Digital cameras CAN see buried gold

[Tom_in_CA]

You saw him plant the coin? If you did'nt then you don't really know for sure do you?

Uh, go back on the thread and see. The persons making all the photos, are themselves the ones saying it . All the targets, where supposed auras and glows are present , were performed over planted test targets. Which would therefore make Jeff's request an easy one to fulfil. Eh?

By the way, I am not saying there is anything wrong with planting of test targets . To test a method. Was only saying that Jeff's request (To "dig it up already") could be easily done. Since these were test -plant photographs.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

A History of Mining on the Kenai Peninsula, Alaska - Grab it through Amazon!

[elh]

Uh, go back on the thread and see. The persons making all the photos, are themselves the ones saying it . All the targets, where supposed auras and glows are present , were performed over planted test targets. Which would therefore make Jeff's request an easy one to fulfil. Eh?

By the way, I am not saying there is anything wrong with planting of test targets . To test a method. Was only saying that Jeff's request (To "dig it up already") could be easily done. Since these were test -plant photographs.

Well, you and jeff are both out of touch with reality. Once a target is buried for testing, why dig it up for proof to a doubter? The doubter could easily say the buried target was NOT dug up, but another target was shown. Besides, buried targets need to stay for a length of time which can never be the same from one area to another.

 

[cybercore]

Hello Friends. I want to ask you ,what are you think for this image ?



I have make this image with my Smartphone Camera ,and after download to my PC,i have view this ....

 

[Tom_in_CA]

Hello Friends. I want to ask you ,what are you think for this image ?
View attachment 1568391
View attachment 1568392
....

Welcome to T'net. That appears to be a random cave. Or were you referring to the odd light streak in the top picture ? I'm sure that will have a rational explanation , and is not indicative of gold or silver. To show/prove that, all you have to do is dig there. And I'll bet you that there's no gold or silver there. Unless, that is, you planted something there, took 1000 pictures, till finally one of them had a blotch in it.

And I would think (any computer gurus would agree) that an image that you look at on your smart phone viewer, is going to be exactly the same image that you'd be looking at if/when you transferred it to your PC.

 

[cybercore]

Welcome to T'net. That appears to be a random cave. Or were you referring to the odd light streak in the top picture ? I'm sure that will have a rational explanation , and is not indicative of gold or silver. To show/prove that, all you have to do is dig there. And I'll bet you that there's no gold or silver there. Unless, that is, you planted something there, took 1000 pictures, till finally one of them had a blotch in it.

And I would think (any computer gurus would agree) that an image that you look at on your smart phone viewer, is going to be exactly the same image that you'd be looking at if/when you transferred it to your PC.

I absolutely agree with you ...

Can someone explain me in this moment which Canon camera is good for Aura Image , and what filter to buy for it .
I have read many source and info about Treasure aura's,and I want to start shooting because I have pretty interesting and almost safe places where there are treasures.
Thank you in advance...

 

[Tom_in_CA]

.... which Canon camera is good for Aura Image , and what filter to buy for it ....

Then you don't "absolutely agree with" me.

 

[Carl-NC]

Cybercore, the concept of treasure auras is a farce. Pretend. Make-believe. Tain't real. That said, if you want to join in the game, then you probably should get the recommended equipment.

David Villanueva (DV) recommends a Canon EOS 350D. If you get anything else and fail, this will be pointed out as the cause. Next, get an IR (pass) filter and attach to the lens; DV recommends a 720nm Cokin (square frame, probably A-style). Because the camera has a built-in IR blocking filter, at this point the two filters are blocking almost all the light to the sensor, across the entire spectrum. The resulting images will be extremely dark; pass them through gamma-correction software and, voila!, you have auras.

The "auras" you get are actually the result of luminance noise caused by too little light getting to the sensor. You can eliminate them by taking long exposure times, but that also eliminates the fun, which is why DV never recommends it. As I mentioned in a previous post, luminance noise is just as likely to show up photographing dog turds as buried treasure.

If you want to truly experiment with IR, then here's an alternative:

1. Get a camera with a CCD sensor. The Canon uses a CMOS sensor, and CCD has better low-light and IR sensitivity. My personal choice is a Minolta 7D, but they are almost collector items now. A possible good (and cheap) choice is a Sony Alpha A100, the follow-on after Sony bought Minolta. Should work just as well but I've never tried it.

2. Remove the internal IR filter. DV says Don't Do This, but if auras are really in the infrared region like he claims then it makes no sense to intentionally kill the IR light coming in, except for the fact that it produces luminance noise and people can pretend they are auras. There is plenty of info on the web as to how to remove the filter. You could replace it with an IR-pass filter (lots of IR photographers do this), but I recommend a glass spacer, and doing all the filtering at the front of the lens.

