Judging by the images we see on the cable ghost hunting shows and many clips from local investigative groups, there is some need for a short discourse on camcorder choices that are best suited to the situations encountered during a paranormal investigation. When choosing equipment, we need to remember the types of situations that will be encountered. The paranormal investigation is the perfect place to remember that newer is not always better.

Camcorder choice is vital in ensuring that we get the images we need when we need them. Not every brand is suited to this kind of work, so we must take into account the features that will be of the most benefit to us in our work. The key features I look for in a camcorder are light sensitivity and ease of use. We need a unit that can capture a good image in all different kinds of lighting conditions and is sensitive to infrared light, as well as being easy to use and configure in the dark.

Sony has typically been the brand of choice due to their venerable NightShot® system, but not all Sony models are up to the task. We will look at a few of the cameras employed by KCPS to get an idea of what to look for in a camera.

The workhorse of our video equipment is the Sony TRV108. This camera is a number of years old now, but its low-light sensitivity is outstanding. It is a Hi8 camera, so the output resolution is not nearly as crisp as that of a MiniDV, but its ease of use and low-light handling make it more than valuable. It is a bit of a large camera, but spends most of its time on a tripod. Audio recorded from the TRV108 is clear, albeit a bit noisy. This model is equipped with the original Sony nightshot and a ¼” sensor. The ¼” sensor in the TRV108 is the primary source of the light sensitivity. Remember, the smaller the sensor, the more light it must have to provide a good image. The TRV108 is also very easy to use, set it up in the light, and use it in the dark.

A quick word about the NightShot® system: when not in use, the camera places an infrared-blocking filter in front of the imaging chip. This allows the camera to faithfully reproduce colors in the recorded image. As these sensors are naturally quite sensitive to infrared light, if this sensor was not in use the resultant image would display strange colors and tones. When switched into NightShot® mode, the filter is removed from the light path to allow the imaging chip to take full advantage of both ambient and infrared illumination, and an infrared LED is activated when entering NightShot® mode to provide illumination on the subject. Different Sony models accomplish the movement of the infrared filter in different ways, as we will see. 

The TRV108 has the added benefit of a mechanically-actuated infrared-blocking filter. Ours is modified so that the filter can moved from the light path without putting the camera into NightShot® mode. This allows the TRV108 to film in full color while still being extremely sensitive to infrared light, and instead of a green image, infrared scenes are rendered in black and white. This allows the camera to register color when white light is used while still providing excellent low-light imaging. Additionally, the TRV108, TRV308, and TRV608 (which are all essentially the same camera with a few different features) can be procured for a relatively small investment (between $100 and $200) on eBay®.

There are two major drawbacks to the TRV108. First, they are old and as such, tend to develop mechanical issues if not maintained properly. They can tend to be a bit finicky at times, so should not be entirely relied upon. Video resolution aside, the other major flaw is the lack of a data interface. In order to capture video from the TRV108, a TV card or camcorder with a DV pass-through must be used.

All in all, the TRV108 has been an outstanding performer for KCPS. If anyone is interested in the NightShot®, just send me a message and I will post some instructions.

Our number 2 unit is the Sony TRV70. This is a MiniDV camcorder with a plethora of features that I most likely will not ever use. It is however, a solid unit and is well suited for a variety of tasks. This camera is equipped with a 1/3.6″ advanced HAD CCD and Carl Zeiss lens. This imager is slightly larger than the TRV108 however the low-light performance is not as good as the TRV108 due to software exposure control. The TRV70 captures an excellent, high-resolution video image. It can also capture 2MP stills to the onboard memory stick, and has a built-in flash. In NightShot®, a good image requires a supplemental infrared source such as the HVL-IRM or HVL-IRH2. The TRV70 has both NightShot® and Super NightShot®.  The infrared filter is removed from the light path via an electromechanical actuator, and I have not yet endeavored to modify it as I did the TRV108. This will most likely be done in the future, as it gives more shooting options. The TRV70 uses touch-screen operation, so no fumbling in the dark for buttons, but it has many features so be sure to familiarize yourself with their locations.

