Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

WTF Do you see what we see. Dont recall you being invited

page: 2
11
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 14 2011 @ 06:30 AM
link   
reply to post by Komodo
 


one of a kind Im afraid and you can move the picture to center the face in the middle.




posted on Apr, 14 2011 @ 06:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by Wolfetone
What are we supposed to be seeing? I can't make anything out.

Anyone else?


same #e as the words, confusing stuff. get his address.

another look to me in my eye, bs thread.

hey, we be there in force, better call 999! now!



posted on Apr, 14 2011 @ 06:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by m0r1arty
I see it I think:



-m0r
edit on 14/4/2011 by m0r1arty because: (no reason given)


excellent!!!

awesome eyes!!!


u rock!



posted on Apr, 14 2011 @ 06:55 AM
link   
The pink object appears to be your hand gripping the camera you are taking the picture with. The thing that looks like a neck scarf looks more like your sleeve. Follow the sleeve up to where the hand is.



The face and camera are obscured by the very bright camera flash.



For reference:



An extreme close up of your reflection in a dripping wet glass window can create some marvellous hoaxes.
edit on 14-4-2011 by dodgygeeza because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 14 2011 @ 07:30 AM
link   
For those struggling to see the image (like myself) I adjusted a few settings in Photoshop to make it more obvious.



Rather strange I'll admit, though it's nothing paranormal.
edit on 14/4/11 by TristanC because: Attached Image.



posted on Apr, 14 2011 @ 07:35 AM
link   
reply to post by TristanC
 


Your photoshop job might only serve to confuse people even more (I'm talking about the circle that you made surrounding the wrist)

Yep, it's still an arm



posted on Apr, 14 2011 @ 07:43 AM
link   
reply to post by dodgygeeza
 

I was simply making what the OP noted more visible. Not analyzing the image.

Although I appreciate your analysis I can’t help but feel you have speculated rather allot. If you could show your pictures with some different colour tones to make these arms & fingers more visible then it would serve a better purpose. At the moment, your pictures look like simple guess work.

Not trying to offend you, just simply bringing it to your attention for future reference.



posted on Apr, 14 2011 @ 07:44 AM
link   
I am an absolute believer. The reps are said to be Earth-bound. This is odd I will give ya that.



posted on Apr, 14 2011 @ 07:46 AM
link   
reply to post by TristanC
 


I'm sorry if my post sounded condescending, it wasn't my intention at all.

I wish it was some sort of alien face but I can't help but see an arm. I think the OP's friends are having a laugh at his expense.

I'm assuming most people are seeing a face in what I would assume is a rolled up sleeve. The reason why I say this is because it is the exact same colour as the torso on the right (in my opinion the main part of the jumper).
edit on 14-4-2011 by dodgygeeza because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 14 2011 @ 07:57 AM
link   
reply to post by canadiancatfoodforcrocadi
 


as your friends have no PC & are not online, maybe you can sell this on eBay for them. i'm not seeing anything besides blur and (I guess) raindrops but I'm confident others will find all sorts of meaning in the photo.

eBay does not care if people post regular items and refer to them as haunted or containing spirits. seen a lot of ugly dolls and ugly jewelry go for way more what they are worth because you can fool some of the people all of the time.

"There is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so" - from Hamlet, by William Shakespeare



posted on Apr, 14 2011 @ 09:25 AM
link   
I'd like to hear the OP's response my previous posts if possible.




posted on Apr, 14 2011 @ 09:44 AM
link   
Hello fellow Canadian! It looks like the entity is actually smiling a little. There appears to be a second creature's face to the left of the first. I hate to take the wind out of your sails however, but to me it looks like we are seeing the results of the weather at the time the photo was taken. Then again, you are correct in saying the camera does pick up things not visible to the human eye.



posted on Apr, 14 2011 @ 09:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by loveguy
Hi.

So the reflection I'm looking at is some one/thing that is or is not actually taking the photograph?

It reminds me of those slee-stacks on 'Land of the Lost.'



Loved that show,of course back then, there was not much to choose from, I can still
remember the sound they made. we are showing our age now ,huh?



posted on Apr, 14 2011 @ 10:01 AM
link   
1. Why do they have a digital camera if they are too poor/drunk/redneck/befuddled to know how to use the internet?

2. Since they are so poor/drunk/redneck/befuddled the story is immediately suspect.

3. After running scans on it, my conclusion is that image has been manipulated.


ASSESSMENT: Class 1 - Image is processed/edited






JPEGsnoop 1.5.2 by Calvin Hass
www.impulseadventure.com...
-------------------------------------

Filename: [C:\Documents and Settings\M\Desktop\180b529c747e.jpg]
Filesize: [81181] Bytes

Start Offset: 0x00000000
*** Marker: SOI (xFFD8) ***
OFFSET: 0x00000000

*** Marker: APP0 (xFFE0) ***
OFFSET: 0x00000002
length = 16
identifier = [JFIF]
version = [1.1]
density = 1 x 1 (aspect ratio)
thumbnail = 0 x 0

*** Marker: COM (Comment) (xFFFE) ***
OFFSET: 0x00000014
Comment length = 59
Comment=CREATOR: gd-jpeg v1.0 (using IJG JPEG v62), quality = 80.