3. Get a variety of IR pass filters for the lens. Play around with the normal camera settings, and you will get some stunning IR photographs. Cut way back on the exposure time, or maybe throw in an IR blocking filter, and you can get a really dark image that can be post-processed to reveal either an aura or luminance noise. Depending on whether you were photographing buried gold or a dog turd.

While treasure auras are a bunch of made-up nonsense, IR photography is itself fascinating. And people have used IR imaging to look at ground density variations, to locate old roads, foundations, and the like. That is to say, IR is not useless in treasure hunting, but pretending it produces treasure auras is.

 

[cybercore]

Very Thank you,for informative answer.I will check this info very carefful.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

Very Thank you,for informative answer.I will check this info very carefful.

Cybercore: I'm not sure what there is to "check very carefully". Even though Carl went into deep detail about various cameras, etc... (going off the very claims of the proponents themselves), you will notice that everything he's saying is to show it does absolutely nothing. Except to accentuate photographic blotches that have nothing to do with treasure. So don't get caught up in Carl's long rambling talk of cameras and lenses (as if that was meant to lend some credence to the notion). It was actually to show the exact opposite: That it doesn't work .

 

[cybercore]

Cybercore: I'm not sure what there is to "check very carefully". Even though Carl went into deep detail about various cameras, etc... (going off the very claims of the proponents themselves), you will notice that everything he's saying is to show it does absolutely nothing. Except to accentuate photographic blotches that have nothing to do with treasure. So don't get caught up in Carl's long rambling talk of cameras and lenses (as if that was meant to lend some credence to the notion). It was actually to show the exact opposite: That it doesn't work .

Can I ask what method do you work with?

 

[Tom_in_CA]

Can I ask what method do you work with?

Sure: Metal detectors.

 

[Charlie P. (NY)]

Personally I doubt that auras exist so, although I sold cameras professionally at one time, I cannot help you in your search.

Most of what I see are dust motes (on the lens, in the lens, or floating in the air in front of the lens), aberrations caused by angled light entering the lens stack, or flaws made more pronounced by overpocessing the images.

Only radioactive elements and mineral ores are capable of producing wavelengths detectable by a camera on their own, and anything else has to be visibly exposed to a source of radiation (like from the sun).


Here is a display of gold at the Smithsonian Institution. Note the lack of auras in the image.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

.... Note the lack of auras in the image....

That only means they were weren't using the right kind of camera and lenses. Eh ?

 

[ScubaDetector]

Personally I doubt that auras exist so, although I sold cameras professionally at one time, I cannot help you in your search.

Most of what I see are dust motes (on the lens, in the lens, or floating in the air in front of the lens), aberrations caused by angled light entering the lens stack, or flaws made more pronounced by overpocessing the images.

Only radioactive elements and mineral ores are capable of producing wavelengths detectable by a camera on their own, and anything else has to be visibly exposed to a source of radiation (like from the sun).


Here is a display of gold at the Smithsonian Institution. Note the lack of auras in the image.

I think that is where my long range gold finder was pointing to from Michigan!

 

[SKIPTONRAY]

If this is real i have documents of a know 20,000 british gold coins buried in a one mile square-------------anyone up for the hunt??

 

[signal_line]

Those cameras don't waste your time. Honestly I can't think of a worse way to try to find anything. I'm in Montana, how far are you?

 

[signal_line]

You know what burns my rear more than anything is people who sell unproven devices/techniques. This is one of them.

And like I've said about long range locators, the 99% make the other 1% look bad. LOL

 

[Doubter in MD]

<snip>

=lesjcbs;5747887 Tom,you say you want compelling evidence. To be compelled is to be forced. The good book tells us the that needs to be compelled is an unwise and slothful servant.

From the dictionary... Compelling - com·pel·ling
kəmˈpeliNG

adjective

evoking interest, attention, or admiration in a powerfully irresistible way.

 

[lesjcbs]

<snip>



From the dictionary... Compelling - com·pel·ling
kəmˈpeliNG

adjective

evoking interest, attention, or admiration in a powerfully irresistible way.

The condition having to be compelled. From the dictionary as to what to be compelled about something means, is more than just to be interested:

com·pel
kəmˈpel/
verb
[COLOR=#878787 !important]past tense: compelled; past participle: compelled[/COLOR]

• force or oblige (someone) to do something.
  [COLOR=#878787 !important]"a sense of duty compelled Harry to answer her questions"[/COLOR]
  

  synonyms:

  force, pressure, press, push, urge; More

  • bring about (something) by the use of force or pressure.
    [COLOR=#878787 !important]"they may compel a witness's attendance at court by issue of a summons"[/COLOR]
  • [COLOR=#878787 !important]literary[/COLOR]
    drive forcibly.
    [COLOR=#878787 !important]"by heav'n's high will compell'd from shore to shore"[/COLOR]
  
  
  
  

 

[Jason in Enid]

Hahaha! When you can't defend your idea, debate semantics and syntax!