What’s the difference between NightShot® and Super NightShot®? I’m glad you asked! Super Nightshot® adds a dynamic shutter control in order to maintain brightness levels. The camera automatically adjusts the shutter speed to compensate for light levels. This sounds good, but in completely dark or very dark conditions without infrared lighting, the shutter speed becomes so long that the recorded image gets quite sluggish and nearly unusable. Super NightShot® therefore, is to be avoided.

Overall, the TRV70 is an excellent camera for nearly every situation. It sports a load of features and captures a superb image. The TRV70 originally sold for about $1000, but I was recently able to purchase one with a load of accessories for $175 on eBay. This price is not typical, however. The TRV70 usually runs about $200 to $400 used.

The last ditch in our camera bag is the Sony HC26. This camera is only good for documenting well-lit areas, mainly for a daylight tour of a site. The light sensitivity stinks, the optics are mediocre, and the NightShot® Plus is a joke. Even though it is a miniDV, the HC26 has only a 1/6″ sensor. Its size is really the only positive of this camera, as it is small enough to put in a jacket pocket. The HC26 is easy to use, but not worth it most of the time.

NightShot® Plus is a newer system on the Sony cameras that allows color as well as infrared sensitivity, not unlike the modification I have made to our TRV108. The biggest difference is that the HC26 requires so much illumination to properly expose the scene, that the NightShot® is not all that useful to begin with.

The bottom line on cameras is this: The larger the sensor, the better the light sensitivity (to a point). The ultra-compact cameras are usually to be avoided, as they are not built for image quality and performance, but for convenience. The TRV108/308/608 line, while older and Hi8 are excellent for great low-light performance. They can be had fairly cheaply, but are more prone to mechanical issues due to their age. The TRV70 is an excellent choice for a moderate investment, and can be used in many situations. Keep in mind that many of the cable shows are spending big dollars on cameras, but they are not always the most effective. Because we are using our videos to refer back to, we want to strive to get the best image possible in any given situation.

I have not yet tried the newest hard drive cameras, as I have not seen the required feature set. Before making any equipment purchase, do your research and be sure of what you are buying.

Thanks for taking the time.  –Cap’n

 Ghost boxes… my, my, my.

–Cap’n Casper

The latest and greatest EVP craze these days is the ghost box. Reminiscent of Spiricom and the Phychophon, these devices are claimed to be a live link to the dead. Don’t get too excited just yet, it gets better. There are also some organizations selling sessions (sound familiar?) for contacting deceased relatives and other loved ones using these devices. Now, those are pretty amazing claims. I would be amazed too, if they actually produced results.

What is a ‘ghost box’?

Also called ‘Frank’s Box’, the idea was brought forth by Frank Sumption. He began constructing devices that he claimed would provide a means of communication with the dead based on a few simple ideas. His original designs utilized the AM tuning section of a car stereo as the primary reception device. The receivers operated via a VCO, or voltage controlled oscillator to tune in a particular station. A white noise generator based on the base-emitter thermal noise of a standard bipolar junction transistor (BJT) was used to provide a ‘random tuning voltage’ to the VCO. This setup caused the AM tuner to randomly tune across the AM spectrum (sounds a lot like EVP maker software). This randomized AM reception was then fed into a speaker mounted in an ‘echo chamber’ (box) along with a microphone. The microphone was of course, fed to a recorder. In principle, the thought is that the random reception of broadcast stations provides a kind of ‘raw material’ to facilitate the construction of intelligible phrases by non-physical beings.

Why not a ‘ghost box’?

While it seems a tempting setup to try, this method has some obvious drawbacks. First, I have listened to many ‘EVP samples’ recorded with methods similar to this, and they are subject to interpretation at best. I have heard (and recorded myself) much, much better samples than even those presented on Mr. Sumption’s website. All of the recordings that I have heard made with this method can be termed “un-impressive”.

Second, let’s think about the skeptics’ major beef with any EVP: electromagnetic interference, radio or otherwise. The setup of a ‘ghost box’ is the epitome of radio interference. Since it uses an AM receiver, all sorts of non-paranormal sources could be picked up such as baby monitors, cordless phones, and two-way radios just to name a few. To make matters worse, lately many have been constructing these boxes to simply sweep the AM spectrum (because that is easier to accomplish, not because it works better) even though Sumption says in his construction notes that it seems to be the ‘randomness’ of the reception that allows the device to work. At bare minimum, these devices should only be used within well-constructed Faraday cages and as far as possible from high-power broadcast AM sources, but then that would defeat the primary principle of operation… interesting.

