Some interesting notes. The guy was quoted as saying "I have had a camera a long time and done an awful lot of photography and I have never had flare on the lens before." Emphasis mine. This struck me as odd for some reason. Every professional photographer I know has to deal with flares. It happens. Also, in the comments section, was this.
Roman ghost baffles club
I noticed at 10 seconds into the video the camera location changed. As the joggers "ran through" the apparition they entered sunlight at that exact time. Looks like the "ghost" was right at the edge of shadow and sunlight. Reflected light from the trees? It doesn't explain however that there was no shadow on the figure, but it could explain the fading in and out, possibly clouds floating by? Cool phenomenon at any rate.
Now, I am by no means a video expert, but I tried watching the video in full screen mode, and the resulting distortion was rather strange. The video artifact seemed to be a different level of compression, or closer or farther to camera (like something on lens) or something, but did not seem to be present on path when viewed this way. The movement appears to be branches blowing in the background of the tree canopy. I personally do not think this is a video of a ghost, but rather a trick of lighting or something.
What I also think is interesting is he said he captured pictures while walking, using a video camera. This would mean he would have to have visually seen the "ghost" to take the video, holding it on location during the entire clip. Two runners go by, and they obviously did not see the "ghost". As such, I have come to the conclusion, based on camera movement, and the optical effects when zoomed up, that this was just a trick of the lighting from the trees in the background. After reading the interview the photographer, I believe he is intentionally not telling the truth, which I hate to say, would mean a purposeful hoax.
Anyway, I hope that all makes sense.
