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

GhostStudy.com: What Do You Make Of It?

Oooh a bit of a bad bunch again this month. Although I do like the asylum cam picture. Peopl just seem to be sending in any old rubbish nowadays. At least some of the older pictures showed some attempt to be creative.

Virgin Mary on Christmas Day - Looks like it could be a reflection to me or a combination of the condensation on the window and reflection. The shadow of the childs head doesn't ring true to me either.

Creature in the Doorway - Not sure about this, it could be anything hanging on the wall. Putting the picture into photoshop doesn't help as there are too many JPG artifacts.

House Fire Ghost - I really wish they had just enlarged the photo rather than enhancing it as well. I'd rather make my own impression rather than someone point it out to be, The photo just looks faked now which is a shame.

Apparitrion in the kitchen - I honestly cannot see this on the normal photo. It is a very good photo but looks like it is caused by shadows to be honest.

Creepy face in cave - Looks like the elephant man to me...LOL

Halloween at Ordsall Hall - Surely it is possible that someone popped their head round the corner?

Personal Cam - ? I'm not sure what this is trying to prove...

Winchester Mystery House - Orbs travelling in formation - Orbs created in photoshop more like!

Vietnam Veterans Memorial - Is that a Klansman on the left of the photo? The photo is really too busy for me to make head nor tail of it...

Spirit of deceased bear - Didn't we used to get a sticker back on the print from the labs when there was fogging like this? What's with the "Warning - this is a graphic depiction of a bear shot by a hunter" message? Doesn't depiction mean that it is staged? It's not exactly graphic either... AS far as that picture is concerned the bear could just be asleep.

Tombstone Arizona Classic - I thought this was for new photos? I've always liked this photo though.

Eaton Hall has a ghost - Eaton Hall has a shadow

Ghost in the barn - Jeez, how can anyone post a picture on a slow shutter speed and declare that they have taken a picture of a ghost. By that measure I have captured a 'ghost bus' during my photography course outing round bolton last week!

Alcatraz Prison Ghost - I like this one, however as they have stated, slow shutter speed and a guide can't be ruled out.

The ghost of Mrs Morrisson - this looks like the house to me I'm afraid slightly touched up in photoshop to make it lighter in appearance.

Screen Door Ghost - Sorry can't see owt...

Personal webcam apparition - transparent hooded and robed ghost. It's a very short transparent hooded and robed ghost. Or is it the ghost of a Jawa?

Asylum Cam Ghost - I actually like this one, it does look like a small child clinging to one of the rails at the side of the staircase.
 
....I was crying because my Son had just said, "I got it with PapPap's gun Mum."
Click to expand...

Is there some irony supposed to be in that comment? Awww isn't it sweet!!
Ickle sonny blasted a biggy wiggy horrible bear to bits. *Kiss*

Right! Enough of vomit induction..(I shan't say anything more on that for fear of offending certain ..er...people!)

Would someone kindly take another look at this attempt again please.. http://www.ghoststudy.com/monthly/dec04/toddler.htm
and tell me if I am wrong,?... but the photo referred to as being taken BEFORE the first one, was in fact taken one minute and fifteen seconds later, therefore making the toddler come down rather than up..the stairs. Look for obvious evidence!! :lol:
Don't forget though....
Until I saw a baby walking up the stairs by itself
Click to expand...

She definately saw the toddler walking UP...and not DOWN the stairs. Hmmmmm. :?
 
Would someone kindly take another look at this attempt again please.. http://www.ghoststudy.com/monthly/dec04/toddler.htm
and tell me if I am wrong,?... but the photo referred to as being taken BEFORE the first one, was in fact taken one minute and fifteen seconds later, therefore making the toddler come down rather than up..the stairs. Look for obvious evidence!!
Don't forget though....Quote:
Until I saw a baby walking up the stairs by itself




She definately saw the toddler walking UP...and not DOWN the stairs. Hmmmmm.
_________________
Click to expand...

Dust? Anone? No?..........
 
spillage said:
Would someone kindly take another look at this attempt again please.. http://www.ghoststudy.com/monthly/dec04/toddler.htm
and tell me if I am wrong,?... but the photo referred to as being taken BEFORE the first one, was in fact taken one minute and fifteen seconds later, therefore making the toddler come down rather than up..the stairs. Look for obvious evidence!!
Don't forget though....Quote:
Until I saw a baby walking up the stairs by itself




She definately saw the toddler walking UP...and not DOWN the stairs. Hmmmmm.
_________________
Click to expand...

Dust? Anone? No?..........
Click to expand...

