must've cost a fortune. He also had a laptop with some kind of program that cleaned up the photos, and took out the spots. I didn't talk to him about it, but he ran a slide show during the reception, and they were...<ahem>...spotless.

This inspired me to go buy a better digi for personal use (not ghost hunting), and the one I got is the next best thing to an affordable Pro-Series. 6 Mega-Pixels with all kinds of doo-dad settings for every kind of photo you might want to take.

Well guess what? We still get dust "orbs". (powder test)

I took these using all the different mega-pixel settings. As you can see, there's really no difference...a dust orb is a dust orb, no matter how you try to dress it up with big mega-pixel talk.

Taken with 6.1 mega-pixel setting     

AND...(drum roll please)...INCORRECT EXPOSURE GHOSTS!!!

This is ME in the photo by the way...I can assure you, I'm not dead yet...nor is it my "astral-self", "doppelganger", "projected conscious", "residual energy of myself", or any other made-up fairy-tale explanation like you see on the net.

All this took was, slow shutter speed + wrong ISO + no flash + a little movement on my part.

Folks, if you have a fancy digital camera with a ton of settings on it, all you have to do is set it for default or the automatic setting when taking a new series of photos. The camera will manage itself, and you'll get nice pictures. If this "anomaly" happens to come up accidentally, please don't send it to some "ghost site". You'll get some lame explanation like, "Dimensional plane slip" or other made up excuse for not being able to explain it accurately. Its just the camera settings, nothing paranormal to worry about. Some folks might forget they played with the settings, and get what they might believe to be "paranormal" photos.

The Meaning of Megapixel

It doesn't matter what the pixel capacity is, be it a 6 mega-pixel and higher, or a cheapy 1.*something*. They all operate the same way (by recording reflected light). The higher megapixel cameras just give you a sharper image, and a larger picture size. This what the instruction booklet said for mine.

6.1 MP....for printing up to 30 x 40in. (76 x 102cm)

5.4 MP....ideal for printing 4 x 6 (10 x 15cm) prints without cropping. Also for printing up to 20 x 30 in. (50 x 76cm); some cropping may result.

4.0 MP....for printing up to 8 x 10in. (20 x 25cm)

3.1 MP....for printing up to 8 x 10in. (20 x 25cm)

1.7 MP....for printing 4 x 6in. (10 x 15cm) prints, emailing, Internet, screen display, or for conserving space.

(read the instruction booklet for your model camera)

The megapixel does NOT have any bearing on the "ghost capturing" ability of the camera.

Here is a basic idea of the differences in the actual image sizes of the various megapixel settings. Cameras are different, but this is the generalization. It doesn't show it, but a 6 megapixel image will be even larger than the 5 megapixel shown below.

(photo courtesy of howstuffworks.com)

Ok...Are we clear on the REAL meaning of "megapixel"?

In simple English...The megapixel is the SIZE OF THE CAPTURED IMAGE.

Night Mode

Other images on the net, depict a "light streak", "streak of light", "orb in motion", "energy", or another comical description, the "plasmoid" (huh?!?). Some of the newer models of digital camera, have various advanced manual settings for all kinds of situations. These "streaks" are caused by the use of a "Night Mode", and people are confusing this for "Night-SHOT". This is NOT a version of the infra-red that is on video cameras. This mode merely keeps the shutter open longer to expose more light to the Image Sensor. Since the shutter remains open longer, the Image Sensor is more sensitive to movement. Brighter sources of light become the focal point, and the tiny amount of shaking just from pushing the shutter release button will cause the over exposed light source to be smeared around the captured image. This is the incorrect exposure setting I keep talking about. Slow Shutter Speed + Incorrect Exposure + Movement.

It tells you right in the Instruction Booklet for your camera, "Use a flat surface or tri-pod to steady the camera while in this mode."

Its also a good idea to use the timer as well. You won't get the camera shake from your finger on the shutter button.

Here are a few re-creations using blue, green, and white LED flashlights as examples.

Something else I've found while playing around with the new mega-Mega-Pixel fancy-schmancy camera...It IS possible to get a double exposure with this thing.

I found this one by accident, but after figuring out how and why (and reading the instruction book), now I can do one anytime. This is another whoops that has come up on the net as "Dimensional Time Shift" or something. *sigh*

It has to do with the "Night-Mode" again. When the camera is in this mode, and the shutter release is pushed halfway down (accidentally or otherwise), the camera sets its focus on whatever it was pointed at, but then the scene can change quickly (as in "what was that over there?!?" *snap*), and you snap the picture exposing another scene. The two scenes will be blended together.

See the blanket over the clothes basket?

No, its not a rip in the fabric of the Space/Time Continuum...just screwed up camera settings, and improper misuse of a misunderstood camera function.

Also, this can happen when the photo is taken and you tilt the camera to look at the picture in the LCD screen too soon. The shutter is still open and recording the frame you just took, AND what the camera is pointing at while you wait for the image to process. This is why it is important to wait a few seconds after the shot is taken, so you won't get an "accidental ghost"...Be patient!!

I've found I can make all kinds of screwed up pictures in this *Night-Mode*, that would have the most eager ghost hunting novice squeal with orgasmic delight, and sending them to their favorite "ghost gallery" for praise and adulation.

The only time I'll say digitals are useful for ghost stuff, is using them to re-create the various misunderstood glitches. I know, you're thinking "But Ken, if digitals are so bad, why do you use one in all of your experiments?"...Simple, just like everyone else, cost efficiency...plus it helps you learn more about how they really work.

Do we understand about digital cameras better now, how they work, and the "ghost" images they can produce? (i hope so)

THEY WILL NOT CAPTURE GHOSTS IN IMAGES...NOR HAVE THEY!!

Face it gang, the Ghost Hunting Community has been DUPED, CONNED, SCAMMED, MISLED, and flat out B.S.'ed to about the use of digital cameras either for someone's personal gain, lack of any knowledge on the subject, or both.

If it were really this easy to capture ghosts, then everybody would do it, and we wouldn't be busting our humps trying to prove to the world they do really exist.

Don't fall for the digital ghost con. Since its all an electronic process, that just means there's more to screw up and be misconstrued as "ghosts".

You have to remember, Digital Photography is still relatively NEW. There were the same types of "ghostly images" taken when regular photography was being developed. This is no different at all. A glitch is a glitch, and until digital cameras become absolutely perfected, its going to happen.

Cheapy point-n-shoot film cameras...*click*...done. Granted, they aren't perfect either, but at least its easier to identify something glitchy.

If cost is all you're worried about, then just use a tape recorder to get your "evidence", since EVPs are harder to refute.

Save your digital camera for vacations, birthdays, and other special occasions, but remember the glitches that may accompany any confusion in the final image.

"I want the truth!!"..."You can't handle the truth.!"~ Tom Cruise and Jack Nicholson, from "A Few Good Men"

~~~copyright 2003, revised 2005 Dr. Ken

None of this material may be used without the
written consent of Dr. Ken