sherbetbizarre
Special Branch
- Joined
- Sep 4, 2004
- Messages
- 5,242
It's that thing that terrorised Karen Black in Trilogy of Terror...
They guy with the big R on his cap?Given the location, I suspect it's Rynner ...
A new one from Cornwall!
From the website of the local paper https://www.cornwalllive.com/news/cornwall-news/ghostly-figure-photobombs-couples-church-4141130
"A couple have been left spooked after spotting a ghostly apparition lurking in the background of their selfie taken near a medieval church in Cornwall.
Craig Thomas, 35, took the picture earlier today with his partner Holly Leech, 27, during their daily exercise, after lockdown restrictions in the UK were eased earlier this week.
But it wasn't until they returned home, that they spotted a ghostly figure peering out from behind Craig's shoulder.
He said: "We live in Helston and went to Church Cove for a walk, we parked at the National Trust bit and normally walk from there to Poldhu.
"We took some photos of the day out from the same area, some of the view and selfies.
"Normally we just take the photos and don’t look at them 'til we get back and post them online."
Craig, who works in RNAS Culdrose's logistics department, said that later his partner noticed something unusual on one of the pictures...."
(Image: Craig Thomas 2020)
That's a good one! Any ideas, fellow Forteans?
I don't for a minute think that the Cornwall picture is genuinely anomalous, but bokeh is apparently a thing these days. So the blurred background might not be so suspicious in and of itself.For a typical phone selfie, the depth of field is suspiciously shallow. It looks as though someone's taken a shot of a window with an amusing reflection in it (the black face), then decided to 'shop in themselves on top of it.
Here's a randomly-selected selfie off the Intermong. Note how the background is tightly in focus:
Compare with the blurred background in the questioned shot above.
maximus otter
I don't for a minute think that the Cornwall picture is genuinely anomalous, but bokeh is apparently a thing these days. So the blurred background might not be so suspicious in and of itself.
That's a good one! Any ideas, fellow Forteans?
...Here's a randomly-selected selfie off the Intermong.
Hi I generally really like your posts but can I respectfully please ask that you don't use such terms on here? Maybe it's because I grew up with my late uncle, who had Down syndrome and we're still missing him very much (he died 4 years ago this week).
When I was a kid (and adult) I heard so many casual names being thrown around - Mong, Mongoloid, Retard, Downer, Downy, Spazz etc etc. He was one of the world's generous and gregarious people, universally loved and in a way I'm glad he's not here to experience (as you say) selfish people with mental capacity act like entitled wankers.
ooooh! luvverly!
can someone please reverse the colours of the extra face? as in print the negative?
I don't for a minute think that the Cornwall picture is genuinely anomalous, but bokeh is apparently a thing these days. So the blurred background might not be so suspicious in and of itself.
You see what I mean about the line along his edge? It smacks of being wrong somehow. I might be wrong. It was a bit less fuzzy when I did it (no doubt compressed a bit here)I just went online and did a negative invert on a freebie photo site. This is what I got:
You see what I mean about the line along his edge? It smacks of being wrong somehow. I might be wrong. It was a bit less fuzzy when I did it (no doubt compressed a bit here)
Here's a randomly-selected selfie off the Intermong.
... I am wondering if digital artifacts are at all possible accidentally? A bit like accidental double exposures and the like, in the days of 35mm film? Could images ever become mixed in a similar way due to glitches in the software? I have no idea.
I am reminded of the 'ghosts' from the film White Noise (possibly the last really scary movie I saw, I decided after that not to subject my psyche to similar stuff).
I am wondering if digital artifacts are at all possible accidentally? A bit like accidental double exposures and the like, in the days of 35mm film? Could images ever become mixed in a similar way due to glitches in the software? I have no idea.
Looks a bit more "3D", here.That was my impression too, it looked like a negative image. Then I thought - with digital photos do such 'negatives' appear, and how common are odd digital artifacts, and can they creep into other photos? I don't have enough tech expertise (ie., any!) to know if such things are possible.
Edited to add:
I just went online and did a negative invert on a freebie photo site. This is what I got:
View attachment 26391
I didn't know Mel Giedroyc was so rad.But something else kept nagging at me, the image that keeps popping up are some figures from this very creative and striking video. Possibly the most creative thing Mel B/G/whatever has ever been involved in:
(probably NSFW)
A CGI dummy figure before customisation?
Shadow figure of a child or small person recorded on a hotel CCTV camera in Quincy, Illinois. May 14, 2020.
It was filmed of a surveillance monitor.If it's cctv why is the camera moving?
I see this kind of thing a lot. It means we don't ever get the best possible video quality.It was filmed of a surveillance monitor.
I share the frustration. I'm willing to guess that access to the original recordings is bound up in a morass of data protection stipulations, especially if the location is somewhere sensitive like a hospital. So the mobile phone recordings are probably themselves in breach of policy, but there won't be the same audit trail of which workstation downloaded the relevant video file when.I see this kind of thing a lot. It means we don't ever get the best possible video quality.
Why don't these people just figure out a way to transfer the original video?
There are several reasons I can think of for this other than "makes it easier to do CGI".Why don't these people just figure out a way to transfer the original video?