[Aussiegirl]

March 19, 2009 at 2:25 am

I havent got any equipment advice for you but i would say if you are being paid for this, you had better speak to them to see what sort of photos they want. Personally I like the usual formal ones, but lots of shots wehre i didnt know i was being photographed , even if doing silly things. In one of my photos, my photographer caught me hitching up my dress. It was a strapless and every now and then i would grab the top of the bodice with both my hands and hike it up when i thought no one was looking. Classic……..

Then he caught me again larking around. I was wtih my friends and hitched up my dress and was doing a sort of can can lol. I didnt even know he was around. I look back at them and laugh and remember all that

[Aussiegirl]

March 17, 2009 at 11:26 pm

First of all, thanks everyone for your comments

Yes I have been investigating for a few years now seriously. I do it as a hobby and have much evidence of the afterlife. Some of my photos are very very interesting. We also have IR video footage and I do evp (electronic voice phenomena) and have some very good ones in controlled situations.

I really really want to get to the bottom of these photos as I dont understand why this happened. I understand why these things do happen with certain settings but am not understanding with the settings i had why it happened. Sorry if that sounds confusing.

I realised in my first post that i hadnt linked the 3rd anomalous photo this is it

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v390/feusurlaneige/DSC00783-1.jpg

and this was the very next photo taken

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v390/feusurlaneige/CopyofDSC00784.jpg

I never use night mode on my camera as i know what happenes with that with no tripod.

I know I didnt walk off when taking these shots. Its not really practicle to use a tripod when investigating . I very rarely get blurred photos. I try mostly to set my camera on what i want and not use automatic as it chooses settings that make grainy photos which i hate.

I cant figure out why these particular photos changed from the others that were normal. I didnt do anything to change them. They were just so random.

In a 30s exposure, i assume the camera would need to be on a tripod. I have seen those photos of the traffic. If i had moved onto the next photo and taken the camera with me, would not if have been still taking the photo with the shutter open and make the picture a complete blur. 30 s seems a long time.

IN the first one with the squiggles, did there have to be some sort of light source in front of the lens to do that or would a flash do that?

The exposure time for the same photo of the building in the 3rd shot which is normal is 10/400. Is that 40seconds and if it is shouldnt that photo looked weird also?

To sum it up, the strange photos have an iso of 100, f/2.8 and in the camera data1 it says the exposure was manual which was 300/10 which is 30 seconds. No light source except for the flash. The camera was directed at the ground. You can see this with the shrub. No torch as i cant hold a torch and take photos at the same time. I dont use it. That is the part i dont undestand. There was no light in front of me except that from the flash. I cant see that the flash would reflect off the grass.

The photo that I took after was the second one in this reply . It has nothing like that. I dont know why the settings are changed. I cant for the life of me work that out unless I accidently moved the dial but i have never done that before. There was no difference in the light sources, The only light source was the flash.

Its info is iso of 250, f/2.8 and the camera data1 says normal programme which was 10/400 which I understand is 40seconds or is it 4 seconds?

So what i want to know is

1. does this look like I could have accidently moved the dial from maybe auto to manual?
2. could a change like this make such a difference to a photo and cause anomalies like this?
3. if i did move the dial accidently, and caused a different exposure and iso sensitivity, why did the background not blur and cause the photo to be in focus in some parts and not others and why did the good photo not get anything in it when it was a long exposure too. Did the iso difference prevent this?
4. Dont you have to have some sort of light source in front of you to get that squiggle affect in a long exposure?

So many questions and sorry about this but i have to get this right in my head. You see, I scrutinise all the photos and video and audio recordings i get and i wont assume things unless i have disregarded all scientific explanations. If these are camera malfunctions from wrong settings, then so be it. Its good for me to know this if other photos similiar to this come up.

I do this as a hobby and do not do house investigations etc or get paid for what i do like they do a lot in america. We do this for a hobby and there are only 5 of us.

[Aussiegirl]

March 17, 2009 at 7:55 am

Sorry me again.

I decided to link them here because i think you check the exif date from the linked photos is that right?

This is the very first photo of the night I took. I was trying to get a house in the background that has no electricity on it. It has a palm in front of it. I didnt get much except the grass in front and a small shrub as it was dark and coudlnt see properly. There were no lights in front of me in the house or on the ground. I make a point of cleaning my lens before and during taking shots. I recall at the time , the camera was acting stupid and the flash wouldnt go off. This photo was taken at 8.34 pm.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v390/feusurlaneige/DSC00769-1.jpg

Next there were 12 normal photos. Then I got these two successively at 9.06pm and 9.10pm. They were taken in two different areas within a short walk of each other. These buildings i have taken photos of for years and never got anything like this. The only light source is the flash and its reflection in the window of the first one and no light source in the second one. That is why i posted the second one to show you the area.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v390/feusurlaneige/DSC00782-1.jpg

and nothing

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v390/feusurlaneige/CopyofDSC00784.jpg

This is the subject of the shot with the squiggles in the first one. All dark area. The first photo shows the left side of the house in the very back and the second shot shows the very tip of the shrub on the left that you can see in the squiggly shot.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v390/feusurlaneige/PICT4306.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v390/feusurlaneige/PICT8059.jpg

You will notice if you view the exif data that the settigns appear to be different on these shots but I have no idea how. This hasnt happened before.

What i am wanting to know is if those settings caused this? I need to know this for future reference. I know that slow shutter speeds can do this. I am thinking the shutter speed in these pics is slow though dont really understand this. I cant figure out that first one becuase i would think to get an effect like that you woud need a light source in front and i dont understand in the 3rd shot how it is only in the centre and out of focus and the rest if fine like a normal pic

Any ideas????