I saw a youtube video from a guy who called himself "psychedsubstance" where he talks about taking an extremely large amount of HBWR seeds. At some point he starts talking about tracers, and what he's saying is an exact description of iboga tracers.
If you've ever taken iboga, you will realise that there is no doubt that he's talking about exactly this phenomenon in the video.

LSA, or something in HBWR seeds must have something in common with noribogaine, pharmacologically, that becomes apparent only, at high doses.

I know it sounds weird. But it has to. There's no other explanation.

As of yet the best assumption that I can make with my very limited understanding of pharmacology is that the tracer/hallucinatory aspect may stem from SOME overlapping pharmacological features. E.g. affinity and efficacy towards the 5-HT2A G protein coupled receptor where LSA may or may not elicit a partial/full agonist response in a way analogous to ibogaine. However unlike the latter or its close structural analog LSD, there doesn't seem to much pharmacological profiling, studies or data in general regarding LSA's pharmacology.

This is just an assumption based on two references given below, the psychological effects it produces in vivo and its structural similarity to LSD-25 which doesn't always mean a similar pharmacological profile.Think harmine compared to DMT or cathinone to mescaline. They may share a skeletal backbone but their effects vary vastly, however sometimes could virtually end up being similar, if not the same as is the case for 1P-LSD to LSD-25 or cathinone to amphetamine. In this case LSA and ibogaine both share a indole backbone which again may or may not cause an overlapping pharmacological feature such as 5-HT2A agonism.

Edit:

Another important thing that might require some notice is even though two or more compounds have an agonist response towards the same receptor (i.e. 5-HT2A) as is the case for serotonin and psychedelics such as 5-MeO-DMT the response may not always be the same as agonism via 5-HT does not induce psychedelia like the latter.

References:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23665164
https://en.wikipedia.org...ki/Ibogaine#Pharmacology

I don't understand, and don't want to watch a YouTube video right now. How are these tracers different from any others that are the most common hallucinatory indicator of a psychedelic trip that includes open-eye visuals?

I've never taken a psychedelic substance to the point of having visuals that wasn't characterized by (what I've always called) "trails" (hence my common wish of wellness to prospective trippers). I'm not familiar with iboga, are the ones induced by it somehow different? I mean isn't a trail a tracer a trail? Seems to me all it indicates is that there is seratonergic activity ala classic psychedelia.

Oh yes. They are an extremely complex kind of tracers. So much so even, that it is quite hard to exactly describe the phenomenon.

I will give it a try:
The effect is already pretty extreme with just the slightest movement of your eyes, so even if you'd lie down and stare at only one fixed point, they are unavoidable, because even a little blink triggers a cascade of events.
So imagine that you have a picture. If you move your eyes, you have another picture.
The first picture morphes into the second picture in a very peculiar proces.
The lines of the picture, so contrastlines, contours, edges, have points that are being dragged from the first picture to the second one, one at a time. But very quickly. The moment one of these points reaches it's destination, a very bright flash of white light occurs that is so bright that it realy seems as if there is a flashlight in the room. And because it happens so fast, with so many points, the result is that even a very slight movement, will cause a series of very bright flashes. Almost as if you're surrounded by papparazi photographers.
The space within the outlines however, liqifies. Everything within the contours, edges, etc, becomes a liquid, until the contrastlines of the first picture line up with those at the second one. This can be so extreme that for a few seconds, everything in your visual field becomes indistinguishable.

This is the best way i can describe it. It is the weirdest thing realy.

Okay then. One day, I'd like to understand this from an experiential perspective. Thanks for the clarification.