• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

Miscellaneous Ghost Photos & Videos

Naughty_Felid said:
This one gave me the shits, that I ran around screaming like a girl even if it isn't very clear.




If you look into the room there appears to be a shadowy figure in the background. You can just make out two eyes!
Click to expand...

You have just won yourself a million dollars - send it to The Amazing Randi and we can watch him eat his words.
 
31 Terrifying Photos of Ghosts That Will Keep You Up At Night (well, some of them might)

real-ghost-stories-26.jpg
 
Coastaljames said:
Now I'm no expert but that looks incredibly like a bloke standing behind her :)
Click to expand...
Apparently what shocked her about that photo was that it was her dead husband standing behind her to put it into context ..
 
I'm betting on Duncan Goodhew, who may well have been opening the fete. Well, it looks more like him than the grandpa, unless you think all white, ageing, bald men are identical.
 
Well, it's hard to tell without a pipe... Maybe he quit smoking in another world...
 
God is pretty tough enforcing that smoking ban... someone set his bush on fire once.
 
t15.jpg


In Rhode Island, a woman took a cell phone pic of her 22 month-old niece, Penny, while babysitting her alone. After looking at her photo and seeing the woman behind Penny (who wasn’t there at the time), she had it examined but no tampering was detected. She has since compared family photos and realized that it looks a lot like her deceased great grandmother.
 
The first one just strikes me as someone 'real' who the photographer just didn't notice at the time. The second picture creeps me out though.
 
Looks like Noel Edmonds. Same colour too.
 
Loquaciousness said:
The first one just strikes me as someone 'real' who the photographer just didn't notice at the time. The second picture creeps me out though.
Click to expand...


I agree L, that second photo is creepy, but the first photo I have a problem with. The photo was taken with a fair depth of field (DoF), as the grass in the foreground has good definition, as well as the walls, any depth of field in the foreground will be approximately twice the depth in the background, but the area where the 'ghost' is, and the background to it has little definition at all.


As a long time amateur photographer, the only explanation for that is 'drop-off', which indicates an aberration in a poor lense, but the left hand side of the photo has no 'drop-off', indicating to me, that there has been some post processing.

Curiouser and curiouser...
 
MungomanII said:
I agree L, that second photo is creepy, but the first photo I have a problem with. The photo was taken with a fair depth of field (DoF), as the grass in the foreground has good definition, as well as the walls, any depth of field in the foreground will be approximately twice the depth in the background, but the area where the 'ghost' is, and the background to it has little definition at all.


As a long time amateur photographer, the only explanation for that is 'drop-off', which indicates an aberration in a poor lense, but the left hand side of the photo has no 'drop-off', indicating to me, that there has been some post processing.

Curiouser and curiouser...
Click to expand...

Good analysis Mungo. The second one would seriously spook you if you were there.
 
New Bell Inn Ghost Picture: A group of men sitting and drinking in the New Bell Inn pub had some spectral company behind them - the ghost of an old woman! Here.

Legless Woman in Black Ghost
A floating, black-clad lady drifts into the frame of a family photo. Frightening... Here
 
GeorgeP said:
New Bell Inn Ghost Picture: A group of men sitting and drinking in the New Bell Inn pub had some spectral company behind them - the ghost of an old woman! Here.

Legless Woman in Black Ghost
A floating, black-clad lady drifts into the frame of a family photo. Frightening... Here
Click to expand...

The first looks like some rubbish in the fireplace, and I reckon the second is a panorama fail....
 
I don't think it can be a panorama fail as this looks like an old picture, judging by cars and clothing maybe the 80's. Everyday cameras didn't have panoramic capture.
 
Loquaciousness said:
I don't think it can be a panorama fail as this looks like an old picture, judging by cars and clothing maybe the 80's. Everyday cameras didn't have panoramic capture.
Click to expand...

Oh yeah. I really should read stuff!

Although....contrary to the text, the woman with the pram (not tram) looks like she's spotted the miscreant.
 
Isn't she just running and her legs are behind the bollard? :oops:
 
Frideswide said:
Isn't she just running and her legs are behind the bollard? :oops:
Click to expand...
I think so, especially as she is out of focus and the rest isn't. With a fast shutter speed the top of her body might have been caught, whilst her legs were still catching up ( if you see what I mean ).
 
Probable 1983 plates Rover, not an SD1, but later. VW T25 or Westphalia van. No other absolute date references....possibly a Talbot to rear.

Hmm. Am I unique in my abject fear of the pink-jacketed little monster that's the purported subject of the original picture?

Odd perspective regarding that pram. Can't quite figure-out what's happening there. And why is the toddler thereupon seated so....big, for the pram??

Strange aspect ratio of picture for an '80s non-digital picture....is it genuinely a C41 processed wet-neg photo? Need to look at this later, once I've beaten back a few more demons at work.

EDIT Rover 2000, I think.

.....the Error Level Analysis shows plenty of white-out on the side of that van, which is interesting (lose the company name, ditch a datum, or beat a brand). Have a look at this link to the online analysis...http://fotoforensics.com/analysis.php?id=e6b85e091b9e58a44301890fe4882f6ea748bd56.61962&show=ela Some indication of editing elsewhere (slight and not too covert, maybe some sharpening, comes back as being 'Paint' but probably not MS Paint.)

EXIF data is practically nil, which is consistent with it being a scanned negative or print.
 
Last edited:
GeorgeP said:
I think nana with the pushchair would have been startled if that was the case.
Click to expand...

Carlos suggests that pram woman has spotted her. Looks like that to me too :)
 
Frideswide said:
Carlos suggests that pram woman has spotted her. Looks like that to me too :)
Click to expand...

Maybe so but her line of sight also suggests shes looking at the little girl. The figures arms dont resemble those of someone running or who is about to fall over.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top