|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
Member (Idle past 178 days) Posts: 515 From: Tustin, California USA Joined: |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Chariots of God (Scripture & Photo Examined) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
arachnophilia Member (Idle past 1374 days) Posts: 9069 From: god's waiting room Joined: |
ScottRP writes: Seriously, it is not a fish, carp or otherwise. well, obviously it's not a fish. it's also not a spirit, human or otherwise. it's a bug, streaking do to slow shutter speed, and it just appears to have something resembling a human face.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
arachnophilia Member (Idle past 1374 days) Posts: 9069 From: god's waiting room Joined: |
ScottRP writes: You are incapable of discerning between a fake spirit photograph and a real one. the question was,
quote: i take it you are not? why aren't you convinced? i'm not saying i am, i want to know why you're not.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
arachnophilia Member (Idle past 1374 days) Posts: 9069 From: god's waiting room Joined:
|
ScottRP writes: You would never make as a spirit photographer. that's right -- my glass is too good, my camera too high quality, and my skills in rejecting images that have dust or water spots too great. i would make a terrible spirit photographer.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
arachnophilia Member (Idle past 1374 days) Posts: 9069 From: god's waiting room Joined: |
ScottRP writes: I am discussing spirits here, not staged fairy photos. well, let's be clear. you're discussing blurry, smudgy pictures of photographic artifacts. the question is why do you think those photos aren't spirits, but yours are?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
arachnophilia Member (Idle past 1374 days) Posts: 9069 From: god's waiting room Joined:
|
ScottRP writes: Spirits are very real. that's neither here nor there. maybe they are, maybe they aren't. the question is whether these pictures are pictures of spirits.
The better the equipment the better the photograph. which is why we have a lot fewer photos of bigfoot, nessie, and UFOs today. better cameras are around and more easily accessible. they do things like autofocus with increasingly accurate precision and speed, so you don't get blurry photos as often, and have better high ISO light gathering abilities do you can use faster shutter speeds in the dark so you get less streaky, smeary action. ask yourself this. if "the better the equipment, the better the photograph" why are all your photos you've presented absolute shit, shot on absolute shit cameras? why no images shot on professional dSLRs? i'll give you a big hint: the same phenomena shot on professional dSLRs has already been shown in this thread, by me. it doesn't look the same, and many of the artifacts you're reading faces into are the product of very awful camera gear.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
arachnophilia Member (Idle past 1374 days) Posts: 9069 From: god's waiting room Joined: |
how do you know they aren't real? what method are you using to discern that they are not real?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
arachnophilia Member (Idle past 1374 days) Posts: 9069 From: god's waiting room Joined: |
ScottRP writes: Please don't bother me with your toy fairy doll photographs. they're not dolls, though. and the girls, of course, claimed to have interacted with the faeries.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
arachnophilia Member (Idle past 1374 days) Posts: 9069 From: god's waiting room Joined:
|
ScottRP writes: For your information, aliens are real. no doubt they are, but i was talking about UFOs (unidentified flying objects), not aliens. they are not the same thing, which is kind of the point. better cameras = fewer unidentifiable things in photographs.
And we are getting more photographs of them now and will continue to get even more in the future. show me a recent one.
These are photographs of beings in another world. They are not easy to get. why are they easier to get on shitty camera gear? this is the reverse of my professional experience, which tells me that better camera gear makes it easier for me to capture a wider variety of subjects.
The photograph of the spirit flying in an orb was done with an infrared video camera. And is one of the best spirit photographs on the internet today. the one that looks like a fish?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
arachnophilia Member (Idle past 1374 days) Posts: 9069 From: god's waiting room Joined:
|
ScottRP writes: Alien Body Discovered in Buryatia Russia April 2011 well, i asked for a UFO, not an alien. and, uh, that one's a well known hoax:
quote: Professional Ghost Hunters use good equipment. i mean, not that i've seen. they're re-purposing EMF scanners, and using consumer grade audio and video recorders at best. my camera is one of the three nearly identical ones in this picture (not the white lens):
it's many pounds heavier, several times larger, and way more professional. this is the image i was shooting at the time (the full frame, no crop)
that hill is almost exactly a mile away from the lincoln memorial (as the crow flies), and my lens is at 200, or just barely wider. i could look it up when i get home if you're really interested. the point is, if there was a giant alien spaceship a mile overhead, you bet your ass i could get a could get a clear picture of it.
