Digital cameras CAN see buried gold

Would a 900nm bandpass be a good choice for gold ore detection?

Randy

Randy,

While taking some test pictures with these filters I snapped some shots of my BBQ Grill while it was hot. (I had a very nice steak)  The 720nm, 760nm, and 850nm filters allowed for some recognizable pictures with the 850nm barely producing anything visible.  The photo taken with the 950nm filter was totally dark and unrecognizable.

Rjwmam,

Has your camera had the IR blocking filter removed from the CCD?  Also thank you for the excellent response!

Randy

Rjwmam,

Has your camera had the IR blocking filter removed from the CCD?  Also thank you for the excellent response!

Randy

Randy,

My camera is unmodified.  The way I understood it, is that all I needed was to use the IR filters.  If I need to remove the IR blocking filter from the CCD I may need to pick up another camera because I am positive that my wife will kill me for altering her camera.

OK. The coins are in the ground.  I have a full spread of pictures that I took to document everything that I did.  They go from a normal shot with nothing in the ground all the way through to the end with the coins in the ground and shots taken with the filters.  These pictures aer un modified since it is too soon to see anything.  The time of day was about 1030 hours MT and the tempurature outside was 80 degrees.  Here are the pictures in the order taken.

More pictures:

Beale,

Thank you for the literature that you posted.  I am always looking for things to read.  I have metal detected my back yard before and all I have found was junk.  The only 14 coins that I know about are the ones that I just buried today in the one location that was photographed.  It may take a few days (or longer) before we can see anything with the camera. 

Beale,

Good read.  Makes sense and is easy to understand.  Do you know what magazine this was from?  Thank you. 

The ground tends to try and fight off this unwelcome metal as a human body tries to fight off disease.

Huh?? 

Logical  Beale, different heat retention properties.  But very interesting, more.

SWR, you know of course that the fatigue curve for Zinc is exactly the same as for human muscle? As a matter of fact, the boundary between life as we claim it to be, and the so called inert forms is gradually being modified.  The difference is being dissipated rapidly.


Don Jose de La Mancha

SWR, Such is human nature, question what you do not know.

I typically do question gobs of pseudoscience. The ground tends to try and fight off metal...ROTFLMAO!

The ground tends to try and fight off this unwelcome metal as a human body tries to fight off disease.

Huh?? 

metal is unwelcome in the ground?

I wonder if rocks are also unwelcome, like kidney's trying to pass stones.

I wonder why metal that came from the ground would be unwelcome in the ground? 

Will dirt also reject clay or sand?


Are not ALL these things natural elements?

All I am saying, all is not known and what is not known is made up until someone finds the correct formula to verify the facts.

YIKES! 

theirs a bit of technique and timing in using your filter...............

What is the best technique to use?  As far as I understand, it is best to be between 45 and 90 degrees perpendicular to the sun with the sun at your back.  With an IR filter I can take the pictures at high noon.  Is there a better way?  I would be happy to try all possible methods with these filters so that we can make the best educated deductions with this.  After all, if this really works we are going to have hundreds and maybe thousands of us running around the hills snapping pictures through digital cameras fitted with IR and UV filters looking for lost treasure.

Try this method, try at sunrise aroud 5:30am or sunset 5pm, the sun must be at the east or west of your coin and you should position south or north, perpendicular to the sun of your coin...... Midas noted this as the aztec way in viewing this auras.

theirs a bit of technique and timing in using your filter...............

What is the best technique to use?  As far as I understand, it is best to be between 45 and 90 degrees perpendicular to the sun with the sun at your back.  With an IR filter I can take the pictures at high noon.  Is there a better way?  I would be happy to try all possible methods with these filters so that we can make the best educated deductions with this.  After all, if this really works we are going to have hundreds and maybe thousands of us running around the hills snapping pictures through digital cameras fitted with IR and UV filters looking for lost treasure.

Try this method, try at sunrise aroud 5:30am or sunset 5pm, the sun must be at the east or west of your coin and you should position south or north, perpendicular to the sun of your coin...... Midas noted this as the aztec way in viewing this auras.

I will do that along with taking shots at the hottest part of the day as well.  The way I look at it is it can't hurt anything. 

Now, Beale, SWR and anyone else for that matter, if you want to bicker and debate eachother please do it somewhere else.  We may not agree on a lot of things and some ideas may seem out in the far reaches of our galaxy to you but knock off with the jabbing back and forth.  If you would like to participate here as adults feel free to do so as I imagine we could all learn some valuable skills here if this works.  My four kids are starting to look more and more like civilized grownups and the oldest is eight.  Thank you.

My four kids are starting to look more and more like civilized grownups and the oldest is eight.  Thank you.

ROTFLMFAO

Given that my oldest just turned 30, and my youngest is 14, I might tend to agree..........  Sometimes seems like they score progressively worse in the "plays well with others" category as they get older..........................

Anybody near Salt Lake City got a test garden rjwmam can try this with ?  You know, long-buried coins with known locations ?

I've got a couple pre-1985 pennies I buried a few years ago at known depths, and marked with plastic tent stakes.  To date, I have been unable to locate them with my CZ-3D....................................

(Can't even find the plastic stakes anymore, either)


Diggem'

theirs a bit of technique and timing in using your filter...............

What is the best technique to use?  As far as I understand, it is best to be between 45 and 90 degrees perpendicular to the sun with the sun at your back.  With an IR filter I can take the pictures at high noon.  Is there a better way?  I would be happy to try all possible methods with these filters so that we can make the best educated deductions with this.  After all, if this really works we are going to have hundreds and maybe thousands of us running around the hills snapping pictures through digital cameras fitted with IR and UV filters looking for lost treasure.

Try this method, try at sunrise aroud 5:30am or sunset 5pm, the sun must be at the east or west of your coin and you should position south or north, perpendicular to the sun of your coin...... Midas noted this as the aztec way in viewing this auras.

I will do that along with taking shots at the hottest part of the day as well.  The way I look at it is it can't hurt anything. 

Now, Beale, SWR and anyone else for that matter, if you want to bicker and debate eachother please do it somewhere else.  We may not agree on a lot of things and some ideas may seem out in the far reaches of our galaxy to you but knock off with the jabbing back and forth.  If you would like to participate here as adults feel free to do so as I imagine we could all learn some valuable skills here if this works.  My four kids are starting to look more and more like civilized grownups and the oldest is eight.  Thank you.

