Maybe it’s just selection bias, but I feel like there were a lot more alleged recordings of paranormal activity going around back when most video and audio was recorded on analog media, compared to after 2004-2005 when Sony Hi8 Handycams hit the lights on the way out and digital took over.
Is that because ghosts can slip through the gaps between the 0s and 1s, but magnetic heads force them into the visible plane? Or is it because people didn’t have widely available CG animation dulling their imaginations? Or perhaps it’s unrelated - did Saddam simply take all the ghosts with him into the afterlife?
I would love to hear your thoughts, and if you make recordings when you go ghost hunting, I’d love to hear about your gear setup.
Analogue recordings of poor quality aren’t the same as poor quality digital recordings. The lack of quality in analogue recordings made the appearance of “paranormal” easier to claim.
Isn’t it interesting how as quality improved, paranormal sightings decreased.
In the very early days of digital photography a ton of people with 1MP cameras were picking up “orbs” and “ectoplasm” and claiming they were ghosts, but I guess that didn’t last very long. Your point certainly holds true today in the sense that if you present a low quality digital image today, people assume it’s scuffed on purpose and become skeptical.
That was dust close to the camera being illuminated by the flash.
Lots of compact digital cameras were smaller than their film counterparts meaning the lenses and flashes are closer together.
Digital compacts had much smaller sensors than 35mm film so the increased depth of field also meant the dust motes were more defined.