It is not that photographs are easier to get on inexpensive equipment. It is that a lot more people own this equipment and have it on hand when they have the opportunityt to take the shot. the thing is, photography gear is becoming more and more accessible for the amateurs. plenty of people have reasonable quality dSLRs these days, and even the camera-phones in everyone's pockets are quickly becoming very good. well, as good as they can be, considering. why are these ghost images always shot on potatoes? Yes, although it looks a lot more human than fish. This is because it is human. well, i see a barrel-eyed fish.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
arachnophilia Member (Idle past 1374 days) Posts: 9069 From: god's waiting room Joined:
|
ScottRP writes: There are not that many people that even own this equipment. i think you missed a subtlety of the above gear-porn picture. i showed up to that particular hill between arlington national cemetery and the iwo jima war memorial, and not only ran into a ton of photographers with professional equipment (not pictured are upwards of twenty or thirty other cameras on tripods, in less optimal spots because we showed up early to get the good spot) but i was there with my friend who has the same camera and lens as me, and we ran into another photographer with the same camera and lens as the both of us. it's more common than you might think.
You wonder why most spirit photographs are not being captured with this high-tech equipment? no, i wonder why none are. why every image captured is some blurry, grainy, compressed, horrible image, shot on a camera that was outdated 10 years ago. and the question's mostly rhetorical. the answer is that it's harder to read into blurry, low-detail smudges and oniony bokeh when your good optics are making smooth bokeh and sharp images, and your sensor is outputting high res, detailed raw data. Edited by arachnophilia, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
arachnophilia Member (Idle past 1374 days) Posts: 9069 From: god's waiting room Joined: |
AZPaul3 writes: Right now, Scott, your pictures are hoaxes well, artifacts of various camera and lighting conditions, generally involving particulates or bugs. the bit with the photoshopped face? that's a hoax. it's kind of like the nessie fin photo, supposedly "enhanced" by JPL or whatever, which is much less impressive without the blatant fakery:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
arachnophilia Member (Idle past 1374 days) Posts: 9069 From: god's waiting room Joined: |
ScottRP writes: Are you claiming that all the frames with faces in this video was somehow photoshopped? no, i'm claiming this one was photoshopped:
because it obviously is. you even agreed in Message 959.
What happened to bugs with human faces or your fish theory? i'm not saying it is a fish. it's obviously not a fish. i'm saying it looks a lot more like one than a human. the point is that you can see what you want in a blurry, pixelated smear, shot with a low shutter speed.
You obviously do not know what it is. This is because you do not know spirits. i know it behaves exactly like a flying insect, shot with a slow shutter speed.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
arachnophilia Member (Idle past 1374 days) Posts: 9069 From: god's waiting room Joined:
|
Coyote writes: You want to see a lot of high-end photographic equipment, look on the sidelines of any professional football game! professional, they regulate access a bit. college? college is incredible. like, it's a line of 400 f/2.8s ($10K in glass!) from one endzone to the other.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
arachnophilia Member (Idle past 1374 days) Posts: 9069 From: god's waiting room Joined: |
ScottRP writes: This is what a spirit looks like in flight. The spirit form leaves a trail and becomes blurred. Anyone who knows spirits knows this. so does anything with a longer shutter speed. like, say, for instance, an insect. what you don't get is a sharp image on the leading edge of the motion (unless a strobe went off, and you're using rear-sync). meaning that it's literally impossible for that to be an image of what it looks like.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
arachnophilia Member (Idle past 1374 days) Posts: 9069 From: god's waiting room Joined: |
ScottRP writes: You cannot expect every person who sees spirits to own such equipment. i don't. besides, it wouldn't help you -- it takes very sharp pictures of things very far away, in lower light, without blurring stuff. to make these spirit pictures, you have to take something fuzzy, close up, on low quality gear.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024