Third, there have been hundreds of thousands of acceptable EVP samples recorded with tried-and-true methods. For many years, the setup for recording was a simple dynamic microphone and a high quality recording deck. Why not improve this method? Not only does a dynamic microphone respond to acoustic events, but also electromagnetic events as well. Since they pickup electromagnetic events via induction, they respond primarily to the magnetic portion of an EM wave. In an electromagnetic wave, the magnetic component loses amplitude much more quickly than the electrical component (a function of the inverse cube of the distance from source). This means that even electromagnetic interference at a distance of several feet will typically not be picked up at the microphone. Local disturbances however (just in case EVP is really electromagnetic in nature, which some research suggests), will be picked up within a few inches of the microphone element. So if a ‘personality’ wanted to interact with the microphone element, that task could be accomplished either acoustically or electromagnetically. Dynamic microphones also have another distinct advantage: they’re cheap. I just purchased a lot of 10 studio microphones on Ebay for a grand total of $76. I plan to construct a dynamic ‘array’, similar to the infra sound arrays used by seismologists. I will post results and details as they are available.

Finally, let’s all remember that the tendency of the human brain is to make sense of what it hears. Our brains rely on memories to process input, which is why voices can be heard to faintly appear out of static. Subconsciously we need to recognize our sensory input, and the mind is a powerful thing. Because of this, I believe it is folly to accept anything less than a class A (fully intelligible, no interpretation needed) voice. I do not analyze anything that requires straining to hear or multiple listens to decipher.

The verdict…

While an intriguing concept, we must remember that live communication with the ‘other side’ has not been accomplished since the days of Spiricom, and it now seems that that may have been a sham (more to come on this). We must continue to be vigilant in the face of those offering an easy solution without much to offer us in the way of evidence. Many investigators claim to be all about collecting hard scientific evidence, but in the end they just open their wallets wide for every roadside ‘snake oil’ stand. Fancy gadgets will not good research make. I have seen many websites touting to be the only group in the area that uses a ‘constanflabuglator’, or whatever the gadget of the week happens to be. I have also noticed that these groups have little, or nothing at all to offer in the way of data supporting any kind of theories.

If we work smart and work together we will find the answers. We are fortunate to exist in the most exciting age of discovery in human history. Let’s not squander that gift just for the sake of the ‘easy way’.

Thanks for taking the time.

-Cap’n Casper

-cap’n casper, founder

Attempting to capture electronic voice phenomena (EVP) remain one of the most popular activities for ‘ghost hunters’. While a laudable pursuit, when does having the newest gadget actually hinder one’s work? With the advent of small digital voice recorders, it seems that many investigators have sacrificed quality for convenience. These devices provide great flexibility, but many not provide the audio fidelity of other means of recording. So what should be used? Let’s take a look at some common devices and methods and see if we can come to some sort of conclusion.

For decades, magnetic tape was the predominant means of recording audio. Reel-to-reel recorders were used by the earliest pioneers of EVP, including Friedrich Jeurgenson, Konstantin Raudive, and others. At the time, these were the highest fidelity devices available and were capable of providing good results. Then came the development of self-contained magnetic tape cartridges. These cassettes made magnetic tape recording more accessible and easier to implement.  Low-end decks tended to be overly noisy, which led to the development of Dolby noise reduction. High-end tape decks are still readily available, and many can be purchased in a used condition for quite reasonable prices. DAT (digital audio tape) was one of the last iterations of magnetic media, utilizing a magnetic tape to store audio data much like the magnetic data backup media of the computer world. This description of the evolution of magnetic tape technology is of course, overly simplified and meant merely to provide a frame of reference for the comparisons to come.

Analog recordings using magnetic tape have the advantage of not altering the audio signal in any way (except in the case of DAT). The incoming signal is written directly to the magnetic medium in real time. This has the distinct advantage of direct transfer. Upon analysis with an oscilloscope or other equipment, the signal can be seen in its original form. However, high-end tape decks are not terribly portable. Portable units are notoriously noisy and suffer from a serious lack of fidelity. While I continue to use tape cassettes in many of my experiments, the tapes used are only of the metal type and I use a relatively good recording deck with a high quality head.

