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

The Only Ghost Photo I Ever Found Convincing. What Do You Think?

If the putative ghost is a kneeling person, did they get cold feet and decide not to participate in the other photo? I'm sure the chairs could have been manoeuvred to accommodate another person.
Who knows? Maybe alcohol could be the answer. We don't know how boozy that evening was. Maybe the ghost woman was just someone having a great time, larking about like a loon, hiding behind the table, popping up for the first photo, and falling back onto her ar*e before the second photo was taken. I think that would mean other people being involved in a conspiracy of silence once the odd nature of the first picture was noticed. "Hey, everyone. Doesn't this look weird? Whaddya say we all pretend it must have been a ghost rising up through the table when it was really only Beryl larking about off her face as usual?"

Well, it's a theory. If she's a ghost or not, I have applied my analytical skills to working out what shampoo she used. It was Head & Shoulders........... *waits for tumbleweed*
 
These 'debunking' discussions/threads are becoming my favourite part of the forum. :bthumbup:

Scientific reasoning, deduction, a touch of cynicism, a hint of conflict...all combining to often largely resolve the issue, yet still leaving a small window of the unknown open.
 
Last edited:
I think part of the reason we're spooked by the photo, is because we've been told it's a ghost, or unexplained.

If, for example we crop the photo down, sharpen it up a bit and then ask someone "what do you see?" without mentioning any spookiness we might get very different perceptions and answers.

Untitled (Copy).jpg


I also don't rule out the cardboard cutout explanation - the lighting on all the figures seems consistent with 'no flash' and the blurry-ness of the figure might be a side-effect of enlarging a photo of a missing member of the group up to 'life-size'.

I've seen others do that occasionally - if a regular member of a group of friends/family can't travel or attend a function a life-sized cardboard cutout travels instead!

Holding that steady on the table in front of the 4 ladies would mean it would appear larger than they.

I am somewhat suspicious that no other identifying info of the party of people, and no other photos from that film reel have been released - My 'gut feeling' is that it's an unstaged, chance earthly image, which someone thought was weird/spooky and released the 2 photos as a jape, a hoax or to make a few quid. The person(s) who made the images public may not even be connected closely to the 11 people shown in the photos.
 
These 'debunking' discussions/threads are becoming my favourite part of the forum. :bthumbup:

Scientific reasoning, deduction, a touch of cynicism, a hint of conflict...all combining to often largely resolve the issue, yet sill leaving a small window of the unknown open.
I was thinking about this whilst watching a channel 5 programme about 'Nessie'

How often, with the attributes you describe, that the fakers and frauds that occasionally turn up on the FF doorstep get short thrift and proceed to throw their toys out then vanish!

I love those moments

The 'saint' part of Kiwisaint...is that the red and white army or are you a performer of miracles?
 
I was thinking about this whilst watching a channel 5 programme about 'Nessie'

How often, with the attributes you describe, that the fakers and frauds that occasionally turn up on the FF doorstep get short thrift and proceed to throw their toys out then vanish!

I love those moments

The 'saint' part of Kiwisaint...is that the red and white army or are you a performer of miracles?
...been a Southampton F.C. fan since 1989.

Although with recent results it's probably less of an Army and more of a Platoon :omg:
 
I think part of the reason we're spooked by the photo, is because we've been told it's a ghost, or unexplained.

If, for example we crop the photo down, sharpen it up a bit and then ask someone "what do you see?" without mentioning any spookiness we might get very different perceptions and answers.

View attachment 69946

I also don't rule out the cardboard cutout explanation - the lighting on all the figures seems consistent with 'no flash' and the blurry-ness of the figure might be a side-effect of enlarging a photo of a missing member of the group up to 'life-size'.

I've seen others do that occasionally - if a regular member of a group of friends/family can't travel or attend a function a life-sized cardboard cutout travels instead!

Holding that steady on the table in front of the 4 ladies would mean it would appear larger than they.

I am somewhat suspicious that no other identifying info of the party of people, and no other photos from that film reel have been released - My 'gut feeling' is that it's an unstaged, chance earthly image, which someone thought was weird/spooky and released the 2 photos as a jape, a hoax or to make a few quid. The person(s) who made the images public may not even be connected closely to the 11 people shown in the photos.
I also find the level of pixelation, or clarity of the 'ghost' of interest. It appears less defined, more 'blurred' or 'fuzzy' than the surrounding people in the picture (even those who are further away)

Also the dimensions of the ghost are off. It does support the notion of a cardboard cutout...maybe brought along as the original 'real' person couldn't make it (and this was used for comic effect). It's the sort of thing that would happen at an office Xmas function or Birthday party etc.
 
