It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Help Needed - photo analyst???

page: 6
0
<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 14 2006 @ 01:59 AM
link   
Do i see a second almost gold face near the bottom right hand corner in the mirror? Or is that just something like a statue in the room?




posted on Mar, 14 2006 @ 08:11 AM
link   

Now, I believe there is something fishy with this photo. I believe the photo was digitally edited.


Fiverz, both 12m8keall2c and myself have been given the original photo, and can verify that it has not been digitally altered/edited at all. It is just as it came out of the camera. Anything in the picture was actually in the scene. There could just be imperfections in the mirror like you say. When mirrors reflect in other mirrors, things start to get distorted a bit.


Do i see a second almost gold face near the bottom right hand corner in the mirror? Or is that just something like a statue in the room?


enthuziazm, I think you are referring to the "third face" I found in the picture while inverting it, but then I also quickly ruled it out as being simply the back of a chair.



posted on Mar, 14 2006 @ 08:14 AM
link   
That is quite freaky man!!!

I had a strange experience when my grandfather died too


P.S. What gang is your grandma in with the gang sign shes throwing up....

"Say Cheese"
"Chizzizzle my nizzle"



posted on Mar, 14 2006 @ 10:29 AM
link   
I have a suggestion to make concerning how to settle the Satanism issue in this case. Could Knight perhaps persuade his grandmother to take a trip with him to the local swimming pool where he can take a photograph of her for us taking a dip in the water. According to Onesharpbroadhead's illustrious and supremely wise historical predecessors, such as the famed seventeenth century English "Witchfinder General" Matthew Hopkins (into whose shoes I am sure he would just love to step), those in league with the devil have renounced their baptism and so will be supernaturally rejected by the element of water. Thus, if the photograph reveals that grandmother floats, Onesharpbroadhead's case will have been proved, and we can perhaps arrange for him to go round and hang her or burn her to death at a stake (whichever method turns him on the most). And if she sinks and drowns, well that's too bad, but no harm done really since God's will (or at least Onesharpbroadhead's interpretation of it) will have been done. In either event, case settled.

An alternative and simpler suggestion might be, however, that, when looking for signs of the devil's influence in people, Onesharpbroadhead might perhaps better follow Christ's advice and begin by examining the beam in his own eye.



posted on Mar, 14 2006 @ 12:12 PM
link   
Pseudonymous

In your next attempt at being witty and bashing someone - you might just want to get your facts straight first.

1. I only pointed out the satanic gesture and the satanic image to illustrate that the image was a HOAX! It is quite obvious to any thinking person that these images were put there on purpose. Someone is getting a laugh out of all the people who believe that this might be real.

2. I never claimed that anyone in the photo or that Knight was a satanist - i don't know what they believe or don't believe - nor do i care - what i do believe is that the satanic imagery was there as a joke.

3. I am not a protestant - so your stupid comments about the "witchhunter" do not apply to me - save them for the fundmentalists.

4. The only reason that i was involved in any of the religious discussion was because of one of the posters absurd statements that he believed in "ghosts" but thought that God was a fairytale. I found this to be incredibly absurd and responded to it, but the immaturity of this poster - made it clear to me that it was pointless to further discuss this with him.

Soooooo - in review of the FACTS.

Onesharpbroadhead merely pointed out satanic imagery in the photo to illustrate it was a hoax - he never accused anyone of satanism - nor does he care if they are or are not satanists.

Onesharpbroadhead is not a fundamentalist protestant - so he could care less about witch hunters.

Onesharpbroadhead finds it incredibly stupid to believe in ghosts and at the same time call God a fairytale.

Oh - and yes - Onesharpbroadhead never said that the devil had influence on anyone in this thread at all.


So Psuedonymous - next time you want to make a fool of yourself by attacking someone with your sarcastic witty little posts - make sure you have your facts straight.



posted on Mar, 14 2006 @ 12:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by onesharpbroadhead
1. I only pointed out the satanic gesture and the satanic image to illustrate that the image was a HOAX! It is quite obvious to any thinking person that these images were put there on purpose. Someone is getting a laugh out of all the people who believe that this might be real.


The image itself is is not a hoax. Whether or not it was a "staged" photograph is up to the individual viewer to decide.

Even when viewed @600% actual size the original file shows no signs whatsoever of editing, photoshopping, etc.