This is voluntary experiment, SWR you are not oblige to follow...

Now, Beale, SWR and anyone else for that matter, if you want to bicker and debate eachother please do it somewhere else.  We may not agree on a lot of things and some ideas may seem out in the far reaches of our galaxy to you but knock off with the jabbing back and forth.  If you would like to participate here as adults feel free to do so as I imagine we could all learn some valuable skills here if this works.  My four kids are starting to look more and more like civilized grownups and the oldest is eight.  Thank you.

Good grief...your ignore button must have stopped working.

Maybe your four kids could explain to you what a FORUM is used for. Most adults actually know that on open forums, there will be discussion(s) with more than one point of view. Asking readers/viewers NOT to participate is a little childish, in itself.

This is voluntary experiment, SWR you are not oblige to follow...

Contingencies on something works only doing a certain thing, at a certain time, facing a certain way is hinged on your pesdo-beliefs. It should work no matter the time of day or the direction you are standing. Period

If timing or the time of day or other circumstances don't mean anything SWR, try to see the Sun rising facing the West in the morning?

The gist of this thread is about digital cameras seeing buried gold, by using IR filtration. The sun rising in the east or west should have no bearings on the buried metal. It has no compass.

SWR, We are talking about taking photos with a digital camera, therefore the direction of light, the intensity of light and the time of day very much has an effect on the photos. You know your quote of saying the time of day should not effect the photos finding treasure is unfounded.

Using an IR filter kinda/sorta defeats the light issue  

Added later:

Quoting from Midas’s book here:

“Auras can be obtained on gold down to a quarter of an ounce or less – that’s a single coin or nugget! The camera can even discriminate between different metals- all from a distance and can be used anytime during daylight hours”

read:  anytime during daylight hours

It's dowsing with a camera... only 1 in a million can do it I guess. And even THEY all disagree about how it works.

The image on my profile I tooked on my t-site.  I took it north of the hole looking downward approximately in 30 degrees angle perpendecular to the sunset around 5pm.  Its still a theory but why does this flahes come at the center?

`Good Afternoon:  We are apparently talking about two different factors.

Luminous gases from an ionic transformation of a buried metal under certain geological conditions, is better seen at night.

The other light that is being discussed lately here, is basically logical  and easily understandable, even  it's method of detecting. may be questionably efficient.

It is commonly acknowledged that the Sun's out put in energy covers the entire spectrum, from 1 cycle to to an infinite number,  which we aren't even capable of visualizing at this point.  The Sun's energy is being discussed as being the possible origin of the well known earth currents.

It is quite feasible that among the various frequencies, there are many that can easily slip in between the molecules of the materiel's in the earth, which in effect makes it transparent  to them yet, when encountering a materiel that is not transparent to them, perhaps such as Gold, could be modified into a polarized energy. This could account for the needed viewing angle.

I frankly have no idea, but it is feasible.  SWR is well acquainted with polarized fields since it is a major part of his profession.

I have to think on this for a bit my friends.

Don Jose de La Mancha

I think you said it as accurately as could be said.   I would add that what could be contributing to this ionization is the suns radiating frequencies above 340nm which for gold is the photoelectric threshold,that is gold emits electrons when radiated with light 340nm and above.  Now we have a fairly solid basis for the light seen above gold with the electrons interacting with a gas similar to mercury vapor which adheres to gold in nature.  I have 3 mercury analyzers and this has become one of my favorite methods for locating gold as it's quick and easy.

Randy

I think you said it as accurately as could be said.   I would add that what could be contributing to this ionization is the suns radiating frequencies above 340nm which for gold is the photoelectric threshold,that is gold emits electrons when radiated with light 340nm and above.  Now we have a fairly solid basis for the light seen above gold with the electrons interacting with a gas similar to mercury vapor which adheres to gold in nature.  I have 3 mercury analyzers and this has become one of my favorite methods for locating gold as it's quick and easy.

Randy

Randy...are ya trying to say that the Sun is somehow responsible for the ionization of buried gold?

Yes I am saying that.  The photoelectric effect on materials has been known for quite some time hence Photoelectric Spectroscopy.  So far it's the only scientific reason I can see for the ionization of gold which is what takes place when gold is hit with light at the threshold frequency and above.  Also Mercury vapor is around gold since it has an affinity for it and is in the soil in varying amounts.  Put the two together and it is a possibility.  Pure science albeit an rare occurance like St. Elmos fire or all the other strange natural events that occur in nature. 

It's only human to have a superstitious doubt until a closer examination uncovers the  possible physics behind something.

Go to google and type in photoelectric threshold.

Randy

It's only human to have a superstitious doubt until a closer examination uncovers the  possible physics behind something.

Not sure what a superstitious doubt is...but I wish you success in utilizing possible physics in your treasure hunting endeavors   

After reading this entire thread several times, I have come to a conclusion.

Many folks are asking questions simply to pick apart the theory and the practice. Many of you drive automobiles, but most of you cannot explain the way a car's engine works on the mechanical level. Most people put gas in once a week and oil in once a year and go. Instead of arguing how many spirits can dance on the head of a pin, pull out your digital cameras and test the questions you're asking. The man is trying to help YOU for God's sake. If you don't belive him, don't. If you do, then great - get out there and find buried metal and make yourself rich.

I for one, believe it. I also believe there needs to be certain prerequisites for buried metals to be found. You can't just shot some pics out your back door and find Ft. Knox (unless of course, you live on the backside of the base!)  In application, you're using a UV filter. I've done a bit of research on the internet (I know, because everything you read on the internet is true) and it sounds like what we're looking for and what we're wanting to find is the halo of the UV reflection. I visualize it not unlike wearing a pair of sunglasses on a bright, sunny day and seeing the sun reflected off the windshield of a car. The sunglasses filterout all but the most powerful glare of the sun, and in somecases, you can even see the outline of the sun (not recommended!) With a UV filter attached and a photograph taken, you're looking for the reflection (that you cannot see with the naked eye) off of the gold or silver or whatever. Yes, it needs to be in the middle of the day when the UV is most intense (1000-1500.) UV radiation can penetrate soil to a depth of about 1-3 inches. I can reasonable assume that if the soil has been disturbed then it is not as dense thus it would penetrate deeper.

