Mahesh, do you agree with Simon's accusation of double exposure?

[Guest guest]

, jagbir

<adishakti_org> wrote:

>

> Dear All,

>

> i am sending three photos taken on Monday 22 August 2005 while we

> were celebrating the birthday of Shahwinder, my second eldest son.

> i took a number of photos but these three are different and

> interesting. (Mahesh, hope you can give your comments.)

>

>

 

Dear All,

 

i just received an email from Simon:

 

Thu, 25 Aug 2005 15:17:16 -0000

" Simon_D_M " <dicon Add to Address Book

-owner

Re: Our eternal spirit/soul bodies are neither transparent

nor physical in Spirit World(second)

 

 

it's a double exposure you idiot

 

-------------------

 

What Simon is actually trying to imply is that i used dishonest

means to bring forth those images. Since he thinks i have

superimposed two images to make them appear as one, i will take it

as an unintended compliment confirming the authenticity of the

photographs.

 

But Simon, i am not the type who hoodwinks the unwary or resort to

cheap tricks to attract attention. (Mahesh, i am still waiting for

you to give your comments since you are a professional photographer

who exposed the recent SWAN 'miracle photos' as faulty exposure

settings. i want to know if you believe i have used double exposure.)

 

So what is double exposure actually? An expert at PC Magazine, Dave

Johnson explains such digital tricks below.

 

regards,

 

jagbir

 

 

Double-Exposure Tricks

Use your image editor to create exotic double-exposure photos.

 

 

Dave Johnson

Tuesday, April 13, 2004

 

Feature: Create a Double Exposure With Layers

 

Double exposures are handy for all sorts of photographic situations.

I've used double exposures to capture ghosts on film, to photograph

two of me playing ping pong, and to capture a time-lapse shot of a

birthday cake new and half-eaten in the same frame. Such pictures

can be cool, but they're really an artifact of the film photography

universe. So does that mean you can't take double exposures with a

digital camera?

 

Well, not exactly. Thanks to the magic of digital photography, it's

actually easier to get the perfect double exposure on a computer

than it is to do it by trial and error " in the lens " of a 35mm

camera. In fact, combining two pictures in an image editor is a

simple matter of using layers, so you've got complete control over

transparency to allow just the right amount of both pictures show

through. Let's give it a shot.

 

 

Blurring Flowers

 

Suppose you've taken a nice, sharp shot of some flower stamen, but

there's something missing. What you'd really like is to add a soft,

dream-like quality to the photo. One fun and easy way to do that is

to create a double exposure from two pictures: one in sharp focus,

and the other quite blurry.

 

To get those two shots, you'll want to use a tripod. That way you

can take two virtually identical shots, certain that the camera

won't move. Take the first photo normally, in sharp focus. Before

you take the second shot, set the camera to manual focus and

intentionally blur the image. Then take the second shot, being

careful not to jostle the camera as it sits on the tripod.

 

 

Working With Layers

 

Now it's time to combine the photos. In Jasc Paint Shop Pro, open

the sharp version. Make sure you can see the Layer Palette on the

right side of the screen. If you don't see the palette, choose View,

Palettes, Layers from the menu and it should appear. By default,

this layer is called Background. To make the layers easier to tell

apart, let's rename this one. Double-click Background in the Layers

Palette and change the name to Sharp Flower. (If you see a dialog

box after you double-click Background asking to promote the picture

to a full layer, click OK.)

 

Now open the blurry flower in Paint Shop Pro and immediately choose

Edit, Copy. Close the image; we don't need it because we copied it

to the clipboard. Then choose Edit, Paste, Paste As New Layer to

stack the blurry picture on top of the sharp one. This is a good

time to rename the new layer (currently called Vector 1) to Blurry

Flower.

 

 

Fine-Tune the Double Exposure

 

When you make a double exposure with a 35mm camera, you control the

relative strength of each image by varying the exposure time. If you

expose the sharp flower longer than the blurry flower, the sharp

flower will appear more prominently in the finished shot. Using

layers in an image editor, you can get the same sort of effect by

controlling the transparency (or opacity) of the top layer.