Technology will tend to advance, which has given rise to digital recorders. Whether done on optical disk, flash memory, or hard disk, digital recorders have undergone miniaturization many times over and are now just as portable as our cell phones, but what about quality? Quality of a digital recording comes down to two major factors: sampling rate and bandwidth. Sampling rate describes how many digital samples of the audio signal are taken every second. CDs are recorded at a rate of 44.1 kHz (44,100 samples per second) which has become somewhat of a standard for consumer audio. When speaking about other digital audio, such as MP3, sampling rate is replaced by data rate. Data rate with regards to MP3 files is the amount of data that is dedicated to the recording of audio every second. A typical MP3 data rate is 128 kB/sec which means that 128kb is used to create the file every second. Bandwidth is the frequency range of a recording. For example, human hearing ranges from about 20Hz to 20kHz, give or take. Ideally any recording will have at least this range of frequencies.

The sampling rate of a digital recording is mainly a function of the capability of the hardware used, and the higher the sampling rate, the higher the quality of the recording. According to the Nyquist Theory, the upper limit of a digital recording will be approximately half the sampling rate. Therefore, a recording made at 44.1kHz will top out at about 22kHz which is about 2kHz above the typical range of human hearing. This theory also claims that frequencies that are outside the range of human hearing will have an effect on those that are. For example, many audio enthusiasts claim that vinyl recordings sound better than digital. Vinyl records can produce frequencies at up to 50kHz, well outside the range of the human ear and so it is claimed that these high frequencies add to the quality of the recording as a whole. In the digital world, this would equate to a sampling rate of 96kHz producing an upper limit of 48kHz in the resultant recording. In general, for the purpose of later analysis the highest sampling rate is best.

Bandwidth, or frequency response, is a major quality consideration. For example, a CD recording has a frequency response that mimics that of human hearing while a telephone has a bandwidth of only about 3kHz. That means that in the case of a telephone conversation, only about 1/6^th of the frequencies we can hear are transmitted. All the rest is lost to the ether. Similar to sampling rate, larger bandwidth means a better recording. Let’s take a look at a couple of digital technologies as a function of these factors and see what might work best.

Optical disc recorders

Included in this category would be Minisic and other similar devices. While not always the most convenient, these units have a wide frequency response (20Hz to 20kHz) and CD quality (44.1kHz) sampling rates. Additionally, a single disc can store up to hours of audio. With an external high-quality microphone, these produce phenomenal recordings with very little background noise. I have used Minidisc for a number of years in conjunction with magnetic tape with wonderful results. On the downside though, the acquisition of the data to PC can be a bit cumbersome and using an external microphone is not always an optimal situation from a standpoint of portability.

Handheld digital voice recorders

These are among the most portable and convenient of devices available. They allow the capability to record almost anywhere, and most current units are equipped with USB interfaces to allow quick downloads of recorded data to a computer. Sounds great, right? Before we decide to go out and buy one, let’s take a look at the specs of some of these units. Most of the handheld voice recorders available at ‘big-box’ retailers are mediocre at best and unfortunately, these are what I see many investigators using. For instance, the Sony ICD-BM1A (a $300 unit) has a maximum sampling rate of only 16kHz, less than half that of Minidisc. Its frequency response is 60Hz to 13.5kHz, much narrower than that of the range of the human ear. So, while it is more convenient, that convenience comes with the cost of reduced quality. Olympus does produce a digital recorder with a sampling rate of 44.1kHz (CD quality), but with a reduced frequency response as well.

However, not all is lost for the handheld digital recorder. Once we step outside of the product offerings of the ‘big-box’ stores, we will find that many more options are available. For instance, the Zoom H2 and H4 provide phenomenal recording (up to 98kHz sampling in .wav format) and many additional features that the mainstream recorders can’t even approach. These types of professional level recorders would be a much better option for anyone with the desire to truly capture high-quality recordings and maintain ease of use and portability.

The final word

It seems that many groups are content to simply record audio than record high-quality audio that will stand up to serious analysis. This begs the question: are these investigators really trying to find out the origins of voices, or are the voices themselves enough? Whatever the purpose, we always need to make sure that the equipment we employ is commensurate with the duty it is to perform. If every effort is made to capture the best data possible, the skeptics may someday run out of arguments.

Thanks for taking the time.