I for one, will be looking into this further and doing my own tests. If it doenst work, then it doesnt. But if it does, then I intend to find out for myself. Good luck everyone and again, do your own tests!

Good mormg Seden: Are your referring to a detector with a vertical surface which has been coated with a flourescencent materiel then placing a sample of the materiel to be analyized in front of it,  then subjecting the sample and screeen with the proper directional  frequency to activate the Flour. materiel.

Any gas / fumes arising from the suspected materiel for one reason or another, will block the passage of the activating energy of the flour. field, resulting in a movng, cloudy image of the vapor that is blocking the flouresence on the viewing surface.

This tech. can visually show any minute bits of Mercury for example, it is very sensative, and inexpensive..  

This same technique can be utilized in other forms, such as the Perklns AA Spectometer in which the speciman in a neutral soloution, is highly energized by vaporizing it while simultaneously passing  a precise frequency in two different paths, one directly to the receiver, the other passing though the vapor of the atomized materiel.   The result is then sent to the analyizer output, in which the resulting difference between the two is compared and a very precise measurement of the suspected materiel is measured..  

The source signal is generally a bit of the suspected materel inside a vacumn tube, whidh is vaporized by the electric current.  I.E.  gold for Gold analyisis, Silver for /silver , Arsenic/ arsenic,   Lead / lead etc etc.

I have had to maintain and overhaul/calibrate  The Perkins AA in the past. Fascinating machine, and it opened up my mind to many things that are just now being investigated in various forms.

Don Jose de La Mancha

[Most Infrared aerial photographs are taken by the government between 12:00 P.M and 2:00 P.M.]

You may get a good reflection with 5:30 PM but I believe 5:30 AM is too early. There is not enough angle to penetrate the ground effectively. Most Infrared aerial photographs are taken by the government between 12:00 P.M and 2:00 P.M.

I'm not too sure this applies as the type of infrared used for thermal imaging for military and industrial purposes is in the ":far infrared" – 8,000 to 15,000 nm, and most these folks would be buying off the shelf stuff in the "near infrared spectrum" at : 700 to 1400 nm wavelengths.  The 12 -2 thing applies to all photography just because shadows are cut down - right?

Good morning Airborne:  I like your post, it is indicative of an inquiring, intelligent, mind and post. ***** !With useful data.

Don Jose de La Mancha

After reading this entire thread several times, I have come to a conclusion.

Not trying to sound rude or curt...but, you have formed an opinion. Until you actually preform the necessary tests (like others of us have), your lambasting tone (post) is just part of the banter, and not a conclusion.

Please, I encourage you to do your own test(s) and report back to us. We can then compare our test results, and possibly come to a consensus.

Oh yea... we all forgot about the water table effect!  Dang...

It's always easy to criticize. As I told SWR, you will end up bitter and grumpy and miserable.

I thought you were ignoring me?

I am and will never be bitter or miserable, however, I will be grumpy from time to time. 

It is my understanding that at least with a Polaroid system it takes at least two weeks after the gold has been buried before it will show up on film.

If the water table has anything to do with it, try to work it so the moon is directly overhead and at full or no moon even better. As the water table rises, the air in the soil is forced upwards. This is just my theory, haven't even tried any digital/IR filter photos.  Also, a dropping barometer will do the same thing to an extent.

Makes sense.  However the water table in my back yard is very deep so it shouldn't even be a factor.  Right?  I have taken several photos since depositing the coins in the ground and  I don't think that anything is visible yet.  I will post pictures soon for everyone's viewing enjoyment but it might be best to let the coins sit for a couple more weeks and then take some more pictures.   

SWR,

My post wasn't meant to sound like a "lambasting." My point simply was, at times it all sounds like a school-yard argument with no one really coming up with new info, just off the wall questions and crazy logic. Perhaps I'm the least educated person reading this, which would not suprise me. However, I doubt we have two dozen Geologists with minors in Astrophysics in the debate here.

The overall point I was driving at is this:

Skeptics, stop asking so many darn questions and start researching and testing to prove your position and posting your findings;

Believers, stop asking so many darn questions and start researching and testing to prove your position and posting your findings.

Yes, here on the boards, dialogue is good. I for one, find it a pleasurable way to stay awake at work!

Again, I think it's plausable, I simply don't have the time to test it out myself. I just enjoy being the armchair observer! 

To those who are doing thier experement about this claimed,


I doubt this is not gas,  this could be just an electromagnetic field.  Example if we have an area a, b and c with the same soil and color on it. Then electromagnetic field in a, b and c would be the same.  If we bury a coin in area b, electromagnetic field of b interacts with the electromagnetic field of the coin, so in my observation. The electromagnetic field in area b will be different to area a and c.  Thats were the camera capture comes in.  If you dont belive that this electromagnetic field can be capture then try to capture the open transmission line cables in different distances then you will see the rainbow like glow form this cables.  Or even in high voltage transmission lines you can see sometimes the waves of this magnetic field.

Hey  SACAR11…..Good information. I have always thought that the electric lines produced an oval signal. Either way we know that the signal does not come from them in an up or down direction. ..Art

To those who are doing thier experement about this claimed,


I doubt this is not gas,  this could be just an electromagnetic field.  Example if we have an area a, b and c with the same soil and color on it. Then electromagnetic field in a, b and c would be the same.  If we bury a coin in area b, electromagnetic field of b interacts with the electromagnetic field of the coin, so in my observation. The electromagnetic field in area b will be different to area a and c.  Thats were the camera capture comes in.  If you dont belive that this electromagnetic field can be capture then try to capture the open transmission line cables in different distances then you will see the rainbow like glow form this cables.  Or even in high voltage transmission lines you can see sometimes the waves of this magnetic field.

I don't see the comparison between a single coin buried 4" in the ground, and 17,000 to 120,000 volts of electricity.

I would also like to see the rainbow like glow coming from the cable. Being a lineman from back in the day...that would make for some interesting wallpaper.

Yeah remember Corona Discharge?

Yeah remember Corona Discharge?

Sure...you think that is the rainbow of colour they were referring too?

Hey could be.  Can you explain the Marfa lights of texas?  Check it out on Google Image,just might make you think just for a nanosecond about natural unexplained lights. 

Randy

Hey could be.  Can you explain the Marfa lights of texas?  Check it out on Google Image,just might make you think just for a nanosecond about natural unexplained lights. 

