Orbs: investigating photography

1.1 Orbs in Paranormal Photography

February 23, 2025
1:16 am

The topic of orbs in the paranormal is an interesting one. Orbs are the source of massive disagreement when it comes to collating ‘evidence’ of the paranormal: I’ve seen screaming, shouting and threatening behaviour by believers in the phenomenon when dealing with those like myself who debunk those little circles of light as nothing more than photographic artefacts.

Looking back at photography history, the first suggestion of orbs being of a paranormal origin seems to have been in the early 1990s (it would be fantastic if anyone knows of earlier ‘captures’?), which was then thoroughly debunked in 1994 by Joe Nickell in his book Camera Clues: A Handbook for Photographic Investigation.

By the very definition of the term ‘paranormal’ – as in, something not explainable by known science, orbs are not paranormal as the photographic processes whereby they are ‘formed’ in photography are well documented, tested and replicable.

Orbs are small blob or circles of light that appear on photographs. They can be all sizes, sometimes coloured, and in some cases appear to be textured – through the process of pareidolia can be seen to contain faces or similar.

But before we delve further – a little bit of personal background in the subject first. The first photographs I took on my very first digital camera in 2003, were actually during a ghost hunt in the rather impressive Chillingham Castle, Northumberland. It was the first ghost hunting event I’d ever been on, and after the investigation , when I was reviewing the images on my camera, I noticed something strange: small blobs of light on some of the photographs. It wasn’t something I’d seen before on film photography (apart from when the flash from the camera hit falling rain), but in the case of the investigation these odd little blobs were on images photographed indoors and in dry weather.

So, I contacted the investigation group that I’d been a guest of and to my surprise (and naive delight) they explained what I’d caught was evidence of a paranormal phenomenon known as orbs and the beginning manifestation of a spirit.

Naturally, capturing such wonderful ‘proof’ on my first foray into ‘official’ investigation was something to be celebrated. That year I began my research and investigations which ultimately led to my book, Otherworld North East: Ghosts and Hauntings Explored being published in October of 2004… and in the book, photographic ‘proof’ of the paranormal in the form of orbs. Obviously now, I regard this as a facepalm moment, but as with most things in life it often requires mistakes being made for progress to be made in turn.

As time progressed, the group I’d pulled together to undertake the field investigations for the book continued to operate as Otherworld North East, investigating a wide variety of locations across the north east. At the same time, in my day job there was the (very) slow transition into digital photography and I began to get more suspicious of ‘orbs’ with their habit of mostly appearing in dusty or damp conditions or more spectacularly in clouds of insects. So, as any self-respecting investigator does… if something doesn’t seem right, you investigate it, which was something I began to do, and it soon became very clear that orbs not in fact the dead trying to manifest, they were simply photographic artefacts that had mundane (and well known within the professional photographic community) causes. Some would say that the explanation, however, is a dusty read…

The air around us

The first thing to look at is the very thing these glowing orbs appear in on photographs: the air around us.

Air’s major components are gases – primarily nitrogen, oxygen, carbon dioxide, argon and water vapour, with other trace gases such as ammonia, hydrogen, methane and nitrogen dioxide.

As well as the gases, air also contains what is classed as particulate matter. This material includes solid particles called aerosols, which includes such things as dust, ash, skin, salt, metals and pollen. Liquids are also present, such as water droplets (when environmental conditions are right) and polutants.

In the majority of cases, aerosols are microscopic and not visible to the human eye, but where there’s airflow, or has been airflow, aerosols will be present.

So what does the particulate matter have to do with orbs?

Very basically put, where there is particulate matter in the air, even if you can’t see it directly yourself, the matter creates a surface that can catch or reflect the light from a camera flash. So what you get on your image is simply the flash flare off particulate matter in the air.

Glare and reflection: backscatter

The process wherein light reflects off airborne particles is called backscatter. This process was documented in the 1997 book by Grimm and Grimm “The Basic Book of Photography”, citing “An additional problem called backscatter occurs when flash light striking these suspended particles reflects back to the camera lens and records on the film as fuzzy white spots. Of course, backscatter can also be reduced by getting the camera as close to your subjects as possible, because the shorter that distance, the fewer the number of floating particles in front of the lens.” Note that this is referring to film photography.

