• Forums Software Updates

    The forums will be undergoing updates this weekend: Saturday 7th - Sunday 8th June 2025.
    Little to no downtime is expected.

Miscellaneous Ghost Photos & Videos

Floyd1 said:
A guy behind is ducking his head down behind the man.
Click to expand...
I've been trying to figure that out, if you notice his hand is put behind him on the front man's arm, making for a very strange contortion, so he's facing away from the camera, twisting his arm back, and where is the rest of him. I see an arm, not sure about anything else.
Unless he's crouched down on the ground with his knees pulled in?
 
Ronnie Jersey said:
I've been trying to figure that out, if you notice his hand is put behind him on the front man's arm, making for a very strange contortion, so he's facing away from the camera, twisting his arm back, and where is the rest of him. I see an arm, not sure about anything else.
Unless he's crouched down on the ground with his knees pulled in?
Click to expand...
I shall investigate this tomorrow. I have drunk far too much red wine tonight to make a coherent commmmmmmmmmmennnnnnt.
 
Thing's day out?

059a04e2d42814443d749a61a78ce1e5.jpg
 
Ronnie Jersey said:
Unless he's crouched down on the ground with his knees pulled in?
Click to expand...
Could be. I certainly think it's just his mate larking about. If we're saying that the top finger of 'the hand' is his little finger, then yes, they're back to back. (There are shadows in the gaps marked, which I'm not sure there would be otherwise, so I'd say there's definitely just someone behind).
1652293998527_LI.jpg
 
Floyd1 said:
Could be. I certainly think it's just his mate larking about. If we're saying that the top finger of 'the hand' is his little finger, then yes, they're back to back. (There are shadows in the gaps marked, which I'm not sure there would be otherwise, so I'd say there's definitely just someone behind). View attachment 55325
Click to expand...
I just can't work out how he managed to twist his arm back into that position, and then bent his body to hide behind this man - and where's his head? The man must be a pretzel!
I know there's something behind the front man's back, but it's so difficult to figure it out.
 
Vardoger said:
Click to expand...
I was a bit suspicious of this anyway as it looked sort of contrived. The end of the video clinched it for me as faked. He walks into a dark room with his daughter supposedly possessed and doesn't turn the light on.
 
Floyd1 said:
Could be. I certainly think it's just his mate larking about. If we're saying that the top finger of 'the hand' is his little finger, then yes, they're back to back. (There are shadows in the gaps marked, which I'm not sure there would be otherwise, so I'd say there's definitely just someone behind). View attachment 55325
Click to expand...
If the person is hiding behind the big pot (it looks like a giant garden urn) and is lying down at full length, with his arm reaching out around (you can see his arm coming out from behind the pot), it would work.

The big question for me would be WHY?? Mind you, the woman has exactly the expression I would expect to be worn by someone thinking 'I really wish Harry would find some new friends and a hobby...'
 
catseye said:
If the person is hiding behind the big pot (it looks like a giant garden urn) and is lying down at full length, with his arm reaching out around (you can see his arm coming out from behind the pot), it would work.

The big question for me would be WHY?? Mind you, the woman has exactly the expression I would expect to be worn by someone thinking 'I really wish Harry would find some new friends and a hobby...'
Click to expand...
What's the yellow light bottom left? A lamp of some sort?
 
catseye said:
If the person is hiding behind the big pot (it looks like a giant garden urn) and is lying down at full length, with his arm reaching out around (you can see his arm coming out from behind the pot), it would work.

The big question for me would be WHY?? Mind you, the woman has exactly the expression I would expect to be worn by someone thinking 'I really wish Harry would find some new friends and a hobby...'
Click to expand...
I think you got it - it does look like a giant garden plant pot, that threw me completely.
And it looks like a vintage photo from the late 1940's, early 1950's, judging by the woman's frilly one piece and hair style.
 
