A photographer in Krasnodar placed a coin on a photographic plate and passed a high-frequency current through it. The resulting image looked like a ghost. That was 1939, and the Kirlian effect had just been discovered. Seventy years later, a different machine asks you to place your hands on metal plates while a computer generates a colored silhouette of your energy field. Both devices claim to show something invisible. A Kirlian camera photographs the corona discharge of an object in a high-frequency electric field, while an aura camera uses biofeedback sensors to map a person’s supposed energy field into color. The two devices share a common ancestor but answer different questions: one captures a physical effect, the other interprets a metaphysical one.
What Each Device Actually Does
A Kirlian camera works by placing an object directly on a photographic plate or film. A high-voltage, high-frequency electric field is applied for a fraction of a second. The resulting image shows a glowing corona around the object’s edges, often with streamers, flares, and color variations. The effect is real, reproducible, and now understood as a form of corona discharge influenced by moisture, pressure, and the object’s surface conductivity.
An aura camera (often called a biofeedback aura imaging system) does not photograph anything. The subject places their hands on metal sensors that measure skin conductance, temperature, and sometimes heart rate. A computer algorithm translates these readings into a colored aura image, usually a human silhouette surrounded by layers of hue. The colors correspond to the device’s internal mapping: blue for calm, red for active, green for balanced. The output is a visualization of biometric data, not a direct capture of an energy field.
The two machines look similar at a glance: both produce images of a person surrounded by light. But the mechanism, the data, and the interpretation are fundamentally different.
Where the Kirlian Effect Came From
Semyon Kirlian was a Russian electrician and inventor. In 1939, while repairing equipment at a hospital in Krasnodar, he noticed that a spark between an electrode and a patient’s skin left a tiny glowing imprint on a photographic plate. He spent the next decade refining the process with his wife Valentina, building a device that could consistently photograph the corona discharge of leaves, coins, and human fingertips.
Kirlian believed he had discovered a way to photograph the “life force” or “bioplasmic energy” of living things. He published his findings in Soviet scientific journals in the 1950s, and the phenomenon was named the Kirlian effect. Western researchers learned of it in the 1970s, largely through the work of Thelma Moss, a psychologist at UCLA. Moss conducted experiments on leaves, claiming that a leaf’s corona changed as it wilted, and that the “phantom leaf” effect (a corona appearing where part of a leaf had been cut away) suggested a persistent energy field. Later research demonstrated that the phantom leaf effect was an artifact of moisture residue on the plate.
The human consequence was immediate: people who saw Kirlian photographs felt they were looking at proof of the soul. The Soviet government funded research into “bioenergetics” hoping to develop diagnostic tools. None of those tools materialized in clinical practice, but the images remained powerful symbols in the esoteric community.
How the Aura Camera Was Born
The first commercial aura camera appeared in the 1970s, developed by Guy Coggins in California. Coggins, a photographer and inventor, built a device called the Aura Imaging System. It used hand sensors connected to a biofeedback monitor. The subject’s skin conductance and temperature were fed into a computer that generated a colored aura image based on a preset color wheel. Coggins claimed the colors reflected the subject’s emotional and spiritual state.
Later versions, such as the AuraCam 3000 (introduced in the 1990s) and the Progen system, added more sensors and software. The modern aura camera is essentially a biofeedback machine with a camera overlay. The subject sits in front of a backdrop, places hands on sensors, and a digital camera captures their photo while the software superimposes the aura colors. The result is a portrait that looks like a photograph of an aura, but the colors are generated algorithmically from the biometric input.
The human consequence: aura cameras became a fixture at psychic fairs, wellness expos, and New Age retreats. For $30 to $60, a person could receive a printed “aura reading” with a color interpretation guide. The experience is interactive and immediate, which is why it remains popular despite the lack of scientific validation.
What the Images Actually Show
A Kirlian photograph shows a real physical phenomenon: the ionization of gas molecules around an object in a strong electric field. The shape, brightness, and color of the corona depend on:
- The moisture content of the object (a dry leaf produces a different corona than a wet one)
- The pressure of the object against the plate
- The voltage and frequency of the applied field
- The composition of the gas between the object and the plate
When a person places a fingertip on a Kirlian plate, the corona changes with sweat, blood flow, and muscle tension. This is why some practitioners claim Kirlian photography can detect illness or stress. The effect is real, but it measures physiological state, not a metaphysical energy field.
