Hi Outsidecreative,

Your question has caused me to stop and think about it, and I find there are two parts to it that make a difference, at least in my experience.

"Retrievals" covers at least two types of experience that I've had -- One, when we seek to help locate temporarily lost souls who are unknown to us, and another, when we go out seeking a deceased person on behalf of some other person.

The first might happen as a result of a disaster like a tsunami, for example, or we just offer ourselves to the  general  retrieval process and see who shows up. In these cases I mostly sense information in order to find them. When I've made some contact I might ask them abit about themselves in order to find a suggestion of who they will meet in the afterlife, in order to encourage them to go there. That information is still basically "sensed" without much conscious sensory input.

However if I went on a retrieval to find someone specific due to someone else's specific request (which I no longer do,)
I'll get a visual impression of the person and slightly hear them, at least some cadence of their speech patterns. The clarity of these impressions usually isn't very strong for me but is enough to offer something to the original requester-person.

In other words, it seems my Interpreter is a bit lazy and won't put information into human formats unless it's necessary   

In short I think we get what we need. 

Betson

Every time I stumble through a response like this, I think of how naturally and evenly Bruce reports his experiences and wish I could do a better job of it. 

  While i'm not sure, i get the sense that Bruce explorations and sensing the data which led to his books, wasn't always as clear and smooth as he translated into for his books. 

   Sometimes with nonphysical sensing and perception, it's similar to when we remember a dream.   When we first have the dream, whether or not it is vivid and more clear, after we write it down and ponder, parts of it often become more clear and detailed. 

  It's like our intuition helps to fill in the gaps or details.  In other cases, we are just translating to the best of our ability and what we perceived isn't necessarily "as is" (in the more specific sense).  I think Bruce does touch on some of these issues in his work. 

   But, and i think Bruce might agree with this, as we attune more and more to, and choose to express what he labels "PUL" consciousness, we tend to perceive in a more clear, expanded, holistic, and accurate manner. 

  PUL consciousness is the great perception expander par excellence.   But that doesn't mean we will necessarily perceive the nonphysical in a more "physical" like manner.   Sometimes, at least for me, it just means that my automatic, intuitive deeply knowing side increases more. 

  Until we get there though, we tend to need and expect more overt "signs" and physical like experiences and perceptions with guidance and the nonphysical.  Because of that, the translation process becomes less direct and more symbolic or allegorical in nature (to an extent, this always seems to remain to some degree, but if one becomes completely intune in a permanent sense with PUL consciousness the difference or discrepancy may become so minimal as to not be that important--just a theory, hunch and intuition that i'm working on and trying to live).