originally posted by: mikeh3t
Ok. I have got the direct email from the phone it was captured from. I will send it to the guy that asked for it. The phone was an LG 4 G4. I'm
going to try and post 2 pics that were taken from the same spot after they hustled back to the location after they say what they did in the photo , to
take a few more pics.
Hi, thank you for the email, pics well received. The ghost picture is the original one this time. There are however a few odd things in the EXIF
metadata that I’ll explain later. Just to be clear here, I’m not saying that these photos are not authentic or have been manipulated in any way
(and I do think that they are authentic), but there are few odd things that I don’t fully understand yet.
The two other pics contains no EXIF data, which happens sometimes in the sharing process. Indeed, these data were likely stripped somewhere during the
process of sharing between your sister in law and you. Can you ask her if she’s sure that they came directly form the phone? Are the photo still on
the phone? If so, maybe she can directly extract it on a computer or send it to you by email directly from the phone? Anyway, if she remember how she
has done it for the ghost pic, she just have to do the same for the two other pics.
Here's a first preliminary short analysis.
The first thing to do in any photo analysis is to check the authenticity of the pictures. Again here, this doesn’t mean that the photographer is a
faker, although it can help sometimes to detect some fakes, but rather to check if all the parameters for a given camera (EXIF data presence and
position, image size, etc…) are present and at the right place as, most of the time, they can be modified unintentionally using a software, a viewer
or a sharing online site, etc.
While waiting for Mike to send me the two other pics in their original version, I’ll focused on the ghost photo at first.
The photo was taken with a LG G4 Verizon (VS986) with the Date/Time Original set as “2016:06:15 23:23:57” :
Firstly, it’s a portrait photo that can be seen as a landscape photo in some viewers or as a thumbnail. It’s a known bug for the LG G4 Verizon
firmware that tend sometimes to record the picture as a landscape photo with the EXIF orientation instruction set as “Rotate 90 CW” meaning that
the picture should automatically be rotated 90° clockwise by the software that open it, using this EXIF instruction, which is in fact meaningless as
it should simply be considered/recorded as a portrait picture and that’s it. Anyway, not interesting here for the study but I thought that it would
be necessary to put a word about this oddity here in case that someone else would like to take a look at this photo.
Back to the authenticity check. For me, this photo is what I would call an “Original Authentic”, meaning that it wasn’t modified in any way by
any post-process software and that it likely came directly from the camera. It’s not a 100% validity assessment as, like in any authenticity check,
there is still a part of unknown, but I do not detect any traces of file modification as for now.
Secondly, and this part is somewhat puzzling as I never meet this before, there is not shutter speed data
in the EXIF! Everything else is there
in the technical data part of the EXIF (focal length : 4.42; aperture/F number : 1.80; size : 5312 x 2988 …) but not the shutter speed value.
So I loaded lots of original other LG G4 picture to see if it happens, but with no luck. This data is always
here, and occurred three times in
the EXIF, as “Shutter Speed Value”, as “Shutter Speed” and as “Exposure Time”.
Also, two other data are missing, it is firstly the “Light Value” tag, which indicates the Exposure value. This is not surprising here as this
value depends of both the F Number and the Shutter Speed values. Secondly, there’s no ISO tag as well, which is not normal at all as this value
indicates the sensitivity of the sensor to light and is always present in all the metadata of all the camera, unless there’s a file modification or
a bug in the EXIF writing, which is still possible.
So it is my opinion that it’s possibly related to a bug again, either in the EXIF data writing during the process of the shot or in the firmware.
To check this, Mike, I would need another original
picture taken with the same LG G4, no matter what the subject is, so I can check is these
missing data are still missing in this other photo. Would you ask your sister in law to do this please?
Now, about the two “ghosts” in this photo, what I can say is that the lightning is coherent, the foreground subject being lightened on the left
side of its head by the background right spotlight, as well as the left arm of the other subject. Also, we can see this same lighting on the two other
So it’s like if the two ghosts in the pictures are really there, and part of the scene.
Another thing which is puzzling is that the two ghosts are not clearly defined. It’s like if they were taken with the camera out of focus. This
should be impossible as in the two other photos, the two subjects are neat, and clearly on focus with the camera likely set at the infinite and with
the depth of field very large, like most of these android camera. This means that all the subjects from a short distance to the camera up to the
infinite should be on focus, which is obviously not the case for the two “ghosts”.
@Mike: was an on-site investigation done by someone specialized in the paranormal field? If so, what was the result of this investigation?
While waiting for the other pics from Mike, all I can say as for now is that either, with all due respect, someone is playing an elaborate trick or
that something unusual and unexplained happened here.
To be continued…
ETA: could it be a double exposure shot? I never encountered this kind of double exposure in digital photo, but who knows, possibly another bug! Or an
The ghost on the left likely moved towards the camera during the exposure, it can be seen on its left shoulder:
edit on 18-7-2016 by elevenaugust because: (no reason given)