Ronnie Jersey said:
Have you discussed this photo on this forum? It's from 2014, two friends took their 3 children to Murphy's Hole in Australia on a hot day and went swimming.
But the photo of them shows a creepy 4th child, apparently:

View attachment 55466

The story is here:

https://anomalien.com/family-photo-...-have-been-visited-by-a-ghost-while-swimming/
Click to expand...
I notice a few things that make me sceptical of the picture.

To me their dress is odd. Why are they dressed as they are, for swimming? Two women with sunglasses on, everyone seems to be dressed in regular clothing ie no swimsuits - the child in the foreground appears to be wearing a tshirt and the smaller one in pink appears to be fully dressed right down to shoes or booties.

The picture is over exposed and the colouring seems way off. It reminds me of an old Polaroid, but the pic was taken in 2014. Does a digital take this bad of a picture? Maybe, but the pinks and greens just seem weird. And then they id the splotch as a teenage girl? Imo that’s definitely pushing it a little. It may be a bulbous shape, but to say it‘s a person? It does look like a double exposure.

Then when the supposed follow up details are that a girl drowned in the exact same place at almost exactly 100 years ago, that’s really where I roll my eyes. If it is a local swimming hole, I can pretty much be sure at least one person has drowned. Unfortunately that is not uncommon.
 
brownmane said:
I notice a few things that make me sceptical of the picture.

To me their dress is odd. Why are they dressed as they are, for swimming? Two women with sunglasses on, everyone seems to be dressed in regular clothing ie no swimsuits - the child in the foreground appears to be wearing a tshirt and the smaller one in pink appears to be fully dressed right down to shoes or booties.

The picture is over exposed and the colouring seems way off. It reminds me of an old Polaroid, but the pic was taken in 2014. Does a digital take this bad of a picture? Maybe, but the pinks and greens just seem weird. And then they id the splotch as a teenage girl? Imo that’s definitely pushing it a little. It may be a bulbous shape, but to say it‘s a person? It does look like a double exposure.

Then when the supposed follow up details are that a girl drowned in the exact same place at almost exactly 100 years ago, that’s really where I roll my eyes. If it is a local swimming hole, I can pretty much be sure at least one person has drowned. Unfortunately that is not uncommon.
Click to expand...
Have you been to Australia? The sun is SO ferocious that people wear rash vests or just T shirts to go in the water to avoid being toast in the first 30 seconds. And also sunglasses as the glare off the water can burn out your retinas in a few moments (ok, that's probably hyperbole, but it's what it feels like). It's especially important for kids to be covered up.
 
Murphy's Hole_LI.jpg

I think the photo is odd - the face of a man with a short beard appears to be in the water (circled).
And that 'head' is even odder, with 2 eyes and curly hair, or 'horns' as the woman described (the one holding the little girl) her. She was really frightened by the photo.
Could be a splash of water.
 
brownmane said:
... The picture is over exposed and the colouring seems way off. It reminds me of an old Polaroid, but the pic was taken in 2014. Does a digital take this bad of a picture? Maybe, but the pinks and greens just seem weird. And then they id the splotch as a teenage girl? Imo that’s definitely pushing it a little. It may be a bulbous shape, but to say it‘s a person? It does look like a double exposure. ...
Click to expand...

The differences in color contrast and color palette in different areas of the photo indicate more than one exposure. Whether it happened in the camera on the scene or in a darkroom, I don't think this photo is a single exposure.
 
EnolaGaia said:
The differences in color contrast and color palette in different areas of the photo indicate more than one exposure. Whether it happened in the camera on the scene or in a darkroom, I don't think this photo is a single exposure.
Click to expand...
Yes, the mum appears to have three hands for a start, she's holding something with one, doing a V with the other, and then there's another, detatched hand floating off to her left, also doing a V. Plus that disembodied 'head' to her right looks a lot like the baby's hat.
 
catseye said:
Yes, the mum appears to have three hands for a start, she's holding something with one, doing a V with the other, and then there's another, detatched hand floating off to her left, also doing a V. Plus that disembodied 'head' to her right looks a lot like the baby's hat.
Click to expand...
I totally noticed that and attributed that hand to the child in the bonnet. But the hand isn't quite the right scale, imo, for the child.
 