Take from the image what you wish, but I can assure you it hasn't been edited in anyway. Again, as for it being possibly "staged", well, that's up to the viewer to decide.

Just my $.02 on the actual image file.


[edit on 3/14/2006 by 12m8keall2c]



posted on Mar, 14 2006 @ 05:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by 12m8keall2c

Originally posted by onesharpbroadhead
1. I only pointed out the satanic gesture and the satanic image to illustrate that the image was a HOAX! It is quite obvious to any thinking person that these images were put there on purpose. Someone is getting a laugh out of all the people who believe that this might be real.


The image itself is is not a hoax. Whether or not it was a "staged" photograph is up to the individual viewer to decide.

Even when viewed @600% actual size the original file shows no signs whatsoever of editing, photoshopping, etc.

Take from the image what you wish, but I can assure you it hasn't been edited in anyway. Again, as for it being possibly "staged", well, that's up to the viewer to decide.

Just my $.02 on the actual image file.


[edit on 3/14/2006 by 12m8keall2c]


Yea after reviewing it some more I would have to agree. It must just be the imperfections in the glass ... which to me would mean any image we percieve to be a face really not truly a face (it was then distorted into a face). The grandpa face I don't know about though. Cheers.



posted on Mar, 16 2006 @ 12:13 PM
link   
The face in question is the "old man" face, not some odd, face-like things you might make up in the shadows. These aren't rusty hub-cap photos from Mars. Here's a picture, there's a face. What can you make of it, if the person says there was nobody else in the room at the time?

Personally, I can't make anything out of it. I don't know. Maybe it's some kind of "ghost," however you want to define that. I would tend, however, to think that it's a real person who stepped into the room for a moment, behind the photographer, who didn't see the person. The likeness to the grandfather can be expected, since these people are part of a family group.

No need to look for Satan in the flower patterns.



posted on Mar, 17 2006 @ 02:39 AM
link   
I now have answers to a couple of questions posed. Firstly I need to state that I am not going to post any family photos of my grandad as it is disrespectful, and I cant think of a decent to way to ask stating the purpose. I am also not going to start probing my nanna, partly because she is 300 miles away but mainly because again, I would be uncomfortable doing so and think I could well offend.

Anyway, as hopefully a rebunk to thosewho say the "satanic" imagery points to this photo being staged (!) I can point out the following:

1. My nan has quite severe arthritus, more potent in her hands and wrists. She finds it painful to have her hand fully extended and finds relief in closing her hand. I think this explains the "hand signal" some people see.

2. As already proposed, the painting on the wall is a paint-by-numbers type painting, done by one of my cousins. This is why the skin colouring on Peter (?) is a little off, although I must say I never thought that even painted reddish, that this was a satanic depiction.



posted on Mar, 17 2006 @ 05:42 AM
link   
Knight,

Definately understand where you come from. Though I have raised a few questions on this thread, i would like to point out that it takes a lot of guts to do what you have done and appreciate the photograph which you have managed to publish.

Thankyou for publishing the photograph which resulted in such a great discussion. I hope along with the critics you got some good useful information.

Cheers



posted on Mar, 17 2006 @ 06:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by Knight783

1. My nan has quite severe arthritus, more potent in her hands and wrists. She finds it painful to have her hand fully extended and finds relief in closing her hand. I think this explains the "hand signal" some people see.


Oh man i apologise for my comment then, my bad



posted on Mar, 17 2006 @ 07:25 AM
link   
No, I am pleased with the discussion and the ideas given. And I can totally see where skeptics are coming from, I am one myself!!!

I initially posted with the genuine intention for someone well versed to debunk the idea of a 'ghost' by analysing the photo and possibly giving me a logical explanation. I understand scepticism, but not the allegations of hoax etc, as I am not trying to make anyone believe anything. For the record I DO NOT BELIEVE IN GHOSTS!!!! (at least not the common meaning) However, I still cant explain this photo


I subscribe to the idea of 'echo' or 'recording'. That somehow, we may imprint ourselves somehow, on say an electromagnetic field. I have done a lot of reading and think this plausible, the tape recorder theory. However, I dont think the image is an entity in itself.

Thanks for all the useful and intriguing replies (for the most part!) it has been very interesting and even helpful. I will admit to being a little annoyed at all the satanic references, but generally thanks everyone.



posted on Mar, 17 2006 @ 07:43 AM
link   
Knight783,

Have a look from our perspective. It took you 4 pages of discussion to inform us that your nanna suffers from arthritis. I would of thought you would of offered that explanation as soon as the topic of the hand sign was mention, but you said you didnt know why she had her hands that way.

You also neglected to mention the 'paint by numbers' Da Vinci, you said that its a very common painting and that lots of people from that generation have them.

Just as you have nothing to gain with this photo being proved genuine, we have nothing to gain by saying its a hoax. On a sum of all the evidence I'm almost certain this is a hoax.

[edit on 17/3/06 by subz]



posted on Mar, 17 2006 @ 10:26 AM
link   
Subz, I have been in Prague on holiday as 128ml will tell you, im not regularly on the website as Im extremley busy at work most of the time. You also have to bear in mind that I am not in regular contact with my nan, she lives 5 hours away from me and we dont speak often.

I know what I will do, I will U2U details which you can check to verify date of death etc, and I can prove that the death was an actual happening. I will supply any details you like to prove that I have not 'staged' a photo. Anything you like, but only privately. Your moronic, based on nothing, insulting accusations are offensive.



posted on Mar, 17 2006 @ 10:38 AM
link   
Knight783,

There still remain only two options for this photo:
1. There is a ghost.
2. The man in the mirror is not a ghost.

The fact that you took time out of your own schedule, even going against your doubts to post a photo in a forum to be ripped apart by strangers suggests to me that this is real. The photo was not manipulated/edited in any way, and you stand to gain no profit or recognition from this photo.

Based on these facts, I am willing to accept the fact that this may be one of the few authentic ghost photographs I have seen in the past 6 years of thoroughly researching this sort of thing. Obviously I can never be proven beyond a doubt that your grandfather was not in the room, but I have faith in you. People always want photos of 'ghosts' that aren't blurry or out of focus, and here is the perfect example. Early in this thread I stated that the best possible ghost photo is simply one where the 'ghost' appears to be normal and alive, and that seems to be what we have here. Whether this was caused by an actual ghost, or simply an electromagnetic recording is another debate.

There is no further we can pursue this without having actually been there in the room.
Case closed for Yarcofin.

[edit on 17-3-2006 by Yarcofin]



posted on Mar, 17 2006 @ 05:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Knight783
Your moronic, based on nothing, insulting accusations are offensive.

Careful there fella, use of abusive language is clearly contrary to the T&C of this board. Let me tell you from experience, I was slapped with a warning for merely infering some members of this board were "morons". You explicitly called me "moronic", cross your fingers a mod doesnt see it.

There are quite a few reasons I came to conclude this image is a hoax. Since you've groundlessly accused me of being a moron I think I might have to share my reasoning.

First of all I have had quite a bit of experience studying the nature of hoaxes. There are a wide variety of motivations and tactics used in staging a hoax. Your image is a nice example of how hoaxes are generally carried out.

To start with you set the stage for us to be guided into a predetermined outcome.

1. You claimed to be a skeptic, never hurts when you're trying to get people to believe the inexplicable.

2. You infered that you are not technologically capable of altering photographs which makes accusations of you altering the photo easy to fob off. You did it by requesting that some one else carry out the extremely basic blurring/blocking out of the family members faces. A grade schooler with MS Paint could carry out that task, but I digress.

3. You outlined that you are reluctant to share this photo due to the sentimental nature of it. This generates sympathy and makes it easier to shoot down real skeptics as being insensitive.

4. You rather disingenuously asked if someone could "enhance" or give an expert opinion on the photo. This implied you were not convinced either way but wanted a technical explanation of the photo. What did you expect the responses to be? Swamp gas? A trick of light? There is a fully formed and distinguished human face in the mirror, there was only two conclusions to be arrived at. A ghost or a hoax.

5. You repeatedly claim to not be a believer of ghosts yet are at a loss to explain what was captured by your camera. How is that possible? What other rational explanation could there possibly be? You were physically there, you should know.

6. You continually refer to a back story of the photo as if it has any meaningful relavance to the anaylsis of the photo. No offence intended but any extraneous information is purely that, extraneous.

7. When asked about the hand gestures apparent in the image you clearly responded that:


Im not offended but it just looks like that, she isnt making any sign as she isnt religious in any way. Really, I wouldnt read anything into that.



As for the satanic references, as well as being rather offended at the suggestions, there is also far far too much being looked into. There really is no hand symbol, its something that would never be done, and something which Im almost certain my nan wouldnt know the meaning of. There is no religion or spirituality in my family. The last supper references are redundant aswell, its simply a painting. The older generation regardless of religion etc posses a lot of these, the painting is Da Vinci's most famous.


A rather emphatic reply to the question of the hand gesture yet when asked why it took you 4 pages to offer the arthritis answer you explain the delay in responding due to being over seas. You werent over seas before you gave two explainations of it being nothing of importance.

8. You claim to not be close with your family members and to have little contact with them. Yet you refer to this photo sending "shockwaves" through your family. You've obviously shared these photos with your family, not that distant then. Also you managed to clarify that it was a "paint by numbers" Da Vinci painting. Did you travel 300 miles to ask your nanna about the painting or did you forget to mention it when asked earlier? Out of interest do they have phones in Oxford?

9. You manage to keep a veneer of calm at the accusations of a hoax as you yourself are "skeptical". Yet when any meaningful rationalizations for concluding this is a hoax are brought up you feign sensitivity and lash out verbally.

Thats just what I personally noticed whilst following this thread. Now what would be your rationale for staging a hoax? Well you're not asking for money (yet) so I assume that is not a motivation. Some people get kicks out of duping people, especially in a forum of such a scale as ATS. What a coup it would be to fool a board as famously skeptical as ATS. There are plenty of examples of people trying to stage hoaxes on ATS and they are not always out for financial gain. So there is precedent.

As I mentioned in my previous post, "On a sum of all the evidence I'm almost certain this is a hoax". That sum is how I base my personal observations on everything and anything.

For starters you were asking us to believe this is a ghost, you didnt explicitly say that but, as explained above, there could be no technical/rational explanation for this photo - it had to be a ghost or a hoax. That is a big ask, if you were asking us to believe your real name was Cecil that would require much less proof than asking rational minded people to believe in ghosts.

That brings me to the image itself. To be honest, I could whip up a similar image in photoshop in a matter of minutes. I can see a simple cut and paste with a layer mask applied. From the position of the 'ghost' relative to the reflections in the mirror I can position the 'ghost' in the room to within a couple of inches. The 'ghost' appears inbetween the man on the rights head and the man on the lefts arm that is placed around the other people. That clearly rules out positioning of a person/ghost behind the camera.

So theres the readers options: believe its a ghost due to the abscence of any rational explaination or think it a hoax. Bearing in mind that if you claim its a hoax youre labelled "insensitive" and "moronic". As I said at the start of this post, we were being guided to a predetermined outcome.

If you really didnt think it was a ghost what in God's name could it of been? You were there, you would know if there was another person in the room hence no rational answer could exist in your mind. So why the doubt? If I took that photo and knew for sure there was no one else in the room at that time I would be 100%, categorically certain in my belief of ghosts. Yet you ostensibly were in doubt where there is no room for it.

Based on the big ask of believing in ghosts grouped with the subtle psychological manipulation apparent in this thread I can safely claim that it is my personal opinion that this is nothing more than a hoax.

If you'd stick with your cover story, my skepticism should not bother you in the slightest but it obviously has. Sorry buddy, better luck next time
If I were to be convinced of ghosts I would either a) need to witness it first hand or b) view video evidence that cannot be explained by rational explanation. But with the caveat that the owner of the footage did not seek financial reward and that they did not try to grandstand from it.

p.s. Sorry for the long post but I dont like being refered to as a moron when in actual fact I have an IQ over 145


[edit on 17/3/06 by subz]



posted on Mar, 17 2006 @ 06:50 PM
link   
can i just comment whereas someone has commented on this photo being edited due to the light bending in the mirror.

On looking at that i thought it was pretty obvious that what you was seeing was not light bending however was a reflection of dust left over after somone had attempted to clean the mirror.

To me it looks to be streaks where someone has cleaned the mirror right to left or vice versa and has not been tall enough to access it properly hence the arch shape of the supposed light.

I believe this light bending is purely a reflection of the dust particles remaining on the mirror after i would say a not to good a clean.