In 1989, the FUJIX DS-X, the first full digital camera was commercially released, but the technology didn’t become popular until the mid 1990s. During the technology’s early development, most photographers reported that the cameras’ circle of confusion was high compared to the film counterparts.

Moving on to digital photography, Fuji’s statement on orbs was published in July 2005: “There is always a certain amount of dust floating around in the air. You may have noticed this at the movies when you look up at the light coming from the movie projector and notice the bright sparks floating around in the beam. In the same way, there are always dust particles floating around nearby when you take pictures with your camera. When you use the flash, the light from the flash reflects off the dust particles and is sometimes captured in your shot. Of course, dust particles very close to the camera are blurred since they are not in focus, but because they reflect the light more strongly than the more distant main subject of the shot, that reflected light can sometimes be captured by the camera and recorded on the resulting image as round white spots. So these dots are the blurred images of dust particles.”

The process: The Circle of Confusion

The circle of confusion (CoC) can be described as “…a point of light directed onto a camera’s focal plane by the lens” (Source: https://www.masterclass.com/articles/a-basic-guide-to-circle-of-confusion-in-photography).

These points of light comprise the ‘orb’ that you see: when the circle of confusion is narrow, the point is sharp: when the CoC widens, that point blurs. The narrowness and sharpness of these points depends on a number of elements, but primarily on a camera’s focal length and f-stop, neither of which were particularly advanced in the early digital models.

Deliberate use of a camera’s Circle of Confusion can be seen in bokeh photography, when usually one item/plane is sharply in focus and where anorther is blurred: the image example here shows the newspaper with a narrow CoC resulting in sharp focus, while the background has a wide CoC resulting in blurring: in the case of wide CoC on light sources, such as reflections, this can result in discs of variable sizes and opacity appearing in the image taken.

So think on this – particulate matter in the air that you can’t see, moving in the airflow around you. You then take a flash photography shot, or there’s a particularly strong light source in the area, and the particles themselves reflect the light back at the camera. Depending on where it is in the camera’s focal plane will depend on the CoC level, and hence you get blurred balls of light appearing on your photograph of varying opacity… this of course also works with non-flash photography if there is any light source present that could reflect off the surface of a particle – which of course also depend heavily on the material the particle was made of and its reflective capabilities.

So as can be seen, even in the early days of digital photography it was a published fact that ‘orbs’ were the results of camera artefacts and the results of airborne particles and camera focal lengths. So where did the idea that orbs were paranormal come from? Any guesses?

The Rise of Paranormal Entertainment

In 2002 a new series aired on UK TV called Most Haunted. The show proved so popular that it became the template for almost all ghost hunting groups that sprang up at the time (despite the ‘for entertainment purposes only disclaimer on the show), and one of the theories that the show presented was that orbs were paranormal in nature.

Obviously, this essentially just ignored the technical data that was already published. The multitude of TV shows that followed in the footsteps of MH jumped on the ‘paranormal orb bandwagon’, which in turn led to the plethora of ghosthunting groups following suit – and the idea entered into modern pop culture, and while more and more serious investigators are trying to debunk orbs as paranormal evidence, the vast majority of ghosthunting groups – certainly from my experience – either still believe or turn a blind eye.

The myth persists

So why do people find it so easy to believe in the spirit orb?

A lot comes down to the lack of understanding of how photography works, coupled with a lot of paranormal groups and paranormal entertainment companies still insisting that orbs are evidence of ghosts. The cynic in me says that for the entertainment contingent, they need to have something to show their paying customers: without the customers’ orbs (so to speak) they’ll have nothing photographically to show for the event in most cases. The same goes for the paranormal groups and individuals who need that shred of ‘evidence’ to keep interest high. There are even those out there that are so invested in the ‘paranormal-orb’ phenomenon that they make a living from interpreting their spiritual meaning. Then there are those that in some cases after 20+ years of ghosthunting and referencing orbs as evidence, simply can’t or won’t accept the fact, as if they did it would mean they’d been wrong for all that time.