James ‘Cap’n Casper’ Presnell: founder

–
Lately many paranormal groups have been making wide use of FLIR imaging systems. While quite impressive as a piece of equipment (they start at about 3 or 4 thousand dollars and go up from there), they tend to be a bit misused from what I have seen.

FLIR (Forward Looking InfraRed) systems, sometimes called thermal cameras or thermal scanners are similar in operation to IR thermometers (for more info on IR thermometers, go HERE) in that they measure the amount of emitted IR radiation striking the devices sensor. FLIR typically uses a microbolometer, which is similar in operation to a digital camera’s CCD chip. However instead of measuring visible light (wavelengths of about 380 to 750nm), IR camera produce their image in response to emitted heat in the form of infrared radiation (wavelengths from about 750nm up to .03cm). Just like IR thermometers, the heat measured by these devices is emitted heat. Instead of taking one reading, the sensor matrix takes many thousands of readings and presents them as an image so be viewed by the user. The type of image provided by these devices has become familiar to many in recent years. The image is produced by assigning each temperature a color, then using the readings obtained by the sensor to show temperature gradients in the field of view of the lens. Not all images are in color, though. Some thermal cameras display in black and white (think of watching ‘COPS’ and seeing an image from a search helicopter). Special lenses are used in these devices to block out the effects of ambient light on the images.

FLIR devices can be useful if implemented in an appropriate fashion. However, many groups claim that they can see ‘cold spots’. Not true. Because FLIR systems measure emitted heat like IR thermometers, matter that is emitting heat is required to obtain a reading. –Remember that by heat, we are talking about anything above absolute zero, or -273 degrees Celsius.– In fact, fire-fighting agencies have been using FLIR systems for a number of years due to their ability to ‘see’ through dense smoke inside buildings. Because IR radiation can penetrate dense clouds of particulate matter even in low light conditions, fire rescue personnel may employ the use of a FLIR system to aid in finding trapped people in burning buildings.

I think the primary appeal of FLIR systems is twofold. First, they’re hi-tech. Most people tend to think that hi-tech is good even if it is used improperly. Technology seems to have a knack of adding credence to claims made by someone trying to make a point. Second, thermal cameras allow us to see beyond our senses. We can feel the heat of an object, but seeing that invisible property somehow makes it more real. After all, the human mind runs on images, hence the old adage ‘seeing is believing’.

Are FLIR systems useful? Absolutely. Are they sometimes over-used? Absolutely. It all boils down to one invaluable concept: know your equipment. If you are going to spend the money to purchase a FLIR and the time to use it, know why you are using it. Understand how the device works and what it is telling you. Most importantly though, comprehend why that data is useful and what you can learn or infer from it. If we truly want to be scientific and thoughtful in our approaches, we will always endeavor to gain the greatest position of understanding in all that we do.

Thanks for taking the time.

-Cap’n Casper

I really hate to write this post, but I’ve seen too much erroneous information presented both on the web and in print to let it go any longer. There seems to be a serious misunderstanding regarding the actual method of operation of IR thermometers, so let’s clear the air!

Sometimes referred to as non-contact thermometers or pyrometers, these devices measure the surface temperature of an object based on the emitted far-IR as guided by the principle of black-body radiation. All objects with a temperature above absolute zero emit some amount of energy in the far-IR spectrum. This lies beyond the infrared visible with night-vision goggles and below low frequency radio waves. We are all familiar with this sort of IR radiation, although we don’t think of it as such. What is called far-IR raditation, we know as heat. This IR radiation can be of three types: reflected, transmitted, and emitted.

The emitted IR energy of an object will determine its surface temperature and is affected by the emissivity of the object being measured. Truly accurate measurements require the device to be calibrated for the emissivity of the material being measured, but most units have a fixed emissivity value of 0.95 that corresponds to most organic matter and painted surfaces. Reflected energy can potentially come from an exterior light source, and is generally only a problem with shiny metals. In this case, the measurement area can be covered with masking tape to eliminate the reflected energy. Transmitted energy is related to the object’s internal temperature, and any object to which the heat is transferred to.

Now that be have a basic understanding of the device’s operation, let us now dispell a couple of myths.

 #1:IR thermometers DO NOT EMIT ANY IR!!!