 

Double-click on the Blurry Flower layer in the Layers Palette and

zoom out, if needed, until you can see most or all of the picture in

the preview window. Then change the opacity level of the Blurry

Flower layer. By lowering the opacity, you let more of the sharp

flowers show through. Try settings of 25, 50, and 75, for instance,

and notice how the different opacity levels give you very different

effects. When you find a level you like, click OK and save your

masterpiece.

 

 

http://www.pcworld.com/howto/article/0,aid,115457,00.asp

[Guest guest]

Dear Jagbir,

These are lovely and fascinating photos.

It is especially interesting that the left arm only is transparent,

and the rest of the photograph is entirely normal. A professional

photographer I have spoken to has said that in cases of double

exposure, the entire photograph would be affected. The effect seen

in these photographs cannot be satisfactorily explained away as an

effect of the camera, or of double exposure.

Best wishes, Semira

 

, " jagbir singh "

<adishakti_org> wrote:

> , jagbir

> <adishakti_org> wrote:

> >

> > Dear All,

> >

> > i am sending three photos taken on Monday 22 August 2005 while

we

> > were celebrating the birthday of Shahwinder, my second eldest

son.

> > i took a number of photos but these three are different and

> > interesting. (Mahesh, hope you can give your comments.)

> >

> >

>

> Dear All,

>

> i just received an email from Simon:

>

> Thu, 25 Aug 2005 15:17:16 -0000

> " Simon_D_M " <dicon@l...> Add to Address Book

> -owner

> Re: Our eternal spirit/soul bodies are neither

transparent

> nor physical in Spirit World(second)

>

>

> it's a double exposure you idiot

>

> -------------------

>

> What Simon is actually trying to imply is that i used dishonest

> means to bring forth those images. Since he thinks i have

> superimposed two images to make them appear as one, i will take it

> as an unintended compliment confirming the authenticity of the

> photographs.

>

> But Simon, i am not the type who hoodwinks the unwary or resort to

> cheap tricks to attract attention. (Mahesh, i am still waiting for

> you to give your comments since you are a professional

photographer

> who exposed the recent SWAN 'miracle photos' as faulty exposure

> settings. i want to know if you believe i have used double

exposure.)

>

> So what is double exposure actually? An expert at PC Magazine,

Dave

> Johnson explains such digital tricks below.

>

> regards,

>

> jagbir

[Guest guest]

, " semirafields "

<semirafields> wrote:

>

> Dear Jagbir,

> These are lovely and fascinating photos.

> It is especially interesting that the left arm only is

> transparent, and the rest of the photograph is entirely normal. A

> professional photographer I have spoken to has said that in cases

> of double exposure, the entire photograph would be affected. The

> effect seen in these photographs cannot be satisfactorily

> explained away as an effect of the camera, or of double exposure.

>

> Best wishes, Semira

>

>

 

Dear Semira,

 

Thank you. It is true that these photographs cannot be explained

away. If it is possible to duplicate them then let Simon and company

produce them. i know that is not possible since, as your

professional photographer friend has also pointed out, a double

exposure will not bring the same results. Niether will any other

speculative explanation which, if true, should be easily duplicated

to bring forth the same results.

 

Semira, there is another thing i have noticed - the two streaks of

light are reflected on Lalita's glasses. But in the next photo there

are no reflections as there are no streaks of light. Check yourself:

 

http://img352.imageshack.us/img352/4004/birthday14rk.jpg

 

http://img352.imageshack.us/img352/8954/birthday37da.jpg

 

 

So how do we explain that? Four of my family members wear glasses

and none of the other photographs show any reflections i.e., the

orange yellow streak of light. Only the single photo, where there

are two streaks of yellow-orange light, is the reflection captured.

So we have added evidence that the camera did capture streaks of

light coming out of the candles, and the same reflected in the

glasses worn by Lalita. How is that possible? ....... i have no idea.

 

But all this did lead me to question my children again about the

Spirit World. Only then did i find out that one of them, Arwinder,

had in fact experimented with his spiritual body. It is definitely

not made of bones and flesh since one hand can pass through the

other. According to him all the deities and prophets in the Kingdom

of God - Shri Ganesha, Shiva, Parvati, Radha, Krishna, Luxshmi,

Vishnu, Jesus, Buddha, Muhammad, Nanak - have the same spiritual

body as himself ............. and the Shakti on whom all meditate.

