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.

 

Photo experts, please explain this strange anomaly.

page: 1
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 21 2010 @ 10:10 PM
link   
I found a stack of photo negatives taken in the 1950's. I was scanning the negatives and came across this weird anomaly. I scanned it at a high resolution and then I inverted it. What in the world could have caused this? It doesn't look like anyone was smoking in the photo, but even so, I've never seen smoke make an image like that.








Here is a photo I took of the negative



edit on 21-9-2010 by virraszto because: (no reason given)




posted on Sep, 21 2010 @ 10:19 PM
link   
reply to post by virraszto
 


that anomaly looks like someone cut their faces out of the picture.







oh ... and also...

Looks like there is a face on the left above the dresser or desk, or whatever that thing is.




I'm no photographic expert, and any other guessing on my part would just be ... speculation.

hope this might help,
et


edit on 21-9-2010 by Esoteric Teacher because: add stuff



posted on Sep, 21 2010 @ 10:22 PM
link   
reply to post by Esoteric Teacher
 


I think the anomaly is meant to be that streak of smoke or whatever it is. However that face you pointed out is interesting, it looks almost ghost like but could be someone sitting behind the table. I wonder why the other two faces are cut out but not that one?



posted on Sep, 21 2010 @ 10:22 PM
link   
I blacked out the two faces, but not the other lady sitting behind the table. This is the negative and the only thing I did was to black out the faces, and invert it, and then I blew up the really weird part.



posted on Sep, 21 2010 @ 10:26 PM
link   
Wierd. So my first impression is that maybe a piece of small string was hangin in front of the lense, making it appear larger.

Then I saw the image at the table. It almost looks transparent. Is it possible that it could be a double exposure? That might explain a few things.



posted on Sep, 21 2010 @ 10:28 PM
link   
maybe the person taking the picture was smoking. their is a weird pattern on that smoke thing, though. Not sure if it could have been something from development or exposure.

I'm no expert on these things, I was making an observation some faces were missing and I saw another face that was not.

I hope someone may be able to offer you a better answer.

good luck,
et



posted on Sep, 21 2010 @ 10:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Esoteric Teacher
 


Would that not be the reflection of the guy sitting nearest to the mirror?

And it does look like there was some smoke going on in that room...interesting photo none the less.

~Keeper



posted on Sep, 21 2010 @ 10:29 PM
link   
reply to post by virraszto
 


Ok, well it really could be a range of things, I'm not a photo expert but I'm thinking maybe some sort of brush has painted a streak onto (the surface of) the negative...does it seem as though the anomaly is part of the picture when you look at the actual negative?

EDIT: And I'm just thinking, didn't those old cameras use some sort of flash powder or something which lets off smoke? Perhaps they took several photos and you can see the smoke from a previous shot drifting up?


edit on 21/9/10 by CHA0S because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 21 2010 @ 10:38 PM
link   
The blown up smoke part just looks like wipe marks from the development of the negatives to me. The face is interesting though.



posted on Sep, 21 2010 @ 10:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by Esoteric Teacher

oh ... and also...

Looks like there is a face on the left above the dresser or desk, or whatever that thing is.




edit on 21-9-2010 by Esoteric Teacher because: add stuff



i was going to point that out lol



posted on Sep, 21 2010 @ 10:45 PM
link   
The lady behind the table is supposed to be there. This came out of the envelope from Kodak Film and was dated for 7-1-1948. There is nothing on the negative, whatever that is is in the negative. It just looks really strange to me the way that blown up image looks.




ps...Is there a way to see the post before mine when replying? I can't remember who posted what to reply to.



posted on Sep, 21 2010 @ 10:48 PM
link   
These older pics usually have a long exposure time..

That may be a piece of the photographers hair dangling in front of the lense,

then moving in a circular motion as the film exposes...

Odd, but not impossible...

BTW, I'm no expert with pics..



posted on Sep, 21 2010 @ 10:54 PM
link   
reply to post by virraszto
 


It's easiest for me if I just "quote" the poster before me and erase what I don't want to include of theirs in my post. Hope that helps!



posted on Sep, 21 2010 @ 11:00 PM
link   
I think it's just a flaw in the film itself.
They had those old box camera's back then, and the film was very thick with frequent imperfections. I've played with some of these old camera's before, and you just never know what's going to show up on them. I've found some in old stores or flea markets with film still in them, which I've had developed.
Some of the photo's contained things that look like....well....this.



edit on 9/21/2010 by ladyinwaiting because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 21 2010 @ 11:10 PM
link   
reply to post by virraszto
 



ps...Is there a way to see the post before mine when replying? I can't remember who posted what to reply to.


I log in again and have two windows to flip back and forth from. That way I can see it, and I can also copy and paste it as needed.



posted on Sep, 21 2010 @ 11:17 PM
link   
reply to post by getreadyalready
 



I log in again and have two windows to flip back and forth from. That way I can see it, and I can also copy and paste it as needed.


Hitting ctrl-n, is much faster..Opens identical page already logged in....



posted on Sep, 22 2010 @ 12:06 AM
link   
It looks like a long exposure and something being waved across on front of the lens.

2nd line



posted on Sep, 22 2010 @ 12:16 AM
link   
reply to post by virraszto
 


Looks like someone with really long, really large, curly hair took the photo and their hair got in the way.

Cool find, whatever it is.



posted on Sep, 22 2010 @ 12:19 AM
link   
reply to post by MeSoCorny
 


I already said that........first



posted on Sep, 22 2010 @ 12:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by rival

It looks like a long exposure and something being waved across on front of the lens.

2nd line


I second this. I would like to add that the over exposure occurred because of a light leak in the camera body.




top topics



 
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join