Then of course there are those that cling to any suggestion of an afterlife in times of grief. A ghosthunter claiming you have a spirit orb at your shoulder when you’re dealing with the loss of a loved one may bring much needed comfort, while at the same time cementing the idea that orbs are spirit manifestations. It can then be very difficult to accept otherwise at a later date.

Personally, I’d like to charitably suggest that the majority of ghosthunters out there who still promote the paranormal orb myth simply don’t know enough about the photographic process, rather than anything more manipulative. Does this make things any better? That’s down to the individual to decide.

During research for this article, I undertook a simple search for ‘paranormal orb’ on Google. I’d hoped to see the phenomenon debunked immediately, but the very first entry marks orbs as “Orbs of light are generally thought to be the manifestation of energy – which is why they’re sometimes referred to as ghost orbs or spirit orbs.” The second tab describes: “White or yellow equals nice spirits who are looking out for us and black or red orbs indicate evil or negative spirits or even demons that want to do us harm.” There’s then three links to ‘spirit orbs’ on Youtube. The next entry reads “While some people believe orbs are manifestations of spirits or other supernatural entities, others argue they can be explained by natural phenomena such as dust, pollen, or moisture particles reflecting light” – which is a little more hopeful, before it then goes on to describe the spiritual meaning behind orbs of different colours. There’s then a reference to a game where orbs are manifestations of spirits, and then finally we have a decent article entitled “Orbs debunked” and an article on backscatter. Sadly the final link is back to ghostly orbs again, before showing examples of what looks like a photograph taken through a swarm of midgies – and the label of paranormal orbs.

So based on the information given on the first page of the search (which most folk will stick to), while there’s some technical explanation over orbs as backscatter, and one on orbs being debunked, the majority are clearly still promoting the phenomenon as paranormal/spiritual. In fact in the next four pages of the search, only three entries debunked orbs as paranormal – and research on orbs such as that undertaken by ASSAP not even appearing in the first ten pages.

So at the moment, if a person is wavering in their belief of paranormal orbs, those using the internet to search for answers may well just give up before they find anything that describes the actual reason your photographs have lovely little glowing balls in them…

Notes and conclusions

Question: Are orbs (not visible to the human eye but which appear on photography) the visual manifestation of a spirit or ghost?
Observations: Beyond the first simple issue of the existance of spirits and ghosts having not been yet proven (ie, the question would be moot if spirits and ghosts do not actually exist), then other causal factors must first be examined, primarily the environment in which the photographs are taken and the photographic processes and technology used.
Hypothesis: This images are simply caused by particulate matter in the air.
Predictions: That the effect can be produced/replicated on photographs in dusty or similar conditions.
Experiment: Multiple photographs over years in many locations and under different conditions, with tests done on deliberate particulate photography with a multitude of camera types.
Analysis and conclusions: The data collected suggests that orbs are a product of backscatter and the Circle of Confusion, with no data to suggest otherwise.
Issues: the main issue with the question over whether orbs can be seen as evidence of spirit manifestation, is that there is no proof of the existance of ghosts and spirits, and thus no way of actually recording their presence and so their ability to appear on photography.

The phenomena in question can be explained by backscatter and varying Circles of Confusion, and can be re-created in the field and also under laboratory conditions. However, as there is no evidence that ghosts and spirits exist, and thus no way of measuring their presence and their effect on photography, the question itself must be suggested as moot and cannot be answered.

Updates

23rd February 2025 project launched
1. Web page added

23/03/2025 project update
1. Video added: Chapter 1.1

31/03/2025 web page update
1. Suggestion box added

The project pages will continue to develop as and when I find more relevant information, with more sections being added as and when I’ve collated the relevant research.

Your recommendations

Do you have any links or sources that you’d recommend me add to this resource page? This can be recommended material from either the pro or con/anti orbs being paranormal in origin.

If you do, please click on the suggestion box above and send the relevant info through! Note, please use full URLS for links – that way they will be vetted for naughtiness easier. Thanks

Examples of orbs

Examples of orbs (click camera above)

Within the Boggart Wood: History, Folklore and Ghostlore