 

i just keep on recording what has been/is being witnessed, whether

on Earth or the Kingdom of God. These photos gave me another

opportunity to delve a little bit further into the nature of the

eternal human soul ........... and the Powers of the Shakti within.

 

Jai Shri Mataji,

 

 

jagbir

[Guest guest]

Hello everyone

 

I would like to point out that this photograph http://img352.imageshack.us/img352/4004/birthday14rk.jpg

is a miracle photograph.

 

No doubt the streaks of light can be created by slowing down the shutter and moving the camera in any direction immediately after clicking the photograph.

but in that case, all the streaks of light would be parallel to each other and have the same shape.

 

What we see here is that the bottom streak has a shape of exact 7 and the upper streak is in no way parallel. Also the subject is not shaky as it would appear if there is a shake when taking a photograph with low shutter.

 

The second photograph is also a miracle photo because if there is a double exposure the ghost effect would be throughout the photograph for all the subjects and the transperency in the left arm is unexplainable.

 

There is nothing in my photography knowledge which can say that this is not a miracle photograph.

 

Jai Shri Mataji

 

p.s As far as Simon or anyone else's comment, just dont bother. I cannot understand why he still lingers around us sahajayogis after so many years. Either he should do sahajayoga and ask for forgiveness or move on and do something else fruitful. He is just wasting his precious time of his life earning wrath from divine. Till the time his Pot of Sin fills to the brim, he is spared. Then he will repent and has to pay heavily for standing against God.

Simon - Are you listening. Just introspect deeply and sincerely before you start to type any reply. And one more thing. Dont make a fool of yourself. Everyone knows who you are. You are exposed a long time back.

Pls do a favour. To yourself. Just drop out of all the groups and do something fruitful. No one is paying you for all your time you give us.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

jagbir singh <adishakti_org wrote:

, "semirafields" <semirafields> wrote:>> Dear Jagbir,> These are lovely and fascinating photos.> It is especially interesting that the left arm only is > transparent, and the rest of the photograph is entirely normal. A > professional photographer I have spoken to has said that in cases > of double exposure, the entire photograph would be affected. The > effect seen in these photographs cannot be satisfactorily > explained away as an effect of the camera, or of double exposure. >> Best wishes, Semira> > Dear Semira,Thank you. It is true that these photographs cannot be explained away. If it is possible to duplicate them then let Simon and company produce them. i know that is not possible since, as your

professional photographer friend has also pointed out, a double exposure will not bring the same results. Niether will any other speculative explanation which, if true, should be easily duplicated to bring forth the same results. Semira, there is another thing i have noticed - the two streaks of light are reflected on Lalita's glasses. But in the next photo there are no reflections as there are no streaks of light. Check yourself:http://img352.imageshack.us/img352/4004/birthday14rk.jpghttp://img352.imageshack.us/img352/8954/birthday37da.jpgSo how do we explain that? Four of my family members wear glasses and none of the other photographs show any reflections i.e., the orange yellow streak of light. Only the single photo, where there are two streaks of yellow-orange light,

is the reflection captured. So we have added evidence that the camera did capture streaks of light coming out of the candles, and the same reflected in the glasses worn by Lalita. How is that possible? ....... i have no idea.But all this did lead me to question my children again about the Spirit World. Only then did i find out that one of them, Arwinder, had in fact experimented with his spiritual body. It is definitely not made of bones and flesh since one hand can pass through the other. According to him all the deities and prophets in the Kingdom of God - Shri Ganesha, Shiva, Parvati, Radha, Krishna, Luxshmi, Vishnu, Jesus, Buddha, Muhammad, Nanak - have the same spiritual body as himself ............. and the Shakti on whom all meditate.i just keep on recording what has been/is being witnessed, whether on Earth or the Kingdom of God. These photos gave me another opportunity to delve a little bit further into

the nature of the eternal human soul ........... and the Powers of the Shakti within.Jai Shri Mataji,jagbir

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Regards,Mahesh Khatri

http://www.geocities.com/maheshkhatri/Maheshkhatri.html

www.shalstudios.com .