The kid in the foreground pointing at his eyes is freaky enough, if he has a body it doesn't seem to be obstructing the kid swimming behind him. The hand on the far right seeems to have another hand gripping its wrist.
I'm guessing lousy photo (Is it a blow up of a larger scene?) possibly some sort of double exposure or discarded hats etc. floating about and a healthy dose of pareidolia.
 
catseye said:
Yes, the mum appears to have three hands for a start, she's holding something with one, doing a V with the other, and then there's another, detatched hand floating off to her left, also doing a V. Plus that disembodied 'head' to her right looks a lot like the baby's hat.
Click to expand...

I think the mother's right hand is holding the bonnet-child's right forearm. The bonnet-child's right hand is in front of the mother's face. The mother's left hand (showing a V-sign / peace sign) appears immediately to the right of the bonnet-child. The bonnet-child's left hand (making a peace sign) is farther to the right, coming out of the water.

The bonnet-child's right forearm appears to be mysteriously truncated below the mother's right hand that's holding it. I suspect this truncation could be the result of a double exposure, which would help explain why the mother / bonnet-child pair is rendered off-color compared to the rest of the photo.
 
I personally don't go swimming in inland rivers or billabongs...in fact, I don't go swimming anywhere I can't see the bottom - that does it for me. There's usually half a dead tree, branches intact, sitting on the bottom of the waterhole, and the difference in temperature between the top 3 feet and the rest is something phenomenal sometimes.

If my Koori mates tell me to chuck a rock, if I get close to water, which is to warn the Water spirits, then I reckon it's a good idea to not swim there...besides...Bunyips live in water, and they're worse than drop bears...
 
EnolaGaia said:
I think the mother's right hand is holding the bonnet-child's right forearm. The bonnet-child's right hand is in front of the mother's face. The mother's left hand (showing a V-sign / peace sign) appears immediately to the right of the bonnet-child. The bonnet-child's left hand (making a peace sign) is farther to the right, coming out of the water.

The bonnet-child's right forearm appears to be mysteriously truncated below the mother's right hand that's holding it. I suspect this truncation could be the result of a double exposure, which would help explain why the mother / bonnet-child pair is rendered off-color compared to the rest of the photo.
Click to expand...
I can't see the detached hand as being to do with bonnet child. Mother is having to hold it's right hand up and make the V sign with its fingers, it seems too small to do that itself - which means that detached hand is too far away to belong to it, and it's too young to do the V sign by itself. Either there's someone else, submerged under mother and bonnet child, or it's two exposures very close in time but with people bobbing about and chaning position,

Edited to add: given the ghostly images in the water and the very wet hair of the two children at the front, this would be my guess. Kids diving and swimming under water and someone is snapping away from the bank but not winding the film on properly.
 
The little boy with the dark hair appears to have his right arm out towards the little girl being held up by her mother.
And his left arm and hand appears to be in front of the 'head' in question.
I wonder if he happened to 'splash' the water with his left hand right before the photo, making that odd blob that looks like a head.
 
This was on today's French Quora:

A photo of 4 guests at a wedding in 1972.

wedding1.png



But look closely at what's lurking behind the tall man:

wedding2.png
 
blessmycottonsocks said:
This was on today's French Quora:

A photo of 4 guests at a wedding in 1972.

View attachment 55698


But look closely at what's lurking behind the tall man:

View attachment 55699
Click to expand...
Oh one of my favorite photos!
Looking at the close proximity of the shoes behind the man in the black suit, he would have known if someone was there - and just my opinion that with the angle of this boy's eye peering out, his body would be sticking out the other side. Also, his legs appear to be straight, he is not even bending, an impossible position for his head to be in.
A creepy photo!
 
The eye peeping out could be from someone behind the curtain. It seems to hang to ground level and we've no idea how much room there is behind it. Dunno about the leg though.
Ronnie Jersey said:
And that lady's hood - she looks like she's traveling to Siberia! LOL
Click to expand...
Those were extremely fashionable back in the early 60's!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top