To me the most suspect part of these images is the spacing of the four ladies. The ghost appears between them, but their spacing has altered quite significantly between the two images.

It really shows up if you mark the centre line of their heads on the pics.

That wouldn't be likely to happen if they were just sitting there between exposures.View attachment 69909View attachment 69910

I find the spacing plausible.

The 80s-haired lady marked by your third orange line from our left has huddled closer to the lady on her left (the fourth orange line from our left) for the photo—perhaps she has her left arm around her.
 
As an aside, relevant I think, this is one of the few 'apparition' photos that we have a contemporary comparison image to work from. This, I think, helps with analysis.
Are there many such around?
 
The more I look at the 1st photo, the more I am convinced that the explanation is that it's a person not in the 2nd picture, crouching (almost kneeling) in front of the 3 other ladies, who have parted their seating positions a bit so that they all appear...

This has always been my take on the image. That she’s an actual person who was in the first photo when the flash failed, and then got up to fix the camera for the second try, is the simplest explanation, doesn’t rely on any really technical stuff - and is not an uncommon or particularly unusual scenario.

The ladies behind her are not sitting at the table, they are sitting against a wall a little behind the table, and to which the table is set at an angle. I think there's a distinct possibility that the ‘ghost lady’ was in the first shot, at the table, and closer to the camera than the ladies behind her - but maybe crouched down, or on her knees, in order to get them in shot.

(The fact that she appears somehow to be in that row of ladies - while very obviously not quite being in that row - is probably the main factor in triggering our visual woo buttons. She's not the right size for them - because they are behind her - but she is the right size for someone sitting at the far side of the table.)

It’s hard to tell precisely – because of the blur/glare – but a little enlargement suggests a possibility that while most (not all) of the subjects are looking at the camera in the initial 'ghost' image, a couple more are distracted and looking away, at something up and to the left of the camera in the subsequent 'flash' image. I’d suggest that this might be her.

Of course, the biggest - and seemingly insurmountable - stumbling block for this theory is that it doesn’t explain why the group would say that they didn’t know her. But I’m an old enough hand at the internet now – I think we all are - to wonder if this is something that the people in the photograph actually claimed, or whether it’s something the internet said. And that’s very often two different things.
 
Last edited:
To me the most suspect part of these images is the spacing of the four ladies. The ghost appears between them, but their spacing has altered quite significantly between the two images...

If one entertains the scenario I suggest, then it would be quite natural for the four women to shuffle a little closer together for the second take, because they no longer needed to allow for the presence, in front of them, of the lady who has gone to adjust the camera.
 
These 'debunking' discussions/threads are becoming my favourite part of the forum. :bthumbup:

Scientific reasoning, deduction, a touch of cynicism, a hint of conflict...all combining to often largely resolve the issue, yet still leaving a small window of the unknown open.

I agree. I like the way forum members bring their analytical skills and often scientific experience to bear on a subject.
Being a pandacracker of very little brain I don't always understand the more technical explanations but, for me, it's what makes coming to this place worthwhile (well, that and the sex)

Th only observation I have to offer is does anyone have an explanation for the 'skirt' that can be seen under the table on the right in the flash photograph? I can't work out who, or what, it belongs to.
 
Th only observation I have to offer is does anyone have an explanation for the 'skirt' that can be seen under the table on the right in the flash photograph? I can't work out who, or what, it belongs to.
It's the bloke's trousers, the middle of the three men on the right. Something is lit up behind them, possibly a shoe worn by the woman next along, which looks like a trim on the hem of the trouser fabric.

Incidentally, the fashions of the men on the right are bang-on for the year. Patterned baggy sweaters with the sleeves always pushed up, light-coloured trousers; very Miami Vice. :nods:
 
It's the bloke's trousers, the middle of the three men on the right

I thought that at first but it looks like his bum is too far back in his seat, plus it looks like his shirt is tucked into dark trousers.

"looks like" doesn't of course mean that's what it is, I've got no idea really.
 
For me it's a combination of the fuzziness of the image, the similarity of the 'apparition' to the woman sitting directly behind and the difference in scale. These all lead me to believe that it's some kind of double exposure, although not a fully complete one, caused by the low levels of light and the movement of the woman. I'd guess she was leaning forward when the camera went off, then realised she was blocking one of her friends so sat back, and the long exposure caused by the failure of the flash meant that she was captured twice, once stationary leaning forward, once leaning back and the movement of her leaning back caused the blurring.
 