Randy

I am very skeptical about the Marfa Lights being a phenomenon. The Society of Physics Students at the University of Texas at Dallas report confirms the lights are related to highway traffic

http://www.spsnational.org/wormhole/utd_sps_report.pdf

To quote from a site on Marfa "according to local lore, the first settlers in marfa in 1883 saw the lights, long before automobiles or highways. the indians living on the land for a hundred of years previous saw them too."

So the mystery continues I'm afraid like it or not.

Randy

Hey could be.  Can you explain the Marfa lights of texas?  Check it out on Google Image,just might make you think just for a nanosecond about natural unexplained lights. 

Randy

If Marfa doesn't sell you, then head north to Watersmeet, MI to check out the Paulding Light www.backwoodswisconsin.com/paulding_light.htm

Diggem'

Believers, stop asking so many darn questions and start researching and testing to prove your position and posting your findings.

airborne, here's mine. notice the white spot at the right most of the picture? what do you think? this was taken at about 3pm perpendecular to the sun, south facing north. i use a homemade filter, 3 layers of unexpose old film. ive taken many shots of the soroundings but when i noticed this pic i tried taking another shot but unfortunately no more battery power.

sorry forget to attached my pic...here's it.

To quote from a site on Marfa "according to local lore, the first settlers in marfa in 1883 saw the lights, long before automobiles or highways. the indians living on the land for a hundred of years previous saw them too."

So the mystery continues I'm afraid like it or not.

Randy

And local lore it is. The first recorded lights was in 1957, after the highway was built. 

airborne, here's mine. notice the white spot at the right most of the picture? what do you think? this was taken at about 3pm perpendecular to the sun, south facing north. i use a homemade filter, 3 layers of unexpose old film. ive taken many shots of the soroundings but when i noticed this pic i tried taking another shot but unfortunately no more battery power.

Did you try any recovery methods to see for yourself if there was anything buried at that location?

airborne, here's mine. notice the white spot at the right most of the picture? what do you think? this was taken at about 3pm perpendecular to the sun, south facing north. i use a homemade filter, 3 layers of unexpose old film. ive taken many shots of the soroundings but when i noticed this pic i tried taking another shot but unfortunately no more battery power.

Excellent pic!  What camera did you use - I see conventional and not digital?  Also - to what do you attribute the span of white spots across the bottom and top of the pic?

It almost looks like the --deleted--e spot you reference bleeds up (or down) from the left side of your "hot" spot.  What do you think that might be?

The span of white spots across the bottom (and top) are the sprocket holes from the 35mm film he used for his filter.

IMHO, with the shaft of vertical 'white' on the left side it appears to me that it may be a flaw. Perhaps a minute crease or fold in the 35mm film, or a spot where the layers are slightly separated. The white spot leads me to believe sunlight maybe directly hitting the inside of the film from above.

Did you dig and find anything there? I could be wrong (and in someways I hope I am!) but it would be great if you DID find something there.

I'm not trying to dog on you or your methods Searcher, I just want folks to understand something. I'm far from being a researcher myself, but I believe in removing as many fault-producing anomalies as possible. I know you may not have access or money to good equipment, but I implore you to do the best you can. Perhaps build a miniature frame and mount the film to it to remove all but the remote chance of an error? Or, get a heat gun and melt the film edges together. I believe you're tenacious attitude to find the truth is commendable. I only wish I had the time that some folks here seem to have - I'd love to play around with some theroies, esp. one such as this.

Keep up the good work, Searcher; And again, please tell me if you found something at that spot!

IMHO, with the shaft of vertical 'white' on the left side it appears to me that it may be a flaw. Perhaps a minute crease or fold in the 35mm film, or a spot where the layers are slightly separated. The white spot leads me to believe sunlight maybe directly hitting the inside of the film from above.

i agree with you airborne. so tomorrow ill take another shot using newly constructed frame made using the proceedure from instructables...ill take the shot at same place, same time, same angle as much as possible.

Hi all, I am testing this as well but the results have not been good so far. I purchased this book on the subject.
http://www.truetreasure.info/SecretEmanual.htm

Just to get a head start if there is anything to this. I have a filter I purchased and filters I'm combining for testing. The end result is to block visible light and only pass IR. I have targets buried for over 6 years. I'm not saying it does not work I'm only test like the rest of you. Here we have 100% humidity and may be a factor. So this testing will be over the winter days as well. I will purchase filter to only pass bands of IR and see if I get results. I will let this thread know what my finding are.

Tim

Excellent pic!  What camera did you use - I see conventional and not digital?  Also - to what do you attribute the span of white spots across the bottom and top of the pic?


jim, i use canon powershot sx110 but the filter frame are crude. i use three unexpose film making three layers and losely fasten inside a round cardboard. airborne cuold be right. it might be a result of a slight separation of layers. on the other hand, this picture is just one of about 5o pics taken and the sun was at my rightside at 3pm. ill take another shot tomorrow, same time same angle...lets see what we get.

Did you try any recovery methods to see for yourself if there was anything buried at that location?

i will, swr, but that would take some time and only if this is verified by other means of detection. if possible confirm it with bore drilling.

things like this would take a lot of comprehensive planing, like 80% planing 20% implementation. these things are buried at great depth. we have to consider logistics like heavy equipment, submersible pumps and etc. manpower, not only tecnically qualified but those you can trust with your life as well. yes, security is a must.

on top of that, there are a lot of other things we have to consider. otherwise, we will be puting a lot of hard earned money to waste.

Hi all, I am testing this as well but the results have not been good so far. I purchased this book on the subject.
http://www.truetreasure.info/SecretEmanual.htm

Just to get a head start if there is anything to this. I have a filter I purchased and filters I'm combining for testing. The end result is to block visible light and only pass IR. I have targets buried for over 6 years. I'm not saying it does not work I'm only test like the rest of you. Here we have 100% humidity and may be a factor. So this testing will be over the winter days as well. I will purchase filter to only pass bands of IR and see if I get results. I will let this thread know what my finding are.

Tim

Hi Tim...that is the same book several of us have been using for these test. The author is the creator of this thread.

Good luck and looking forward to seeing your final test results.

i will, swr, but that would take some time and only if this is verified by other means of detection. if possible confirm it with bore drilling.

things like this would take a lot of comprehensive planing, like 80% planing 20% implementation. these things are buried at great depth. we have to consider logistics like heavy equipment, submersible pumps and etc. manpower, not only tecnically qualified but those you can trust with your life as well. yes, security is a must.

on top of that, there are a lot of other things we have to consider. otherwise, we will be puting a lot of hard earned money to waste.