Read that again…

You may be saying ‘but what about the laser?’. The laser on a non-contact thermometer is for AIMING PURPOSES ONLY. It provides the same function as a laser on a gun, but without the abrupt finale. The IR thermometer might just as well have an optical scope attached. Readings are made by the use of a simple optics system much like that of a camera that focuses IR heat onto a pyroelectric detector element. The meter takes a ‘picture’ of the IR being radiated from an object, but does not contribute any of its own.

 Because of this, the measurement area grows larger in proportion to the measurement distance much like a spotlight beam. Therefore, the field of view (FOV) must be considered when making measurements. If a measurement is being made from a considerable distance, the reading will actually be something of an average of temperatures within the optical field of view of the device.

 #2: IR themometers CANNOT measure ‘cold spots’!!

Non-contact thermometers rely upon heat emitted from an OBJECT (or matter of some sort) to make temperature readings. They are no more capable of measureing cold spots in a room than a thermal imager. There must be some sort of material providing radiated IR, and unless the local atmosphere contains a dense concentration of particulate matter (which would not be accurately measured, but only affect a measurement), IR thermometers cannot be used to ‘scan’ an area for ‘cold spots’. Remember, even if it appears that a reading is above or below the ambient temperature, if an IR thermometer is being pointed into a large area the reading can be affected by the three types of IR radiation: reflected, transmitted, and emitted. These devices simply are not desinged to measure the tempature of empty space. That’s what probe thermometers, thermistors, and thermocouples are for.

These devices were designed to read the surface temperature of objects in hazardous locations, objects that are dangerously hot or cold, and for other applications in which a contact temperature reading is simply not feasible. They perform well and are convenient, but not suited to every application.

Thanks for taking the time.

The EMF (electro-magnetic field) meter has become a staple in the world of paranormal investigation. A variety of devices are now widely available and most are quite moderately priced. Do these gadgets provide sufficient usefulness to the investigator? And if so, what types of ˜EMFs” are worth our scientific attention?

Nearly all measurable energy is electromagnetic in nature. Due to the propagation methods of most forms of energy, both electric and magnetic field components are involved (hence the term electromagnetic). As shown in the figure below, these components travel in the same direction and with the same magnitude, but out of phase in space.

There is a frequency of oscillation measure in Hz and a wavelength in meters, not to get too technical. The practical implication of these facts is to understand that change their instantaneous amplitude at a constant rate over time. Nearly all meters rely on this characteristic to make measurements. Most employ a coil of wire to sense EM fields via the principle of mutual induction. Simply put, this means that any EM field will induce a current in a coil of wire within said field. This signal is amplified by the meter and output in the form of some display.

Now that we’re past all that, let’s discuss its practical field implications. It is important for an investigator to understand the capabilities of any given meter. Many instruments do not measure fields oscillating below 50 or 60 Hz or above 80 or 100 kHz. Fields in this frequency range are almost certainly man-made, so any readings obtained with these devices would merely serve to find ˜artificial” sources or radiated energy. The venerable Trifield meter however, will measure DC (static) fields, but only rapid changes in magnitude will register. (The Trifield has additional interesting functionality that will be explored in a later article.) These static fields actually fall into the category of geomagnetic radiation and are produced as a result of the Earth’s gravitational field and its interaction with ferrous metals and other magnetic substances. Great care must be taken when employing the Trifield meter in the field, as any rotation of the meter within the Earth’s gravitational field will generate a momentary reading that could easily be mistaken for an anomalous find. In fact, it is suggested by the manufacturer that it be used as a stationary device in magnetic mode.

EM fields are everywhere, and the rampant misuse if EMF meters has produced a false sense of data acquisition among investigators. The ability to measure an unseen force has preceded the desire to properly implement that ability in many cases. When using instruments such as these, we must be aware not only of their capabilities but also of their limitations and the validity of any readings obtained. EMF meters should not be used as catch-all devices, but should be employed properly and only when warranted. It is doubtful that many man-made EM fields have a significant effect on paranormal phenomena. While very low frequency, high magnitude fields have been shown to induce perceived phenomena, evidence is mostly anecdotal.

The bottom line is this: useful readings involve more than a swinging meter needle, flashing lights, or a beeping tone. Know your equipment, know what you are measuring, and understand what your meters are telling you.

Thanks for taking the time.

–Cap’n Casper