Maroon_Sweater yes it should definitely catch your attention. Thank you.

Taosaur so you're running to wikipedia to prove it's dust when clearly there is something larger going on but you're not really wanting to look at the situation properly. Instead your moms flooded basement experience satisfies you. And some unaccounted for theory about cameras having an inbuilt error in them.

the compact designs changing the angle of reflection on near particles when the flash goes off.
The compact design that does not tell us much about all the cameras in existence and the common strange malfunction you are describing that would have to happen in all conditions where the orbs happened. So changing angles of reflection from the compact design. Are you sure? You say near particles where the flash is, and that's suppose to create the orbs. But the orbs don't appear in any pattern of conditions from any particular angles of any circumstance. Otherwise it would turn out as a malfunction consistently instead of no seemingly logical sequence that can be demonstrated as any faults of the camera. So the changing angle reflection from the partials in the light of the flash (some didn't use a flash) from compact designs seems to act entirely randomly and still don't come out as dust partials but transparent luminescent clearly defined objects. Behind and in front of things. Ofcourse all this is ignoring the video footage. Where people witness seeing it while filming it. Which makes the entire photography fault theory obsolete.


It would be interesting to see your contaminated picture. Together with the other orb pictures. Then we can judge for ourself if it resembles it or not.

But remember this is not just about photography.