[Guest guest]

I agree With U Mahesh Bhai,

Simon, Dont dare to do such things in future.

 

Regards

Shaileshmahesh khatri <maheshkhatri wrote:

 

Hello everyone

 

I would like to point out that this photograph http://img352.imageshack.us/img352/4004/birthday14rk.jpg

is a miracle photograph.

 

No doubt the streaks of light can be created by slowing down the shutter and moving the camera in any direction immediately after clicking the photograph.

but in that case, all the streaks of light would be parallel to each other and have the same shape.

 

What we see here is that the bottom streak has a shape of exact 7 and the upper streak is in no way parallel. Also the subject is not shaky as it would appear if there is a shake when taking a photograph with low shutter.

 

The second photograph is also a miracle photo because if there is a double exposure the ghost effect would be throughout the photograph for all the subjects and the transperency in the left arm is unexplainable.

 

There is nothing in my photography knowledge which can say that this is not a miracle photograph.

 

Jai Shri Mataji

 

p.s As far as Simon or anyone else's comment, just dont bother. I cannot understand why he still lingers around us sahajayogis after so many years. Either he should do sahajayoga and ask for forgiveness or move on and do something else fruitful. He is just wasting his precious time of his life earning wrath from divine. Till the time his Pot of Sin fills to the brim, he is spared. Then he will repent and has to pay heavily for standing against God.

Simon - Are you listening. Just introspect deeply and sincerely before you start to type any reply. And one more thing. Dont make a fool of yourself. Everyone knows who you are. You are exposed a long time back.

Pls do a favour. To yourself. Just drop out of all the groups and do something fruitful. No one is paying you for all your time you give us.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

jagbir singh <adishakti_org wrote:

, "semirafields" <semirafields> wrote:>> Dear Jagbir,> These are lovely and fascinating photos.> It is especially interesting that the left arm only is > transparent, and the rest of the photograph is entirely normal. A > professional photographer I have spoken to has said that in cases > of double exposure, the entire photograph would be affected. The > effect seen in these photographs cannot be satisfactorily > explained away as an effect of the camera, or of double exposure. >> Best wishes, Semira> > Dear Semira,Thank you. It is true that these photographs cannot be explained away. If it is possible to duplicate them then let Simon and company produce them. i know that is not possible since, as your

professional photographer friend has also pointed out, a double exposure will not bring the same results. Niether will any other speculative explanation which, if true, should be easily duplicated to bring forth the same results. Semira, there is another thing i have noticed - the two streaks of light are reflected on Lalita's glasses. But in the next photo there are no reflections as there are no streaks of light. Check yourself:http://img352.imageshack.us/img352/4004/birthday14rk.jpghttp://img352.imageshack.us/img352/8954/birthday37da.jpgSo how do we explain that? Four of my family members wear glasses and none of the other photographs show any reflections i.e., the orange yellow streak of light. Only the single photo, where there are two streaks of yellow-orange light,

is the reflection captured. So we have added evidence that the camera did capture streaks of light coming out of the candles, and the same reflected in the glasses worn by Lalita. How is that possible? ....... i have no idea.But all this did lead me to question my children again about the Spirit World. Only then did i find out that one of them, Arwinder, had in fact experimented with his spiritual body. It is definitely not made of bones and flesh since one hand can pass through the other. According to him all the deities and prophets in the Kingdom of God - Shri Ganesha, Shiva, Parvati, Radha, Krishna, Luxshmi, Vishnu, Jesus, Buddha, Muhammad, Nanak - have the same spiritual body as himself ............. and the Shakti on whom all meditate.i just keep on recording what has been/is being witnessed, whether on Earth or the Kingdom of God. These photos gave me another opportunity to delve a little bit further into

the nature of the eternal human soul ........... and the Powers of the Shakti within.Jai Shri Mataji,jagbir

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Regards,Mahesh Khatri

http://www.geocities.com/maheshkhatri/Maheshkhatri.html

www.shalstudios.com .