Has anyone else noticed that the women either side of the “apparition” are actually looking at her, not at the camera? There is not quite enough resolution to be 100% certain, but it certainly appears that their eyes are on the foreground figure, and they are all laughing (maybe even the third adjacent lady too). This is just some larking around that resulted in an amusing and uncanny photo. Wish I’d been there, looks like it was a good night!
 
Has anyone else noticed that the women either side of the “apparition” are actually looking at her, not at the camera? There is not quite enough resolution to be 100% certain, but it certainly appears that their eyes are on the foreground figure, and they are all laughing (maybe even the third adjacent lady too). This is just some larking around that resulted in an amusing and uncanny photo. Wish I’d been there, looks like it was a good night!
It does. It would be good to get in touch with someone who was there and ask a few questions about what their take on the photo is.

To be honest, I'm not completely convinced that those women are necessarily looking at the ghost lady. It's hard to say that definitely, but, yes, they could well be.

I wonder how well all those people knew each other. Were they a party of friends and/or family? Or just a bunch of holidayers getting a bit merry? Did they have any contact with each other after that evening? Did all the people who appear in the photo get to see it?

I'm sure the chances are there is a mundane, real world explanation for what initially looks weird, but the fact we are still discussing it suggests there is still plenty of room for doubt, intrigue and speculation. Good, innit?
 
Has anyone else noticed that the women either side of the “apparition” are actually looking at her, not at the camera? There is not quite enough resolution to be 100% certain, but it certainly appears that their eyes are on the foreground figure, and they are all laughing (maybe even the third adjacent lady too). This is just some larking around that resulted in an amusing and uncanny photo. Wish I’d been there, looks like it was a good night!
You could be right. The "ghost" appears to be laughing too. Maybe the dark haired lady briefly leaned forward and tucked the table cloth into her top as a joke? Or it could have been a waitress or someone else joining in the fun? Add in the time for the camera to be reset for the flash photo, then the length of time before the film was developed and the group (or at least the camera owner) could easily have forgotten this incident.
 
It does. It would be good to get in touch with someone who was there and ask a few questions about what their take on the photo is.

To be honest, I'm not completely convinced that those women are necessarily looking at the ghost lady. It's hard to say that definitely, but, yes, they could well be.

I wonder how well all those people knew each other. Were they a party of friends and/or family? Or just a bunch of holidayers getting a bit merry? Did they have any contact with each other after that evening? Did all the people who appear in the photo get to see it?

I'm sure the chances are there is a mundane, real world explanation for what initially looks weird, but the fact we are still discussing it suggests there is still plenty of room for doubt, intrigue and speculation. Good, innit?
From the days when you had to wait to get your pictures developed there’s a good chance most if not all (other than the photographer) didn’t get to see it.
 
From the days when you had to wait to get your pictures developed there’s a good chance most if not all (other than the photographer) didn’t get to see it.
Yup, somewhere there's a school history trip photo where everyone is standing in a former Roman bath looking dignified, except for one individual who is lying face-down, grinning and pretending to swim. I'd love to see that again. :chuckle:

Nope, I have no idea who the swimmer was, why do you ask? :thought:
 
Has anyone else noticed that the women either side of the “apparition” are actually looking at her, not at the camera? There is not quite enough resolution to be 100% certain, but it certainly appears that their eyes are on the foreground figure,
This is one example of what I meant in my earlier comment about there being a lot of movement in the photos. Several of the people in the ghost photo are not looking in the same spot.

Usually when group photos are done, people are looking toward the camera, unless there is some joker who is stealing the scene.
 
I Googled this photo today because it randomly popped into my head and I wondered if there had been a proper investigation into it – so it was a very impressive coincidence to see that this thread was started only five days ago, this discussion is pretty much exactly what I was hoping for!

After reading the thread I’ve registered to post this, because I have some more info on this photo that I recall reading in a book about the paranormal back in the 90s. It seems the details given in the book have not made it onto any websites featuring this photo, so it’s worth me sharing them here in light of the curiosity over the photo’s backstory and potential explanations. I recall reading about this photo in a book about the paranormal that I read back in my school days, in the school library. I can’t recall the name of the book, just that it was a coffee table-type book on the subject of the paranormal, and the last page of the book was about this photo. Bearing in mind this was around 25 years ago, my memory of the info in the book may not be entirely accurate, but I’ll recount it to the best of my recollection!

According to the book, the people in the photo were two families who met while staying in the Hotel Vierjahreszeiten on holiday. On the last night of the holiday, they partied together in the hotel restaurant, and the man on the far left – presumably ‘Mr Todd’ – set up his camera to take a photo of them all. As reported in other accounts, the first time the flash did not go off, so he went back and reset the camera to take another photo.

