The woman in the booth at the 1970s psychic fair holds her breath. Two metal plates, each the size of a hardcover book, sit on a table. She places her palms flat on them. The technician counts down. A flash, a crackle of ozone, and the Polaroid ejects. The image shows a dark silhouette, her handprint, and around it a corona of red and blue fibers. She has just seen her own aura – or something that looks like it.
An aura camera is a device that visualizes the human energy field, typically using either Kirlian electrophotography or biofeedback hand sensors. The two main types produce images that look similar but measure fundamentally different things: one records a physical electrical discharge, the other interprets skin conductance and temperature into a color map.
What an aura camera actually does
The term “aura camera” is a convenience, not a literal description. No device today photographs the aura as described in theosophical literature – a subtle luminous body that extends beyond the physical form. What the cameras do is capture measurable physical phenomena and then translate those measurements into a colored image of the body outline.
The first type, the Kirlian camera, works by placing a photographic film or a glass plate on a grounded metal plate. The subject touches the film, and a high-voltage, high-frequency electric field is applied. The resulting corona discharge exposes the film, creating a glowing halo around the object. The effect is real, reproducible, and entirely physical. Moisture, pressure, and the condition of the skin all influence the result.
The second type, the biofeedback aura camera, uses a hand scanner that measures skin temperature, galvanic skin response (GSR), and sometimes pulse. A computer algorithm assigns colors to these readings and superimposes them onto a live video feed of the subject. The output is a composite: a person’s face and body, surrounded by a shifting colored cloud.
Both methods have been sold commercially since the 1970s. Neither sees the aura. Both produce images that people use for divination, self-reflection, and entertainment.
Where did aura cameras come from?
The history of aura photography begins in Krasnodar, Russia, in 1939. Semyon Kirlian, a technician, and his wife Valentina noticed that a photographic plate placed between an electrode and a patient’s skin during a medical treatment produced a spark pattern. They spent the next decade refining the technique, eventually publishing their findings in 1958. The Soviet scientific establishment dismissed the work as parapsychology, but the “Kirlian effect” spread to the West through the 1960s.
In 1970, Thelma Moss, a psychologist at UCLA, began studying Kirlian photography in the context of consciousness research. She published The Probability of the Impossible in 1974, which included images of leaves with missing segments that still showed the leaf’s outline – what she called the “phantom leaf effect.” The implication was that the energy field remained even after physical removal. Later experiments showed this was an artifact of moisture or residue on the plate, but the controversy fueled public interest.
The first commercial aura camera, the Kirlian camera model KP-1, appeared in the early 1970s. It was a bulky affair requiring a darkroom. By the 1990s, digital sensors and instant film simplified the process. In 1992, Guy Coggins, an American inventor, developed the AuraCam (though we will not name the brand here), which replaced the contact plate with a hand scanner and a video camera. That system became the template for most modern aura photography booths.
What the colors mean – and what they don’t
The colors in an aura camera image are not arbitrary, but they are not universal either. The software assigns a color palette based on the subject’s readings. Different manufacturers use different algorithms. A red halo in one system may indicate high energy, low stress, or simply a warm palm.
In esoteric traditions, the aura is described in specific colors. The theosophical works of Charles Leadbeater and Annie Besant (1900s) mapped the aura into layers: red for vitality, orange for emotion, yellow for intellect, green for healing, blue for spirituality, violet for transcendence. These codes were later adopted by New Age practitioners and loosely incorporated into camera software.
But the camera cannot distinguish between “spiritual blue” and the blue of cold skin. The interpreter – the practitioner reading the image – supplies the meaning. A good reader will not simply recite the color chart. They will look at the shape, the brightness, the consistency, and the subject’s story. The camera is a tool, not an oracle.
How aura cameras are used in practice
We have seen aura cameras at metaphysical fairs, holistic health centers, and even corporate team-building events. The process is simple: the subject sits, places both hands on the scanner (or palms on the metal plate), and waits for the device to capture the readings. The image appears on a screen within seconds. The practitioner then interprets the colors for the client.
Some practitioners use the images as a starting point for a reading. They ask about the client’s current emotional state, health, and life changes. The colors become a conversation piece, not a diagnosis. Others use the camera to track changes over time – a client returns after a month of meditation, and the image shows a different distribution of colors.
In alternative medicine, a few practitioners use Kirlian photography as a diagnostic tool, claiming that irregularities in the corona discharge indicate blockages in the energy body. This is not supported by mainstream science, but it has a following. The 1975 book The Kirlian Aura by Stanley Krippner and Daniel Rubin documented early attempts to correlate Kirlian images with medical conditions.
Kirlian versus biofeedback: the real difference
If you are considering which type of aura camera to use or study, the distinction is crucial.
Kirlian cameras (contact-based) produce a direct physical record. The image is a photograph of the corona discharge. It is reproducible. The same subject, given the same conditions, will produce a similar pattern. But the conditions are hard to control: skin moisture, pressure, and even the time of day affect the result. The image is monochrome – colors are added later by the technician, often through filters or software.
Biofeedback aura cameras (hand scanner + video) produce a digital composite. The scan is objective – it measures real physiological data – but the color assignment is entirely arbitrary. The same subject, using a different brand of camera, may see completely different colors. The video overlay is also subjective: the camera must guess where the aura extends, and the algorithm often creates a smooth, symmetrical halo that looks pleasing but may not reflect the actual readings.
Which is more accurate? The question is misleading. Neither is accurate to the metaphysical aura. The Kirlian camera is more honest: it shows you a physical phenomenon without pretending to interpret it. The biofeedback camera is more accessible: it gives you a picture that looks like what you expect an aura to look like.
What people get wrong about aura cameras
The most common mistake is believing the camera sees the aura. It does not. The aura, as understood in occult traditions, is a subtle energy field that cannot be photographed by any device currently known. The camera captures a proxy – either a physical discharge or a physiological reading – and then, through software, creates a visual representation.
A second misconception is that the colors are scientifically validated. They are not. The color palette is a convention, not a discovery. Red does not always mean anger. Blue does not always mean calm. The interpretation depends on the reader’s framework, not the camera.
A third is the belief that Kirlian photography can diagnose disease. The 1970s saw claims that cancer, mental illness, and even pregnancy could be detected through Kirlian images. None of these claims survived controlled testing. The technique is at best a novelty, at worst a source of false hope.
FAQ
Can an aura camera see your actual aura?
No. All aura cameras measure physical phenomena (electrical discharge, skin temperature, conductance) and then translate those measurements into a colored image. The metaphysical aura remains invisible to current technology.
Are aura cameras scientifically proven?
The Kirlian effect is a real physical phenomenon. The biofeedback measurements are also real. But the claim that the camera captures the “energy body” or “spiritual aura” is not supported by science.
What do the colors in an aura camera image mean?
The meanings are assigned by the software or the practitioner, based on traditional color correspondences (red for vitality, blue for spirituality, etc.). Different cameras may use different algorithms, so the same person can get different colors on different devices.
How do you choose an aura camera?
Consider the type: Kirlian cameras give a direct physical record; biofeedback cameras give a more visually appealing composite. Price, portability, and software quality vary. No camera is “better” – they are different tools for different purposes.
The aura camera is a window into the body’s subtle signals, not into the soul. It reminds us that the boundary between the physical and the energetic is not as clear as we think. For those who wish to explore the subject further, we recommend reading our guide to aura colors and their meanings, the glossary entry on the concept of the aura, and a deeper look at how to read an aura photograph. The camera is a tool. The reading is an art.