Kind of going overboard there aren't ya? If the "glow" is generated by a single gold coin or small cache of gold coins 8" below the surface...there is no need to confirm it with bore drilling.

Kind of going overboard there aren't ya? If the "glow" is generated by a single gold coin or small cache of gold coins 8" below the surface...there is no need to confirm it with bore drilling.

you are right, swr, but this field is freshly plowed ready for planting corn. dnt even have to dig, the cache could have been scattered all over.

i hope the weather will be sunny today. ill take another pic.

Excellent Topic. Where is Midas. He had very good information.

Well just to let everyone know what I'm doing. I had a older digital camera and took it apart last night removing the IR filter. If you do this by a cheap one! I'm using Congo blue and Rosco red filters in combinations for testing. I also have a cut negative from a 35mm file as a filter to test with. It's 10:00am here and the pictures that follow were taken at that time. The first 2 are raw IR, the second 2 are change in a picture viewer which I increased contrast and decreased brightness. If you want to download the IR photos from here and play with the adjustment go for it. So far I have not had any results. What does happen is if you play with the controls enough the brightest spots will stand out. Which means nothing. But on the other hand. I have others in my group testing on control targets that have been in the ground for over 5 years with results! I was surprised to see this photo. It's the last one in the group. First picture is about 1lb of nickles at the base of the tree. The second is 10lbs of lead about center the picture.

Now a little about this test site. This site was made to test the Arc-Geo Logger and Ground resistivity. The site is in KY. The mike can is at 5 ft. The lead is at 2ft and the tool box I believe is at 2 ft. What stands out is the one spot over the lead and the best is the area over the mike can! The glow covers the area where the backhoe dug! So this make me wonder maybe the IR can pass deeper into disturbed ground easier than normal ground can it be the mineral content in the ground? Whatever the case he did get this picture first shot! He used a 35mm neg over the lens and shot south to north. So maybe the reason I'm not seeing anything is because I don't have minerals here? Questions but still testing.

*

Don't forget to go back and read what I've posted about ground disturbances. There is an awful lot of pseudo science being thrown around in this thread. But your situation could probably be easily explained by considering that the ground that has been dug up by a back hoe is probably now a different makeup from the soil around it. So these areas may not drain the same way or may have slightly higher concentrations of weeds or other plant material that looks different on an IR picture. Note that this does not negate the usefulness of the IR camera approach for finding large hidden caches with significant ground disturbance. Just understand that there may be nothing more to it than that and that this would imply that all of this talk about ionization, glowing gases, and other such stuff could be completly made up. So you may not be able to find small gold nuggets or mineral deposits with these methods as has been claimed by the OP.

Tim…although the “glow” is very predominating over the milk can area…it is equally predominate over the tree line in the background.

As jb7487 noted, the disturbed soil and other ground disturbances plays a huge role in interpreting the color changes. It is in my humble opinion…you have not captured an aura or escaping ions from buried objects.
 
We used aerial infrared over twenty years ago to find dumps, stagecoach roads, fort sites and the like. It is amazing, but you can see the wagon wheel impressions, building outlines and other items in the infrared that you cannot see in regular capture photography.

Good evening  MY friend SWR: I agree with  you, no ionic gas discharge nor aura is being photographed, but possibly a differential heat factor since we are in the infrared.   Like you, I have used aerial and terrestrial IR photography to find ground disturbances from the 1600's.  Old missions and trails.

Incidentally, I accidentally found a hidden Circle about 200 ft in diameter at Tayopa using IR and color separation photography.  I knew that it had to be there, but I couldn't find it, nor did any of the Indians up there know of it.  It was the key to locating the prime deposit  of Tayopa, and further proof that I had found Tayopa..

They had made it on a 45* slope by merely scraping away the top soil in a circle of 200 ft in diameter, with the ring width of approx. 25 ft.  It was originally visible as soon as you came up the lower barranca.  However,  with time, the soil was replaced and the new top growth prevented seeing it.  There was enough difference between the orig soil condition and the present to be easily seen with the photography.

Don Jose de La Mancha

Tim:  What filter did you use on the 3 rd and fourth pictures,  #'s   s 20100007 & s 20100003B

Don Jose de La Mancha

SWR WROTE  " We used aerial infrared over twenty years ago to find dumps, stagecoach roads, fort sites and the like. It is amazing, but you can see the wagon wheel impressions, building outlines and other items in the infrared that you cannot see in regular capture photography. "


This is very useful information. I too am looking for an old covered up mine. I don't have the Money to hire areal Photographers " YET " but i do have a camera and two feet. I will climb one side of mountain and photograph with IR at high noon. I just need the Old, Old trails leading to the mine. If i get Glows/ Auras that will be extra Icing on the cake. Thanks again !!!

Please understand I am not saying the spots are what the author claims. I even said that it may be due to the ground changes. I only posted the photo to show his first shots. Today he could not repeat the photo. He shot a number of pictures with no luck. I also shot 10 or more over control targets from 12:00 to 4:00 with no luck. Until I see repeatable shots and determine if it is IR and what band/range I cannot say this works at all. So far I have no proof it does. I ordered a 780 pass filter to test. I will work through the pass filters that are available and if I still see no repeatable photos on my control targets I will move on and drop this.

Sense I converted a camera to IR I will use it in some form. 

Tim

Mr Mike ( Mont ) are those auras right at where the coins are.

Tim,

I bought an IR scope off ebay for $75 + a 850nm filter for $25.  Since you've made the effort to convert your camera to IR, use it to detect subtle thermal differences for locating metals in soil.  This is best done close to sundown while the ground is warmer than the air.  There was an article on using this technique in a 1990 issue of the California Mining Journal so this is what I'll be doing.  In the true sense, your camera or scope becomes an Long Range Locator or in the case of the Landsat photos, a very long range locator.

I want to try an experiment by charging the soil with ~10KV using an 9 volt battery operated Ion Generator and arcing it to a ground stake,then try taking UV and Infrared photography so see if I can see some buried metal better with the HV.  Anyone besides SWR try this?

Randy

Thanks Mike (mont) I am getting ready to order the Canon EOS 350D or The Canon EOS 450D for 649.99. I think these Will do the Job. 10 Mega Pixles. I also plan to order the Cokin 720 NM IR FIlter for 52.00. Midas has been very helpful to me. For whatever reason if this doesn't work out I will still end up with a nice Camera to use at my sites. From what I see you Guys are on to something. 

I dug a small hole about four inches diameter.

Could you pinpoint exactly were the small hole was dug.

Thanks

Those of you that are testing, take the picture with the target area to the left or right of center. I found that the center will mostly always have a higher "brightness" than the rest of the picture. That area will always show something with changes to the picture controls to bring out the wanted effect. This way by shifting the real control target to the right or left of center if it works it will show up on both sides. You can see the there is nothing near the lead. The lead 10lbs is under the lump of grass on the right.

Tim

[not]

Those of you that are testing, take the picture with the target area to the left or right of center. I found that the center will mostly always have a higher "brightness" than the rest of the picture.

I totally agree. I suspect this is what Mike is seeing. He knows something should be there so he post processes the picture until it shows an "aura". Why doesn't he stop the post processing step sooner and declare defeat? Because he knows that something is there and he wants an aura to show up. Keep in mind that this is not what you will be doing out in the real world. How do you know when to stop the post processing step when you don't know if something is even there? It is a completely different matter to shoot a picture of a place that you have never been to or even know if something is there and then do some consistent post processing to come up with a spot with high enough probability that you would choose to waste time digging there.

Again, I'm all for the ground disturbance idea. It is easily backed by science and even common sense. There are known cases where it has proven to be useful. But shooting a picture and post processing the heck out of it so that it shows an "aura" exactly where you want it to is not science at all. It's wishful thinking. If you don't believe me, go out and try it in a real field test and see where it gets you.

Tim, I know there is a bright spot at the center of the photos I took, but I'm not convinced that is the only effect. I took another photo this morning with the silver off to the side. It was cloudy and I used a 750 filter. I got a bright spot off to the side but it was not the same as an aura. When I adjusted the contrast down, I could not get the spot to come into focus. I'll try again when I get some direct sun.

Mike...in lieu of using silver...see if a gold object or a baseball trading card gives the same effect   

see if a gold object or a baseball trading card gives the same effect

Nice point. I think that anyone trying this technique should use this as a litmus test. It is very common for people to only look at positive results for known targets of interest. If you put a baseball card in the ground and get the same results then you've definitely shown that your technique is suspect. You can make a chart of the possibilites (there are actually 8 of them) to try and show whether or not a result is desireable and helps prove that the technique works.

1) Unknown target of non-interest with a negative result - This is desirable. You didn't want to find the item and you didn't.
2) Unknown target of non-interest with a positive result - This is undesirable. You had a positive hit on something you didn't want to find.
3) Unknown target of interest with a negative result - This is undesirable. You had a negative result on something you wanted to find.
4) Unknown target of interest with a positive result - This is desirable. You found something you were looking for.
5) Known target of non-interest with a negative result - This is desirable. But because the location is known the data point is not entirely conclusive.
6) Known target of non-interest with a positive result - This is undesirable. You had a positive hit on something you didn't want to find.
7) Known target of interest with a negative result - This is undesirable. You had a negative result on something you wanted to find.
8 ) Known target of interest with a positive result - This is desirable. But because the location is known the data point is not entirely conclusive.

So if you look at the eight possibilities above you'll see only two that really matter in proving this theory: 4) and 1). In both cases you are dealing with an item whose presence is unknown. In one case you find something you are looking for based on a positive result. In the other case you don't find something based on a negative result. The former being the true measure of the value of the proposed theory. After all, we can spend all day not finding something that we don't want. I don't need IR photography to do that.

So this long winded explanation is really just a ridiculous way of saying that the only real test of the theory and usefulness of the technique is going out and finding something unknown that you were hoping to find. 

The camera I am using is probably not acceptable as is. I have tried to use a 950 filter and it comes out so dark I can't get anything out of it. For some reason the flash works all the time. The filter must be unsetting the exposure. I don't know what kind of camera to use, but this Canon is not it.

Mike, Which Canon are you using?

I have a Canon powershot... S2 15.  Is anyone using one of these in the experiments?

The camera I am using is probably not acceptable as is.

Mike, have you removed the internal IR blocking filter? Although the OP and the book cited say that this is not a requirement, I tend to believe otherwise. I really don't see how a standard digital camera is going to produce a decent usable image without removing the internal IR blocking filter. If you don't remove the internal filter then you have to do a tremendous amount of post processing of the image which destroys any hope of getting anything useful out of it.

The camera I am using is probably not acceptable as is. I have tried to use a 950 filter and it comes out so dark I can't get anything out of it. For some reason the flash works all the time. The filter must be unsetting the exposure. I don't know what kind of camera to use, but this Canon is not it.

Mike...did you retake any pictures of the 4" hole with other items in it?

Just to keep everyone up to date I ordered a 780IR bandpass filter for my sony night-shot. I will post some pictures after I get it along with pictures with the camera I removed the IR blocking filter. They will be raw so all can play with the settings.

Tim

Just to keep everyone up to date I ordered a 780IR bandpass filter for my sony night-shot. I will post some pictures after I get it along with pictures with the camera I removed the IR blocking filter. They will be raw so all can play with the settings.

Tim

Good deal, Tim.

As I suggested to Mike...use different targets in the hole(s)...as well as nothing in the hole(s) to help compare   

Hi all
  I plan to do some testing over my test garden using infrared. I started testing last week, using exposed film. The milkcan image Tim posted is one of my images. I am using a DC3400 Kodak digital camera.
I ordered a Opteka 37mm High Definition II R72 720nm infrared X-Ray IR Pass Filter to use in the testing. I should have it by Monday.
 The 10 gallon milkcan in my test garden was buried in 2005 six feet deep, I also have other items in it buried in 2007. A large metal toolbox, Cast Iron, Brass, Aluminum, Copper, Lead, and have just buried 6 Silver quarters. All Items but the quarters should have a good Aura around them. So, I should have some good targets to test with. I have attached a picture taken of my test garden when the items were buried, and their location.     kybob

Well I got my 850nm filter today and it worked just fine on my Sony Cybershot.  The attached photo you see a pole and lattice to the left.  Straight out to the right of the pole are MANY buried copper radials that have been there since 1985 plus there's a 8' copper rod next to the pole  so I'm done with this experiment and will use my IR scope with the 850nm filter for locating soil temperature changes at sunset out in the goldfields.