After returning home, Mr Todd got the film developed and looked at the photos. He noticed the blurred extra woman in the first (non-flash) photo, but assumed it was a double exposure and thought no more of it. A few months later, the second family came to visit the Todds to reunite for the first time since the holiday, Mr Todd showed them the photos, and one of the ladies was shocked when she saw the first photo, because she was convinced the extra woman in the shot was a ghost. She pointed out that the woman was clearly behind the glasses on the table, which would not be possible in a double exposure.

Confused, Mr Todd took the photos to be examined by photographic experts, who ruled out any possibility of double exposure. Unable to explain the mystery woman, the Todds went back to the Hotel Vierjahreszeiten on their next holiday the following year and showed the photo to the staff, but the staff confirmed there was no history of haunting at the hotel and no one recognized the mystery woman.

Mr Todd was reluctant to blame the photo on the paranormal, but in the absence of a rational explanation, felt there was no other choice. The dark-haired woman to the right of the ‘ghost’ was apparently Mr Todd’s wife (I think her name was Ella or Ellen, going from memory), and some people who saw the photo remarked that the ‘ghost’ looked like her. Mrs Todd had apparently been ill with cancer at some point around that same time, either before or after, and was given months to live, but made an impressive recovery against the odds and beat the illness, leading some to speculate that the ‘ghost’ was some sort of guardian angel protecting her.

That’s the story behind the photo as far as I recall! Of course, whether the story given in the book was entirely true or not is another question. Either way, great to see it being discussed here and some plausible explanations being put forward; hopefully some more info about it may come to light!
 
I Googled this photo today because it randomly popped into my head and I wondered if there had been a proper investigation into it – so it was a very impressive coincidence to see that this thread was started only five days ago, this discussion is pretty much exactly what I was hoping for!

After reading the thread I’ve registered to post this, because I have some more info on this photo that I recall reading in a book about the paranormal back in the 90s. It seems the details given in the book have not made it onto any websites featuring this photo, so it’s worth me sharing them here in light of the curiosity over the photo’s backstory and potential explanations. I recall reading about this photo in a book about the paranormal that I read back in my school days, in the school library. I can’t recall the name of the book, just that it was a coffee table-type book on the subject of the paranormal, and the last page of the book was about this photo. Bearing in mind this was around 25 years ago, my memory of the info in the book may not be entirely accurate, but I’ll recount it to the best of my recollection!

According to the book, the people in the photo were two families who met while staying in the Hotel Vierjahreszeiten on holiday. On the last night of the holiday, they partied together in the hotel restaurant, and the man on the far left – presumably ‘Mr Todd’ – set up his camera to take a photo of them all. As reported in other accounts, the first time the flash did not go off, so he went back and reset the camera to take another photo.

After returning home, Mr Todd got the film developed and looked at the photos. He noticed the blurred extra woman in the first (non-flash) photo, but assumed it was a double exposure and thought no more of it. A few months later, the second family came to visit the Todds to reunite for the first time since the holiday, Mr Todd showed them the photos, and one of the ladies was shocked when she saw the first photo, because she was convinced the extra woman in the shot was a ghost. She pointed out that the woman was clearly behind the glasses on the table, which would not be possible in a double exposure.

Confused, Mr Todd took the photos to be examined by photographic experts, who ruled out any possibility of double exposure. Unable to explain the mystery woman, the Todds went back to the Hotel Vierjahreszeiten on their next holiday the following year and showed the photo to the staff, but the staff confirmed there was no history of haunting at the hotel and no one recognized the mystery woman.

Mr Todd was reluctant to blame the photo on the paranormal, but in the absence of a rational explanation, felt there was no other choice. The dark-haired woman to the right of the ‘ghost’ was apparently Mr Todd’s wife (I think her name was Ella or Ellen, going from memory), and some people who saw the photo remarked that the ‘ghost’ looked like her. Mrs Todd had apparently been ill with cancer at some point around that same time, either before or after, and was given months to live, but made an impressive recovery against the odds and beat the illness, leading some to speculate that the ‘ghost’ was some sort of guardian angel protecting her.

That’s the story behind the photo as far as I recall! Of course, whether the story given in the book was entirely true or not is another question. Either way, great to see it being discussed here and some plausible explanations being put forward; hopefully some more info about it may come to light!
The phrase 'photographic experts' is often bandied about, but we never hear about exactly who these experts are, or where the man-in-the-street got hold of one to ask their opinion.

I think, without actual testimony, from a named expert in exactly this type of photography, I'd take 'photographic experts' with a pinch of salt. For all we know he might just have asked his mate down the pub.
 
Back
Top