Im still on the fence on this one by the way



posted on Mar, 18 2006 @ 02:44 AM
link   
Subz,

1. I remain a skeptic, im not guiding anyone to a predetermined outcome. If you read my last post you would see I state clearly I DO NOT BELIEVE IN GHOSTS.

2. To address your digression, my knowledge of computers is very very basic. I cant access the internet even from my home, and working for the police, the only systems I tend to use are all DOS based such as the Police National Computer. A grade schooler with MS Paint could carry out that task, although Im not a grade schooler and I dont have MS Paint, but I digress.

3. Strangley, sometimes things are sensitive. Not everything is a ruse. Oddly enough Subz, tragedies happen.

4. I was thinking this could possibly be explained as something like a carry over image from another photo, or an odd reflective quality changing the look of someones face and moving it in the mirror, anything.

5. Simple answer but I understand not everyone is as sharp as I assume. The whole point of this post is that I DONT KNOW. Your claim YOU SHOULD KNOW is absurd, why would I post if I knew? Hi people, this is a picture with a reflection of my long lost great 2nd uncle, see him in the mirror there, the end.

6. Of course any other info is extraneous to the photo analysis, whats your point here? Its extranous but it doesnt change the relevance of it. An explanation of the circumstances is needed.

7. I simply asked my dad why my nanna was doing that with her hand, he gave me an answer. It didnt take me 4 days to think about responding, I was in Prague! I previously stated that I thought this was unimportant because to myself, it was obvious, it doesnt mean 2 explanations were given, they are the same.

8. A strange and unexplainable photo has shown up, has been shown around the famliy who naturally came together for a short period of time after a family death. All were shocked at the resemblence and the nature, there is no link between closeness and being shocked, another moot point. The paint by numbers Da Vinci was again confirmed by my Dad, had been there for years. I never even noticed it until this thread. They have phones in Oxford, what do you want me to do? "Hi nan, some people on the interent reckon the painting on the wall has satanic imagery in it. They think this relates to a hoax about Grandad and a family photo. Could you confirm some details for me. I know your upset but this is important!". Get real. Out of interest, are you deviod of comapssion or totally lacking in sense?

9. Im level headed at skeptical views, I have only lashed out when personally accused of lying (and exploiting this situation to create a hoax!) and when satanic elements entered the frey.

There are people involved in this thread who can tell you no editing has been done to this photo, simply ask for the proof like all good skeptics do. Read my last post for a possible personal opinion, all I am doing is inviting discussion and opinions. Jeez, how many times do I need to inform your brain (with an IQ of 145 no less) I DO NOT BELIEVE IN GHOSTS!!! Get it? Maybe your high IQ limits brain capacity to absorb information.

Sorry buddy, but any points you raise can be rebuked, and yet again Im not trying to convince anyone of ghosts, better luck next time
trying to understand that.

p.s sorry for the long post, I dont like being referred to as a liar when its not true. Subz I never labelled you a moron, I said your accusations were 'moronic', look the definitions up, you should grasp it with such a high IQ (good boy by the way, very well done
) My IQ is 146 I think!

[edit on 18-3-2006 by Knight783]



posted on Mar, 23 2006 @ 04:26 AM
link   
Don't know if anyone else has noticed this,...

i played around with this picture in PS, the first thing that i noticed wasn't the "face" on the left side,... i clearly see a face in profile on the right side of the picture above the grandmother's head, i enlarged that part of the picture, and scaled up the contrast, that's all i did, then i drew a red line over the contours of what i think is a face in profile.




posted on Mar, 23 2006 @ 03:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by thesaint
I believe this light bending is purely a reflection of the dust particles remaining on the mirror after i would say a not to good a clean.

Im still on the fence on this one by the way


Great point!! I think you just helped me make this decision:



Look at the streaks in the reflection. You can clearly see them going across almost the entire mirror. You can even see it over the reflection of one of the family member's heads. However, I do not see a single streak over the "face". It even looks like the streaks mysteriously stop when they reach the out part of the face. This leads to beleive that it is a hoax. If you are good you can digitally edit a photograph without leaving any evidence. To me this looks exactly like that, with the exception of the inconsistant streaks by the face. In fact looking closer there also appears to be a darker tone in the area directly surround the face, and some white stuff right under the nose. Anyone else see this?

[edit on 23-3-2006 by Barcs]



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in

join