Randy

Hi all
  I plan to do some testing over my test garden using infrared. I started testing last week, using exposed film. The milkcan image Tim posted is one of my images. I am using a DC3400 Kodak digital camera.
I ordered a Opteka 37mm High Definition II R72 720nm infrared X-Ray IR Pass Filter to use in the testing. I should have it by Monday.
 The 10 gallon milkcan in my test garden was buried in 2005 six feet deep, I also have other items in it buried in 2007. A large metal toolbox, Cast Iron, Brass, Aluminum, Copper, Lead, and have just buried 6 Silver quarters. All Items but the quarters should have a good Aura around them. So, I should have some good targets to test with. I have attached a picture taken of my test garden when the items were buried, and their location.     kybob

Greetings...what are the possibilities of burying the flap off a cardboard box or empty box of cereal? Something nonmetallic should be included.

Chances are that the aura will be equally the same as "good targets"

Straight out to the right of the pole are MANY buried copper radials that have been there since 1985 plus there's a 8' copper rod next to the pole  so I'm done with this experiment and will use my IR scope with the 850nm filter for locating soil temperature changes at sunset out in the goldfields.

Randy...how are copper radials related to buried gold...I don't see a 8' copper rod, nor understand the requirements of a 8' copper rod for this experiment.

Shouldn't there actually be buried gold in a buried gold experiment?

Hi Ky-Bob good to see you join the testing. I should have my filter soon as well.

Tim

SWR, who gives a rats a$$ if it's gold,copper or silver?  Go back and  look at the aura pictures on pg.22 of David Villanueva's book.  Cut the crap, the book talks about various metals and you know it. 

Mike, you can get the Ion Generator I have for $3.95 here:http://www.goldmine-elec-products.com/prodinfo.asp?number=G1783&variation=&aitem=1&mitem=1
As I explained, you'll have 2 ground rods, connect one to the negative terminal of the battery and rig up
a spark gap with one of the  pins.  Since this is extremely high impedance you cannot connect the high
voltage pins directly to the other copper rod as it will just short it out.

I think this has merit and from Prof. Bose's findings back in the late 1800's this puts out UV rays and I would suspect you'd need a UV filter to see the charged metal but then again who knows,maybe IR or nothing at all.

Just an experiment for you sarcastic critics out there, I'm not claiming I know for sure what the results would be so let's keep cool heads here in the spirit of experimentation and just fun!

Randy

SWR, who gives a rats a$$ if it's gold,copper or silver?  Go back and  look at the aura pictures on pg.22 of David Villanueva's book.  Cut the crap, the book talks about various metals and you know it. 

Mike, you can get the Ion Generator I have for $3.95 here:http://www.goldmine-elec-products.com/prodinfo.asp?number=G1783&variation=&aitem=1&mitem=1
As I explained, you'll have 2 ground rods, connect one to the negative terminal of the battery and rig up
a spark gap with one of the  pins.  Since this is extremely high impedance you cannot connect the high
voltage pins directly to the other copper rod as it will just short it out.

I think this has merit and from Prof. Bose's findings back in the late 1800's this puts out UV rays and I would suspect you'd need a UV filter to see the charged metal but then again who knows,maybe IR or nothing at all.

Just an experiment for you sarcastic critics out there, I'm not claiming I know for sure what the results would be so let's keep cool heads here in the spirit of experimentation and just fun!

Randy
[/quote

E-field again, right Ill post my images later after the result of thios one.......

SWR, who gives a rats a$$ if it's gold,copper or silver?  Go back and  look at the aura pictures on pg.22 of David Villanueva's book.  Cut the crap, the book talks about various metals and you know it. 

Mike, you can get the Ion Generator I have for $3.95 here:http://www.goldmine-elec-products.com/prodinfo.asp?number=G1783&variation=&aitem=1&mitem=1
As I explained, you'll have 2 ground rods, connect one to the negative terminal of the battery and rig up
a spark gap with one of the  pins.  Since this is extremely high impedance you cannot connect the high
voltage pins directly to the other copper rod as it will just short it out.

I think this has merit and from Prof. Bose's findings back in the late 1800's this puts out UV rays and I would suspect you'd need a UV filter to see the charged metal but then again who knows,maybe IR or nothing at all.

Just an experiment for you sarcastic critics out there, I'm not claiming I know for sure what the results would be so let's keep cool heads here in the spirit of experimentation and just fun!

Randy

Sure thing...step away from the MD 20/20

Hey  SACAR11…..Good information. I have always thought that the electric lines produced an oval signal. Either way we know that the signal does not come from them in an up or down direction. ..Art

Art,

The signal comes from the object in a circular direction, if you understand the north and south characteristic of this electromagnetic field which is essential function on the concept of motor.   Its oval signal if the conductor is rectangular such as bus bars but it is circular for wires and coils.


I'm not too sure this applies as the type of infrared used for thermal imaging for military and industrial purposes is in the ":far infrared" – 8,000 to 15,000 nm, and most these folks would be buying off the shelf stuff in the "near infrared spectrum" at : 700 to 1400 nm wavelengths.  The 12 -2 thing applies to all photography just because shadows are cut down - right?


During this time could you try using UV filters only instead of IR.

I received my 720 infrared filter today. It is too dark for my camera the way it is. Tim received his also today and the camera he removed the internal filter from, looks good using the same filter I have. I may have to go his route if this proves out. Attached is a raw picture from my camera. Tim sent me a picture from his and it is crystal clear. So I will stop testing until I get something working on this in.
kybob

SWR never answered the above question so here is the answer. Add one single electron to yellow gold you have white gold or platinum. Take away one electron from yellow gold you have mercury. One is a liquid metal and the other takes over 1,000 more degrees to melt than does yellow gold. The power of one electron. Think about the power of all the molecules and atoms that make up our world and outer space. Then you can understand the mysteries of infrared photography, dowsing and one day much, much more.

Albert...try to stay on topic.