Check out India Rakhi Special for Rakhi shopping, contests and lots more.

http://in.promos./rakhi/index.html

[Guest guest]

, mahesh khatri

<maheshkhatri> wrote:

> Hello everyone

>

> I would like to point out that this photograph

> http://img352.imageshack.us/img352/4004/birthday14rk.jpg

> is a miracle photograph.

>

> No doubt the streaks of light can be created by slowing down the

> shutter and moving the camera in any direction immediately after

> clicking the photograph. but in that case, all the streaks of

> light would be parallel to each other and have the same shape.

>

> What we see here is that the bottom streak has a shape of exact 7

> and the upper streak is in no way parallel. Also the subject is

> not shaky as it would appear if there is a shake when taking a

> photograph with low shutter.

>

> The second photograph is also a miracle photo because if there is

> a double exposure the ghost effect would be throughout the

> photograph for all the subjects and the transperency in the left

> arm is unexplainable.

>

> There is nothing in my photography knowledge which can say that

> this is not a miracle photograph.

>

> Jai Shri Mataji

>

 

Dear Mahesh,

 

Thank you for you professional comments in validating the

authenticity of these miracle photographs. i needed them to dismiss

any claims that they can be duplicated by dishonest means.

 

There is yet another thing i have noticed. Earlier i wrote:

 

> Semira, there is another thing i have noticed - the two streaks of

> light are reflected on Lalita's glasses. But in the next photo

> there are no reflections as there are no streaks of light. Check

> yourself:

>

> http://img352.imageshack.us/img352/4004/birthday14rk.jpg

>

> http://img352.imageshack.us/img352/8954/birthday37da.jpg

>

 

Now i have noticed that the reflections of the streak of light is

even seen on the plants, not just the glassess. Moreover there is an

aura surrounding the streaks of light, which the second photo does

not have. And since as a professional photgrapher you have confirmed

these are indeed miraculous photos i consider this matter closed.

 

Jai Shri Mataji,

 

jagbir

[Guest guest]

jai shri mataji....

 

there should not be any doubt regarding the powers of Shri Adi Shakti.... this is indeed a miracle photograph..

 

jai shri mataji

 

vinodjagbir singh <adishakti_org wrote:

, mahesh khatri <maheshkhatri> wrote:> Hello everyone> > I would like to point out that this photograph > http://img352.imageshack.us/img352/4004/birthday14rk.jpg> is a miracle photograph.> > No doubt the streaks of light can be created by slowing down the > shutter and moving the camera in any direction immediately after > clicking the photograph. but in that case, all the streaks of > light would be parallel to each other and have the same shape.> > What we see here is that the bottom streak has a shape of exact 7 > and the upper streak is in no way parallel. Also the subject is > not shaky as it would appear if there is a shake

when taking a > photograph with low shutter.> > The second photograph is also a miracle photo because if there is > a double exposure the ghost effect would be throughout the > photograph for all the subjects and the transperency in the left > arm is unexplainable.> > There is nothing in my photography knowledge which can say that > this is not a miracle photograph.> > Jai Shri Mataji> Dear Mahesh,Thank you for you professional comments in validating the authenticity of these miracle photographs. i needed them to dismiss any claims that they can be duplicated by dishonest means.There is yet another thing i have noticed. Earlier i wrote:> Semira, there is another thing i have noticed - the two streaks of > light are reflected on Lalita's glasses. But in the next photo > there are no reflections as there are no streaks of

light. Check > yourself:> > http://img352.imageshack.us/img352/4004/birthday14rk.jpg> > http://img352.imageshack.us/img352/8954/birthday37da.jpg>Now i have noticed that the reflections of the streak of light is even seen on the plants, not just the glassess. Moreover there is an aura surrounding the streaks of light, which the second photo does not have. And since as a professional photgrapher you have confirmed these are indeed miraculous photos i consider this matter closed.Jai Shri Mataji,jagbir

 

 

 

" You Cannot Know The Meaning Of Life Until You Are Connected To The Power That Created You. . . "

to experience it visit http://sahajayoga.org/

To help you stay safe and secure online, we've developed the all new Security Centre.