I took a look at this again as suggested and yes the time stamp on the pictures does indicate that the second photo was taken before the first one. Has anyone pointed this out to Jim? Be prepared to be banned from the Ghoststudy forums for disagreeing with him though...
 
Just emailed Jim about it. It's fairly obvious though isn't it lol!
I suggested that the eye witness testimony should be disregarded now! haha!
 
Hi all. New here, la de da. Been enjoying the FT site for some time now, and especially the message boards. Why? Because the folks here don't act like the ones over at GS. I used to hang out at that site myself, but finally couldn't take it any longer when they posted the (I suppose) now infamous picture of the Spider-Man doll claimed to be a demon. Plenty of arguments arose over the photo, and even when it was plain to see in side by side comparisons of photos of the doll in question, some there still wanted it to be a demon.

That finally broke my patience, and I went off on a long rant about that, the over-abundance of simulacra photos touted as "ghosts", and the constant freak-out "I know someone who knew someone" stories of Ouija boards, "so you'd better say a prayer or protection spell when using one, lest ye become possessed." It's enough to make any sane thinking person go temporarily nuts.

Anyhow, just wanted to jump in here with my two cents on the site. My friends and I check it out for some lame laughs every month in regards to their photos, but that's about it. If anything, it's always hilarious to see them always changing their minds about what truly makes up a genuine "spirit orb".
 
Thanks for the welcome, spillage.

I wanted to mention another thing that happened on the boards there not so long ago. Someone was asking about ITC and how to go about it via the video cam pointed at the tv causing the loop feedback, so some member on there decided he'd postsome captures he got, and I did the same. It was pretty funny the reactions that these got, with all the usual "Oh my god, that would scare me so much! I'd never want to turn my TV on again!" replies that the GS members are famous for.

Anyway, here's the link to the "evil deities" I captured in my TV:

Note that "itc25" and "itc26" are in fact jokes and are my actual head. These naturally got the wildest responses. :twisted:
 
Wow konajinx, fab pictures. I like 'itc8', looks just like an alien :D and welcome to our world :shock:
 
Thanks Elf. Yeah when I did these captures, I made sure to try and put shots up of things you could actually "see" without too much eye strain, whereas the other guy who was offering up ITC caps was doing the whole "Look at this one! See where I've highlighted? It kind of looks like a head!" Bah. "Kind of" doesn't cut it for me. :) I always want to see the goods, which is why I always have to laugh at the monthly galleries at GS because it's always the same-old same-old there, and most everyone's a 100% believer by default.
 
Thanks for that...I did "mouse over", but not on that bit.
Are they supposed to be just loop feedbacks? They look to me like they're either doctored or there was something on the screen at the time. Some of them actually show imagfes of things other than 'white noise'.
 
Yeah, they are just looped signals, however my camera comes equipped with different lens settings, so some were done with the "mirror" setting on, but not many (1, 3, 5, 16, and 17 to be exact). Nothing was doctored. I just ran the video through my video capture device on the computer, and that's it. After that, I played the loops through Windows Media Player with the pause button on, so I could pause and un pause as close to a frame as possible. Then I found things that looked interesting within the loops and then took a digital photo and trimmed the captures down to those points (seems like a weird way of going about it, but was the fastest method I could think of at the time). So the only "doctoring" that was done was an image crop, but nothing was added or taken away from to get those. I admit, even I was surprised by some of them, including the one that sort of look like insect heiroglyphs and the two cats.

It's just a matter of looping the signal and then turning the camera slightly in different directions to get different results.
 
Well what you have to realize is that a lot of these, such as the one you have pointed out, were just smaller portions of the overall picture of the TV screen. As I said, I'd advance the video frame by frame, until I saw something interesting within the whole frame, and then grab it. That example you have was not the full shot of the TV screen, but merely just a small portion. Sorry I didn't point this out originally, but hopefully this will clear up some confusion.

Plus you have to remember that depending on type of video camera used, the distance from the TV set between it and the camera, how much movement is applied to the camera during looping, and any effects or filters used on the camera, as well as possibly the make or kind of TV itself all factor in to the whole ITC capture. Sometimes you can get full color loops, whereas other times they are black and white, as shown in my caps. I think a lot of folks often forget that there are quite a number of factors going in to this whole exercise, and it's not just merely a matter of pointing a video camera at the TV and feeding back its signal, although it certainly can be simply that, but there are almost always extraneous factors also working within the background as stated above.
 
