Hey Tom, good topic! I share most of the same thoughts that Karen and Andy gave previously, so there’s no point in reiterating it all in my own words. They make great points having the knowledge and experience in the industry, and those opinions and views can only be understood by people who are within the industry.

Maybe I'm looking at it wrong then… Because when I see a show where there's a meeting with a client, a setting up of equipment, an investigation, breakdown, analysis of all the video & audio etc., and a review with the client… yeah some things may be a bit different based on the uniqueness of each location – but I'd be willing to bet every group does this in almost the same fashion.

See what I mean?

Yes, I do see what you mean. In regards to your example, what people see taking place such as the interviewing/meeting with a client, touring the location, setting up equipment the breakdown and examining the recordings and photos for possible evidence is the same with every group, though I personally do NOT like to be told any stories or history of death that took place before the investigation. I like to explore and investigate first, see what we come up with then before I give my results (which are already written in report form, photos labeled, EVPs noted, possible evidence on video marked, etc.), I then ask for the ghost stories from the people and see how it correlates with my evidence and what I sensed throughout the location. After everything, I then do the historical research of deaths, injuries, illnesses, etc. and match that up with our results and the stories the client told us. To me, I’d rather prove myself to myself first and foremost, and then see how, or if, any of what I documented or learned during the investigation compares to the client’s experiences and the true history of the place. I do not like any specific info beforehand as a way to personally test my own abilities and use my abilities hand-in-hand with the equipment.

So, the general synopsis of an investigation on TV and in “real life” is very similar, but how each person investigates is very unique and different. The other thing is, the way I look at it, some of us who have been investigating for years understand the more scientific methodologies, how to use that type of equipment (I’m talking measurements, readings, not thermal imaging cameras), and we’ve (or at least I have) conducted tons of experiments over the years to try and distinguish paranormal energy from magnetic pulls of the earth, household items, electrical circuits…to the simpler aspects like using the proper camera settings, using different methods such as my “repeat the shot” and trying to document activity during EVPs that we may capture on film. It’s all very detailed, when you conduct an EVP session at the same time you’re using a still camera, video camera, possibly something like dowsing rods, noting uncontrolled sounds like animals, bugs, cars, people in the distance…

A new person to the field won’t have the experience and have had the opportunity to make the mistakes we have to learn how to be a better investigator. To me, that’s what’s different. On TV you do not see all the small, detailed but very important specifics of investigating. It is so much more than loading up your van, taking a tour with a client, setting up your cameras and walking around with flashlights and voice recorders. That’s what people see on TV. It can very easily lead some to believe you can go to any of these “abandoned” places with a flashlight, camcorder and voice recorder, and capture all of this paranormal activity within a matter of minutes. Can it happen? Sure, it’s a possibility but it’s not a big reality.

There’s my two-cents… These are the kinds of conversations I enjoy here! Thanks, Tom!!

I have yet to run around in a parking lot at night spanking my butt yelling "We got John Wilkes Booth" over and over like a moron.

BUT…if you ever have the urge to, be sure you film it and share it with your friends here at PUG!!!

/laugh.png' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />