Eerie photograph I took, analysis needed.

originally posted by: Rob48

My point is, the water there is clearly not that deep - it is dry sand at low tide, and the tidal range in that area is not very big. Furthermore, looking at the tide table, the photograph was taken approximately two hours before low tide (based on data from Mossel Bay which is very nearby). So the tide was rather low, which fits with having shallow water in that location.

www.tides4fishing.com...

Data for March 15 2014 here. Photo was taken at 18:59, low tide was 21:00.

So all that we have is a photo of a person, who the photographer claims was not there. Any other "weirdness" is purely a result of the long exposure.

As others have said: cool picture. Just a shame somebody walked into one of your shots - but you bracketed the exposures so you still have some good ones

EXCEPT... According to your own charted data here, the tide at 18:59 was just over 0.7m - consistent with the claim of 1m by the photographer, and inconsistent with the "ankle deep" claims.

A human male of average height would have been about mid-thigh deep in the water.

originally posted by: nenothtu

originally posted by: Rob48

My point is, the water there is clearly not that deep - it is dry sand at low tide, and the tidal range in that area is not very big. Furthermore, looking at the tide table, the photograph was taken approximately two hours before low tide (based on data from Mossel Bay which is very nearby). So the tide was rather low, which fits with having shallow water in that location.

www.tides4fishing.com...

Data for March 15 2014 here. Photo was taken at 18:59, low tide was 21:00.

So all that we have is a photo of a person, who the photographer claims was not there. Any other "weirdness" is purely a result of the long exposure.

As others have said: cool picture. Just a shame somebody walked into one of your shots - but you bracketed the exposures so you still have some good ones

EXCEPT... According to your own charted data here, the tide at 18:59 was just over 0.7m - consistent with the claim of 1m by the photographer, and inconsistent with the "ankle deep" claims.

A human male of average height would have been about mid-thigh deep in the water.

I don't think you understand how tide datums are calculated. It doesn't mean "the water at point X is 0.7 metres deep". How could it? The actual water depth is obviously dependent on how far down the beach you measure it.

The depths on tide tables usually take the lowest astronomical tide (ie the lowest theoretically possible tide) as 0.0 metres.

The data for Mossel Bay (just along the coast from the beach in question) show that the evening low tide was 0.5 metres above LAT on that day. At the time in question the tide was about 0.7 metres above LAT. The lowest recorded tide is given as 0.2 metres above LAT.

So the water was roughly 50cm above the lowest ever recorded water level for that area (and only 20cm higher than absolute low tide for that day).

Given that I posted a photo found via Google Maps with dry sand in the area that the figure was standing (and it is unlikely that that picture would have been taken at the lowest ever tide) I think we can safely say that the water would have been considerably less than 50cm deep at the time.

a reply to: VreemdeVlieendeVoorwep

Looks like a man standing there next to some sort of animal. OOOh gave me goosebumps lol. The one on the right next to the man looking figure could be a chair, I don't know that's creepy.

originally posted by: NarcolepticBuddha

originally posted by: VreemdeVlieendeVoorwep
a reply to: NarcolepticBuddha

Here is a crop of the artifact in question.

vvv

Noticed it right away! Definitely looks like the shape of a person. The proportions are exact and unmistakable.

I see a boy and his dog.

The image would be child's play to fake. You can clearly see from the blurriness of the water that it is a slow frame rate, easily enough for a person to enter the frame, stand there for a few seconds, then quickly duck out. The result would be what you see in this photo. I can't believe someone would think otherwise.

s24.postimg.org...

In this (crappy) sketch, you can see where someone stood, took a large step, then planted their feet and turned. Probably all within a second.The red outline clearly shows a standing position, while the green shows that you can even see the angle of the back as the person leans into the large step. The blue obviously shows the final position. You can even see a dark-colored "aura" where the image "smeared" due to exposure between the figures. Four seconds was more than enough time to run into frame, do this motion, and quickly exit.

a reply to: VreemdeVlieendeVoorwep

Okay. if we're going by vision alone - it looks to me like a human throwing stuff into the sea beside a deer or such also looking that way...that's all I've got.

The figure on the left looks like a ghost. The figure next to it looks like a giant evil smiley face! Picture a Pac-Man face sticking his tongue out, with stuff dripping from his eyes, and the corners of his mouth; also standing on peg legs. Evil Pac - Man!!!

a reply to: VreemdeVlieendeVoorwep Okay. if we're going by vision alone - it looks to me like a human throwing stuff into the sea beside a deer or such also looking that way...that's all I've got.

That was funny,

That's what I was doing as well with my lost surfer theory earlier in the thread.

Honestly, I want to believe and am leaning towards ghost, but the most recent replies seem to be stirring things up a bit....

This might've been said already, but 6+ pages is too much for me to read: Could it have been Slenderman?

Howdy Mr VVV Long time my good friend !! Very good to see you posting!

Great pic!! Pick pick pick it to death... it doesnt matter what the opinions are here. The mystery of it is cool enough. No one can prove it one way or the other... hence the wonderful mystery. The believers will believe and the unbelievers wont. Who cares? Be happy with the impossibility to determine what it is and is not...and dont bother with the cries of "hoax " and etc.
I have a pic of me in the "cave" under Lemp Mansion in St Louis with a huge blue lightning streak looking thing beside me. There are 100 ways I can come up with a rational explanation, but dont want one. I certainly dont bother posting such things here to see my awesome mystery picked to death. I just enjoy the mystery and am greedy with my intriguing thingies! Stick to your swimming with sharks pics...

What do I see? Usually I dont see crap in a pic. At first I saw nothing. With the filters it looks like 2 young guys carrying a long surf board into the water. The front one is looking back directly at your camera. His hair looks dry, so he wasnt in the water yet. The other man is ignoring you with his head down. LOL!

I very much approve of these types of ghostly activities. These spirits get the idea! Surfing beats the hell out of rapping on walls, making lights go on and off, and moving small items to annoy people. I have a plan for my afterlife, much like the boys surfing rather than scratching on walls or whispering nonsense. OoGa-BoOgA!!

What do I see? Usually I dont see crap in a pic. At first I saw nothing. With the filters it looks like 2 young guys carrying a long surf board into the water. The front one is looking back directly at your camera. His hair looks dry, so he wasnt in the water yet. The other man is ignoring you with his head down. LOL!

.

That's what I see too! I stated so earlier in this thread. Even linked the specific board I thought I saw.

You just made my day advantage for sharing my stoked pareidoila. Star for that.

And this quote is great,

I very much approve of these types of ghostly activities. These spirits get the idea! Surfing beats the hell out of rapping on walls, making lights go on and off, and moving small items to annoy people. I have a plan for my afterlife, much like the boys surfing

I thought of this earlier. About spirits trapped to this dimension (or whatever dimension these ghosts reside) and how mabye they can just surf, and if people like OP are able to spot them on shore getting ready to paddle out, than surely they can be found amongst the waves as well!

And a side thought: if the ghosts are spending their afterlife surfing!? Then I think they've found heaven......

Purely speculative and rambling, but I do feel on topic...

Just realized, maybe not two beings, but just one moving into position.

One being of residual energy by the shore.

I see one person being caught in motion by the long exposure. Whether that person is a living person or not is dependant upon the OPs integrity.

Way to sound far more intelligent than I, lol.

See above for a gullible fantastical post, followed by it's contrast.

Sensational thread.

VVV is a standup guy. I love his photos I often see them on his online albums (facebook etc)

I am going to go with you and your big Great Dane pet somehow in the shot. Wish it WAS a ghost.

I would like to thank everyone that commented on this thread. Also, everyone that contributed with possible solutions. It is understandable that my credibility will be brought into this, and I am fine with that. I never want to fool anyone or present this picture for more than what it is.

Some members contributed a lot, into a possible solution for this picture. I can only tell you guys what happenned that day. I live, in this area, and as a matter of fact, the area I live, is even possible in some of the sattelite pics some members linked. The area is known to me, the tides, the temperatures, the depth of the water.

The day this picture was taken, the beach was empty. That is how any photographer, doing a landscape, or in this case a seascape, would choose his location. As did I. Last thing you want is some random person running into your shot.

I will try this weekend to go back to the spot. Same camera, same place, same settings. I will try to recreate this shot. I will also try to get someone, to move into frame during my exposure, in the same area the artifact in this picture appears. It is the only way, I think, at least for myself, that I can be sure what or how the artifact appeared there.

vvv

a reply to: zazzafrazz

Lol Zazz, unfortunately my dog was not with me that day.
Only dog on the beach that day was me!

vvv

I am pretty open to a lot of theories, but the paranormal has always been a little out there for me.

It is human nature to view faces and bodies in shadows, weird blurs and even the occasional tortilla . It is in our brain to personify these things.


I do admit it is quite weird, but I would not worry about it.

a reply to: VreemdeVlieendeVoorwep

But but but, the lighting and tide heights will be completely different.
You'll of course be able to produce a facsimile of what happened to a degree, but it's not going to change the mind of either of the camps I'm afraid.

For one, you'd need a person of the same statue (that can only be a best guess), who knew the exact bodily movement taken. How can you know that if you saw no one there?

So as it's a good idea, I don't actually think it will answer questions, just create more confusion. Saying that, knock yourself out though cause there might be a better sky to improve the photo!