Ah, thanks. I'm with you now lol.
It's rather like taking photos' of tree bark and cropping/adding art effect to portions.
I used to point my camera at its monitor and wave it about to give it a surreal lighting effect but didn't encounter anything other than the reflective source feeding back visually. Looked more like UFOs than anything. :p
 
Apparently this month's hilarity won't be posted until the 20th, but did you all see where they have asked the dead to contact GS? Seriously going off the deep end there, people. A number of "mediums" and two ghosts have replied to their game of 5 questions! Check it out:

http://www.ghoststudy.com/new6/ghostcall.htm

I don't know whether to laugh or cry. Or vomit.

Does anyone know if Jim regularly takes any illicit substances? I'm beginning to wonder.
 
konajinx said:
Does anyone know if Jim regularly takes any illicit substances? I'm beginning to wonder.
Click to expand...

Lets keep things clean - no punches below the belt.
 
I go there to look at the pics and ignore the articles, which is the opposite of why most people buy Playboy. And, newsflash: orbs are boring. Get over it.

Some of the pictures are obvious fakes, most are ho-hum. The descriptions sometimes border on the illiterate, the commentary is dopey, but...damn. Some of those pics spook the shit outta me. Some are just plain beautiful--I'm thinking of a 40s pic of a little girl surrounded by a shimmering light from a couple years back. Gorgeous.

Seems Fortean to not worry about if these things are "real" or not. Like UFO pics. Certainly they can offer no quantifiable proof of the phenemenon, regardless how convincing they look. For me, they're art with a cool backstory.
 
Sorry if this has been featured elswhere but I just had to post it!
I rekon it pisses all over ghoststudy.com for pathetic excuses to fill spaces and belief in the crap!
http://www.reneesghosts.homestead.com/P ... llery.html

Note particularly a woman's shadow of her head on the wall behind the sofa and how they go into it and refer to it as "Energy appearing from the couch.." LMAO! :lol:
Oh, here it is....

www.reneesghosts.homestead.com/files/OC ... Ghosts.jpg

and the enhanced lol!

www.reneesghosts.homestead.com/files/oC ... hosts2.jpg

:roll:

*Addition* Oooh!!! Oooh! Mr Peavely!!! Check out the amazing fantastic video footage of a moth flying towards a bloke's back then turning off towards the camera lamp!! Oooh !!!ooh!!!! oooh!!! They call it an orb going through him and becoming brighter!! Oooh !!!OOOh! Let's vote on which site is more ridiculous!!! (Mr Peavely!) :D http://www.reneesghosts.homestead.com/GhostVideo.html

[Emp edit: Removed IMG tags as it is bandwidth theft and raises some copyright issues too.]
 
They're not real, then? And there was I believing those nice people on that website . . . :madeyes:


Why doesn't one of us send a photo in?

Carole
 
carole said:
Why doesn't one of us send a photo in?
Click to expand...

Heh nice one, I almost believed you were being serious with that but even slow-on-the-uptake me, thought nah... cos she's got to have seen the earlier debacle on this thread with Misguided Fool's photo over on Ghoststudy.com.
 
Actually, that pic posted on there from here was what led me here last year. When I finally got fed up with all the blind believers over on GS, I mentioned that event, and was met with much hostility, but then if you don't agree with the faithful there, you're often met with that anyway.

In regards to the "couch energy" photo, I've seen that before. I just don't get some folks. It's like ghost sites which feature people taking pictures of windows from the insides of their houses with the flash reflecting back and picking up all the fingerprints and other smudges on the glass, finding simulacra in that and then claiming those are ghosts as well. It's a strange world.

And yea, I too will make the monthly visit to GS for the pics and not the articles, but the asking ghosts themselves to help out caught my eye. I wonder how they'll use that data now.
 
Quixote said:
carole said:
Why doesn't one of us send a photo in?
Click to expand...

Heh nice one, I almost believed you were being serious with that but even slow-on-the-uptake me, thought nah... cos she's got to have seen the earlier debacle on this thread with Misguided Fool's photo over on Ghoststudy.com.
Click to expand...

Quite - we've been down that track before and we aren't going there again. Basically we aim to extend the same kind of treatment to other sites that we would expect from them (not that we get it all the time but even if various places think we are fluffy woowoos, hardnosed scpetics, idiots, etc. we will try to maintain th moral highground and consider the fact that if both Believers and Skeptics look down on us then we are probably doing things right ;) ).

Rampant rudnss about other sites or people (who can't defend themselves) will get a word in one's shell-like but co-ordinating mischief on other sites is a good way to get one's ass in a sling.

Granted we have only had minor problems but I've seen some frightening things on some sites (like coordinated witch hunts) and we will continuye nip that kind of thing in the bud.

Its also worth noting that this isn't necessarily aimed at anyone or even at this thread specifically but we have noticed the occasional outbreak of such behaviour so its worth a general reminder every now and again.

Here endeth the public information broadcast for tonight ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top