An aura camera image shows a computer-generated interpretation of biometric data. The colors are assigned by the device’s software, not captured from the body. Two different aura camera models can produce different colors for the same person because the mapping algorithms differ. The image is a visualization of how the subject’s nervous system responded at that moment, not a photograph of an aura.
How Practitioners Use Each Device
We have worked with both machines in our own research. The Kirlian camera is a tool of observation. You place a leaf, a coin, or your own hand on the plate and watch the corona shift. It teaches patience: the image changes with the smallest variation in pressure or moisture. Practitioners use it to demonstrate the effect of intention or energy work, though the results are always open to physical explanation.
The aura camera is a tool of reflection. The subject sees a colored portrait of themselves and receives a printed guide. The experience often prompts conversation about emotions, chakras, and personal growth. The device is less about measurement and more about creating a moment of self-inquiry. Many practitioners use it as an icebreaker in readings or as a visual aid during energy healing sessions.
Neither device is diagnostic in a medical sense. Neither has been accepted by mainstream science as a tool for measuring the human energy field. But both have found a place in the esoteric toolkit, one as a laboratory curiosity, the other as a participatory ritual.
Notable Figures and Texts
Semyon Kirlian (1898–1978) published his first paper on the effect in 1958, titled “Method of Obtaining Photographic Pictures of Various Types of Objects.” His work was translated into English in the 1970s and circulated among parapsychology researchers.
Thelma Moss (1918–1997) wrote The Probability of the Impossible (1974) and Body Electric (1979), which brought Kirlian photography to a popular audience. Her experiments at UCLA’s parapsychology laboratory remain controversial but influential.
Dr. Konstantin Korotkov, a Russian physicist, developed the Gas Discharge Visualization (GDV) technique in the 1990s. GDV uses a modernized Kirlian camera with digital processing and computer analysis. Korotkov’s work attempts to correlate corona discharge patterns with health conditions, and his devices are used in some alternative medicine clinics.
Guy Coggins (1940–2015) patented the Aura Imaging System in 1973. His company, Aura Imaging, continues to produce aura cameras under the brand name AuraCam.
Common Misconceptions
“A Kirlian camera photographs the soul.” It does not. The corona discharge is a physical effect caused by ionization. No experiment has ever demonstrated that the image corresponds to anything beyond the object’s surface properties and the electrical field conditions.
“An aura camera takes a real photograph of your aura.” It does not. The device measures skin conductance and temperature, then assigns colors based on a programmed algorithm. The image is a constructed visualization, not a direct capture.
“The two devices measure the same thing.” They do not. The Kirlian camera captures a real-time physical phenomenon. The aura camera captures biometric data and translates it into a symbolic image. The only thing they share is the claim of visualizing an energy field.
“Kirlian photography can diagnose disease.” No controlled study has demonstrated diagnostic reliability. The effect is influenced by too many variables (moisture, pressure, temperature) to produce consistent clinical results.
FAQ
Can a Kirlian camera photograph the soul?
No. The corona discharge is a physical effect of ionization. No scientific evidence supports the idea that it captures anything metaphysical.
Is an aura camera scientifically valid?
The biometric sensors are real, but the color mapping is arbitrary. The device measures skin conductance and temperature, not an energy field. Its value is experiential, not empirical.
Which is better for a beginner?
An aura camera is more accessible. You sit down, place your hands on sensors, and receive a printed image within minutes. A Kirlian camera requires more setup, a dark room, and practice to produce consistent results.
Do they measure the same thing?
No. The Kirlian camera captures a physical corona discharge. The aura camera measures biometric data and generates a symbolic color image. They are different tools for different purposes.
The Kirlian camera and the aura camera sit on opposite sides of the same question: can we see what is normally invisible? One answers with a photograph of a real electrical effect, the other with a computer-generated portrait of your nervous system. Neither proves the existence of an aura. But both have given people a reason to pause and consider that there might be more to a living body than its visible surface. For a deeper look at how energy fields are visualized and interpreted, see our guide to auras and the glossary entry on the aura. You may also find our article on Kirlian photography and energy diagnostics useful for understanding the technical side of these devices.