cameras and ghosts

[sweetkb713]

Sweet,if it's a digital camera,why do you keep saying you have it on 'film'??

Sorry. I didn't realize I had to be so technical. Film students call everything film.

 

[sweetkb713]

My point - teachers get bored

I'm not really sure what your point is. To what teacher are you referring? Mine?

 

[sweetkb713]

I'm confused about some things. Do these cameras have a physical power switch that cannot be controlled by a remote? Does the camera also have a standby/online switch? Can it be controlled by the remote?

Yes, there is a physical switch. It cannot be controlled by any remote control. You can turn a camera on if it is in a power save mode, but the switch has to be flipped to camera first. If the switch is flipped to off, it is OFF.

How can you see this on the video? Is the physical switch flipping back and forth? If not, what do you mean by the camera turning on and off?[/B]

The camera is switched to off. You can see that it's switched to off. And then the camera turns on without the switch turning to camera or playback.

[/B][/QUOTE]If it is a physical switch, it would have to be some mighty mighty electrical field to affect the camera's power.

What about a static electricity buildup? Could that have any affect?[/B][/QUOTE]


[/B][/QUOTE]What, now certain aspects of the experience are off limits to discussion?

And no one is going to go back to see if it happens again?

~~ Paul [/B][/QUOTE]

I'm tired of people obsessing about the one thing that is most likely human error and can be explained away, and hitting me over the head with that. Yes, I get it. I explained a few days ago that's possible. Why do we have to go on about it?

They haven't said anything about going back. It's a private business, and I don't know if the owners would want other students just tramping around running experiments. But it does warrent some investigation.

 

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

SKB said:
The camera is switched to off. You can see that it's switched to off. And then the camera turns on without the switch turning to camera or playback.

Well, that's certainly interesting. You can see the switch set to OFF. Then what happens that makes you think the camera turns on? A display comes on? Lights blink?

And you're absolutely sure that I can't turn the camera on with a remote, even with the switch set to OFF?

~~ Paul

 

[Jaggy Bunnet]

Yes, there is a physical switch. It cannot be controlled by any remote control. You can turn a camera on if it is in a power save mode, but the switch has to be flipped to camera first. If the switch is flipped to off, it is OFF.



The camera is switched to off. You can see that it's switched to off. And then the camera turns on without the switch turning to camera or playback.

Anyone checked if the switch (or the connections from the switch are loose/faulty?

 

[Checkmite]

Re: Re: cameras and ghosts

When I wsas little I'd play tricks on my sister like that, I'd have a second remote and change her channel on her. It took her quite a while to figure it out, she was going nuts thinking the TV was broke.

When I was little, my dad bought a cool stereo system, that came with a remote. The volume control on the tuner was actually a knob (with a little LED on it to act as the "pointer"), and when you used the remote's buttons to change the volume, the LED would flicker and the knob would actually turn all by itself...freaked me out the first time I saw it.

Even if the teacher didn't give out the remotes, someone could have had their own remote (often the same remote works for different models by the same company, or it could be a universal remote). Make that DID have their own remote, lots of fun to do that in a "haunted" house.

I'll bet if you cover up the remote sensor on the camera w/ black tape the "ghosts" will go away.

This reminds me of another set of incidents when I was young. I had a radio-controlled racecar. When I wasn't using it, I kept it in its styrofoam box on top of my dresser. One night, when I hadn't gotten to sleep yet, and everything was quiet, a started hearing tiny bursts of a very faint "electric" sound...each was about a second (or a little less) in length. Sometimes, a whole bunch of these little bursts would come in rapid succession. I eventually deduced that the sound was coming from the steering servos and main motor in my radio-controlled car. I removed the batteries from the handset, but the little twitches continued until I removed the battery from the car itself. That meant my car wasn't receiving instructions from my handset, but from some sort of outside interference.

Things like my car - and remote-controlled video cameras - are not only susceptible to interference, they're required to accept it by FCC regulations. Take any electronic instrument involved with radio and read the tiny "FCC Compliant" blurb that comes with the documentation. The interference doesn't even have to come from its own remote.

Remotes aren't the only possible explanation for events like the ones in question; but they ARE possible. Until the experiment can be duplicated with measures in place to ensure that remote controls will not function, it must be considered. Electrical tape over the sensor will work very nicely to prohibit remote interference.

 

[Checkmite]

They haven't said anything about going back. It's a private business, and I don't know if the owners would want other students just tramping around running experiments. But it does warrent some investigation.

YES, it warrants investigation!!!

One thing I get tired of is people coming out with stories like the one you've been told, of fantastic unexplained physical phenomena and effects, and hearing the story end with "we won't ever go back there". I don't understand those people. A camera, with a physical circuit breaking switch set firmly to OFF, suddenly turns on and starts working by itself? Excessive power drains unique to a physical location? And then, no further interest in the site at all? "Oh, ho-hum, that's weird, but let's go home"? I think not.

 

[sweetkb713]

Well, that's certainly interesting. You can see the switch set to OFF. Then what happens that makes you think the camera turns on? A display comes on? Lights blink?

And you're absolutely sure that I can't turn the camera on with a remote, even with the switch set to OFF?

~~ Paul

The camera turned on because you can see through the viewfinder. Come on, Paul, don't be thick.

Yes, you can't turn the camera on when it is set to off. I am positive.

 

[sweetkb713]

Anyone checked if the switch (or the connections from the switch are loose/faulty?

It is certainly a possibility, but no one else has had problems with the camera before or after this happened.

 

[CFLarsen]

YES, it warrants investigation!!!