I received my 720 infrared filter today. It is too dark for my camera the way it is. Tim received his also today and the camera he removed the internal filter from, looks good using the same filter I have. I may have to go his route if this proves out. Attached is a raw picture from my camera. Tim sent me a picture from his and it is crystal clear. So I will stop testing until I get something working on this in.
kybob

I played around with your picture...and could not get any results either.  Odd   

Kybob, some cameras are different. A 720 nm is too bright on mine. Some cameras have sensors through the lens area, some let light through that reflects off the filter and causes a bright spot. Just removing the inside IR filter does not guarantee you'll get a good picture. Some cameras need a piece of glass to replace the filter or they won't focus right. I saw one photo of a guy who took apart his camcorder. So many parts I couldn't believe it.

I'm starting to think that most (not all) of the anomalies people are getting are just faulty photos. I've got a modified camera on the way. Should be here tomorrow. That report said some paranormal guy found some gold. Villanuevo said he didn't have much luck, but I wonder what he was working with or if he knew enough about it. What I have read is that just slapping a filter on is not the right way to get a good photo, but the truth is I don't know what works. Could be it needs to be out of focus??

Good luck with your new camera, Mike.  Make sure you take some pictures of empty holes and holes with not-so-good targets. 

Everything and every element on the earth and in outer space has an effect upon each other, either by gravitational attraction or by negative or positive attraction. That is how everything was put together in the Master's plan. Everyone believes Einstein to be one of if not the smartest man that ever existed, not true. Can anyone verify his theory of relativity? No, they can not. It is like a wild guess. You take an astronomical figure such as the (Speed of light squared) multiply it by mass and end up with supposedly the power of a nuclear blast or in this case energy. Anyone can say the same thing such as take the circumference of the earth, cube that and multiply it by the mass and it will equal the power of energy. All I am saying, all is not known and what is not known is made up until someone finds the correct formula to verify the facts. We all are guessing until we can verify all of the information and turn them into facts. We do not need a skeptic sitting on the sidelines, "OH, that will never work, it never has and it never will. I tend to look on the bright side, one day we will solve most of these mysteries, then the skeptics will have mud on their face as they did when world scholars believed the world was square or flat and if you traveled to far east or west you would fall off the Earth. In a way it is good to have skeptics, it makes knowledgable people try harder to find the root cause or the answers that man is always in search of. Keep it up SWR, we will only try harder to prove you are sitting still as we are moving on.

A question for SWR, "Can you tell me the power of a single electron?" You take gold for instance add a single electron to it's outer shell,  you know what it takes over 1,000 more degrees of temperature to melt the gold with one extra electron in it's outer shell. What is this new metal called by name? I am sorry one more question. "Take a single electron from the outer shell of yellow gold, do you know what you have then? A hint, you now have a liquid metal.

SWR never answered the above question so here is the answer. Add one single electron to yellow gold you have white gold or platinum. Take away one electron from yellow gold you have mercury. One is a liquid metal and the other takes over 1,000 more degrees to melt than does yellow gold. The power of one electron. Think about the power of all the molecules and atoms that make up our world and outer space. Then you can understand the mysteries of infrared photography, dowsing and one day much, much more.

No you don't. Changing the electron shell only gives you an ion. To change to a different element, you have to change the nucleus.

The 720nm band passes 720 up in IR. My Sony night-shot works great as does my camera I removed the IR filter from. But this poses a question. I did not see where the author removed the IR blocking filter. KyBob could not see or get a picture and he shouldn't get one because of the IR blocking filter. The 720 is designed to block all visible light and pass the IR range form 720 up. So what range is this guy seeing these supposed auras? The problem I have with this is the processing. If the aura is real you should not have to do much processing and the aura should be the same when the target area is shifted in the frame from left to right. From the books pictures it appears the brightness parts of the picture is being processed to be an aura.

So if this happening in the IR range and the camera has a blocking filter in it as Kybob does and he saw nothing because no IR is passing, whats up with all the pictures in his book? It's raining here today. There is a couple of shots I want to do. I want to shoot some more over my control targets with bother cameras using this filter and I have a place where there is an large anomaly to see if something shows up there. I will carry my camera on trips and take pictures over time to see if anything shows up. I will post the pics when I get to take them. It looks like rain all this week here.

This filter is used for crime detection, medical photography and detection of distribution of vegetation. Which comes to my first point; maybe disturbed ground would cause the area in the photos.

Tim

http://www.eskimo.com/~nickz/infrared.html

Some good reading.

Tim

Add one single electron to yellow gold you have white gold or platinum. Take away one electron from yellow gold you have mercury. One is a liquid metal and the other takes over 1,000 more degrees to melt than does yellow gold. The power of one electron. Think about the power of all the molecules and atoms that make up our world and outer space. Then you can understand the mysteries of infrared photography, dowsing and one day much, much more.

I'm not even sure what the point to this rant is. Why do you assume that the number of electrons in a material has anything whatsoever to do with what it looks like in IR photography, to dowsers, and other mysterious claims that are constantly made on this board? This is just another attempt to make others feel inferior while you spout pseudo science with no facts or proofs to back it up.

[If the aura is real you should not have to do much processing and the aura should be the same when the target area is shifted in the frame from left to right]

But this poses a question. I did not see where the author removed the IR blocking filter. KyBob could not see or get a picture and he shouldn't get one because of the IR blocking filter. The 720 is designed to block all visible light and pass the IR range form 720 up. So what range is this guy seeing these supposed auras? The problem I have with this is the processing. If the aura is real you should not have to do much processing and the aura should be the same when the target area is shifted in the frame from left to right. From the books pictures it appears the brightness parts of the picture is being processed to be an aura.

Amen!

So if this happening in the IR range and the camera has a blocking filter in it as Kybob does and he saw nothing because no IR is passing, whats up with all the pictures in his book?

Amen again! I have not seen the book but I would guess that these pictures are exactly like what Mike originally ran into when he said that his camera is probably not adequate. The author took pictures and post processed the heck out of them to get anything at all. He did this on known targets that were centered in the view. He then declared victory because he got a positive result on a known target. Not exactly the type of thing that will lead you to finding unknown treasures out in the wild.

Which comes to my first point; maybe disturbed ground would cause the area in the photos.

Amen once more! Wow, I couldn't have said it better myself. 

Here are 3 photos I took this evening using the camera I converted to IR and the 720nm filter. If anyone wants to play with the the first one feel free. The second and third shows the camera without the filter and with. I still cannot get any results.

Tim

Tim, It looks like that camera has sent you into the future-2016. Maybe you discovered something greater than IR for treasure.