One thing I get tired of is people coming out with stories like the one you've been told, of fantastic unexplained physical phenomena and effects, and hearing the story end with "we won't ever go back there". I don't understand those people. A camera, with a physical circuit breaking switch set firmly to OFF, suddenly turns on and starts working by itself? Excessive power drains unique to a physical location? And then, no further interest in the site at all? "Oh, ho-hum, that's weird, but let's go home"? I think not.

Precisely.

Believers shy away from real investigations, because they are terrified that their beliefs might be shattered by reality. They prefer to live in denial. We have seen it here, on this board, in many variations: The half-baked investigations, the faked ones, more and more desperate attempts to explain (away) the tough facts, ignorant, incoherent rants, even all-out insanity.

Believers being oh, so open-minded and courageous enough to see new horizons: It's pure manure. Believers are ruled by fear.

 

[Hagrok]

The camera turned on because you can see through the viewfinder. Come on, Paul, don't be thick.

Yes, you can't turn the camera on when it is set to off. I am positive.

OK, to make this 100% clear, there is video of a camera, whose record switch is clearly marked in the "OFF" position, whose "viewfinder" suddenly comes on, whilse the record switch is still clearly in the "OFF" position. I'm guessing by viewfinder that you mean the digital LCD display of what the camera is seeing. Is that right?

Anyway you could get ahold of this video and digitally record it and post it here? That'd be great, we could probably even get the make and model of the camera from that.

--Dan

 

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

SKB said:
The camera turned on because you can see through the viewfinder.

Yup, I'm thick, because I don't understand this statement at all. Hagrok and I would both like clarification.

~~ Paul

 

[Hagrok]

Yup, I'm thick, because I don't understand this statement at all. Hagrok and I would both like clarification.

~~ Paul

Note that that I'm not trying to be a jerk here. It's just that it's impossible to formulate an opinion without more information. As the saying goes, the Devil's in the Details.

Sure, we could say "well, it must be some kind of electrical interference". But that's not really any better then saying "well, it must have been a ghost".

--Dan

 

[Hand Bent Spoon]

After reading all the possibilities here, to me it seems there are three possibilities, from most likely to least (IMO):

1. They faked it. Graduate film students + haunted location = "Hey, I have an idea!" Also, the location seems to be run by a person with a stake in its haunted reputation. Think you can't be fooled? Then you're the easiest to fool of all.

2. Interference. Electrical, magnetic, whatever. Something was interfering with the proper operation of the cameras.

3. Genuine ghost activity. This 'possibility' is here, but it is unlikely in the extreme. If this possibility panned out, science texts would have to be reworked.

IMHO, you've been served.

 

[sweetkb713]

After reading all the possibilities here, to me it seems there are three possibilities, from most likely to least (IMO):

1. They faked it. Graduate film students + haunted location = "Hey, I have an idea!" Also, the location seems to be run by a person with a stake in its haunted reputation. Think you can't be fooled? Then you're the easiest to fool of all.

Actually, the people who own the building don't have a stake in its haunted reputation. In fact, most of the local people that the students interviewed said that they never heard anything about hauntings.

2. Interference. Electrical, magnetic, whatever. Something was interfering with the proper operation of the cameras.[/B]

I think this is the most likely answer. I was just hoping there was someone here who knew more about this and could give me a better idea.

 

[Skeptical Greg]

I'm not trying to sway you. I'm not saying it's paranormal. I'm asking WHAT IT COULD BE. Please don't jump to conclusions about me.

Obsessing about one specific thing is a general "debunker" tactic.

Uhhh, Huhhh..

So, in what other circumstances have you found yourself at odds with "debunkers" ?


P.S.

In our experience, obsessing about one specific thing is a general " woo- woo" tactic ...

 

[sweetkb713]

Uhhh, Huhhh..

So, in what other circumstances have you found yourself at odds with "debunkers" ?

P.S.

In our experience, obsessing about one specific thing is a general " woo- woo" tactic ...

I'm not saying that I personally have been "at odds" with debunkers. However, I have observed that if normally rational people cannot come up with an explanation for something, instead of discussing THAT, they harp on one miniscule part of the story that they do understand.

For instance, I had already said that the batteries probably weren't charged all the way, and yet people continued to post that the batteries weren't charged all the way and pretty much said that I was in denial or didn't know what I was talking about.

Obsessing about one specific thing isn't really a tactic of a debunker or a believer. It's the tactic of a person who believes so strongly in their own ideas that they cannot bear to explore something that they don't understand or for which they have no explanation.

 

[Prester John]

Graduate film students go to a haunted house and come back with a film showing mysterious happenings!

Come on, why else go to a haunted house!

I have got a firm idea of what i think is the simplest and most obvious answer to this riddle.

 

[Skeptical Greg]

They haven't said anything about going back. It's a private business, and I don't know if the owners would want other students just tramping around running experiments. But it does warrent some investigation.

Seems like the owners could be in danger of serious liability issues regarding the presence of pace makers and the like..

Looks like they would do well to get to the bottom of this or cease all operations...

On the other hand, if the ghosts only like to play with video cameras, a suitable warning and disclaimer to that effect, should suffice..

 

[richardm]

Sweet,if it's a digital camera,why do you keep saying you have it on 'film'??

.. The digital camera was the one playing up, but there were also Hi-8 cameras there. Plus, sheer force of habit I should imagine. What word would you use instead?


Has anyone considered that it might have been a problem with the batteries ?

If the switch is physically moving positions, then it's not a simple electrical fault. It might be a mechanical switch operated by a remote though - like Joshua's stereo.