*** Marker: DQT (xFFDB) ***
Define a Quantization Table.
OFFSET: 0x00000051
Table length = 67
----
Precision=8 bits
Destination ID=0 (Luminance)
DQT, Row #0: 6 4 4 6 10 16 20 24
DQT, Row #1: 5 5 6 8 10 23 24 22
DQT, Row #2: 6 5 6 10 16 23 28 22
DQT, Row #3: 6 7 9 12 20 35 32 25
DQT, Row #4: 7 9 15 22 27 44 41 31
DQT, Row #5: 10 14 22 26 32 42 45 37
DQT, Row #6: 20 26 31 35 41 48 48 40
DQT, Row #7: 29 37 38 39 45 40 41 40
Approx quality factor = 79.94 (scaling=40.12 variance=1.43)

*** Marker: DQT (xFFDB) ***
Define a Quantization Table.
OFFSET: 0x00000096
Table length = 67
----
Precision=8 bits
Destination ID=1 (Chrominance)
DQT, Row #0: 7 7 10 19 40 40 40 40
DQT, Row #1: 7 8 10 26 40 40 40 40
DQT, Row #2: 10 10 22 40 40 40 40 40
DQT, Row #3: 19 26 40 40 40 40 40 40
DQT, Row #4: 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40
DQT, Row #5: 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40
DQT, Row #6: 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40
DQT, Row #7: 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40
Approx quality factor = 79.87 (scaling=40.26 variance=0.36)

*** Marker: SOF0 (Baseline DCT) (xFFC0) ***
OFFSET: 0x000000DB
Frame header length = 17
Precision = 8
Number of Lines = 768
Samples per Line = 1024
Image Size = 1024 x 768
Raw Image Orientation = Landscape
Number of Img components = 3
Component[1]: ID=0x01, Samp Fac=0x22 (Subsamp 1 x 1), Quant Tbl Sel=0x00 (Lum: Y)
Component[2]: ID=0x02, Samp Fac=0x11 (Subsamp 2 x 2), Quant Tbl Sel=0x01 (Chrom: Cb)
Component[3]: ID=0x03, Samp Fac=0x11 (Subsamp 2 x 2), Quant Tbl Sel=0x01 (Chrom: Cr)

*** Marker: DHT (Define Huffman Table) (xFFC4) ***
OFFSET: 0x000000EE
Huffman table length = 31
----
Destination ID = 0
Class = 0 (DC / Lossless Table)
Codes of length 01 bits (000 total):
Codes of length 02 bits (001 total): 00
Codes of length 03 bits (005 total): 01 02 03 04 05
Codes of length 04 bits (001 total): 06
Codes of length 05 bits (001 total): 07
Codes of length 06 bits (001 total): 08
Codes of length 07 bits (001 total): 09
Codes of length 08 bits (001 total): 0A
Codes of length 09 bits (001 total): 0B
Codes of length 10 bits (000 total):
Codes of length 11 bits (000 total):
Codes of length 12 bits (000 total):
Codes of length 13 bits (000 total):
Codes of length 14 bits (000 total):
Codes of length 15 bits (000 total):
Codes of length 16 bits (000 total):
Total number of codes: 012


*** Marker: DHT (Define Huffman Table) (xFFC4) ***
OFFSET: 0x0000010F
Huffman table length = 181
----
Destination ID = 0
Class = 1 (AC Table)
Codes of length 01 bits (000 total):
Codes of length 02 bits (002 total): 01 02
Codes of length 03 bits (001 total): 03
Codes of length 04 bits (003 total): 00 04 11
Codes of length 05 bits (003 total): 05 12 21
Codes of length 06 bits (002 total): 31 41
Codes of length 07 bits (004 total): 06 13 51 61
Codes of length 08 bits (003 total): 07 22 71
Codes of length 09 bits (005 total): 14 32 81 91 A1
Codes of length 10 bits (005 total): 08 23 42 B1 C1
Codes of length 11 bits (004 total): 15 52 D1 F0
Codes of length 12 bits (004 total): 24 33 62 72
Codes of length 13 bits (000 total):
Codes of length 14 bits (000 total):
Codes of length 15 bits (001 total): 82
Codes of length 16 bits (125 total): 09 0A 16 17 18 19 1A 25 26 27 28 29 2A 34 35 36
37 38 39 3A 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 4A 53 54 55 56
57 58 59 5A 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 6A 73 74 75 76
77 78 79 7A 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 8A 92 93 94 95
96 97 98 99 9A A2 A3 A4 A5 A6 A7 A8 A9 AA B2 B3
B4 B5 B6 B7 B8 B9 BA C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 C7 C8 C9 CA
D2 D3 D4 D5 D6 D7 D8 D9 DA E1 E2 E3 E4 E5 E6 E7
E8 E9 EA F1 F2 F3 F4 F5 F6 F7 F8 F9 FA
Total number of codes: 162


*** Marker: DHT (Define Huffman Table) (xFFC4) ***
OFFSET: 0x000001C6
Huffman table length = 31
----
Destination ID = 1
Class = 0 (DC / Lossless Table)
Codes of length 01 bits (000 total):
Codes of length 02 bits (003 total): 00 01 02
Codes of length 03 bits (001 total): 03
Codes of length 04 bits (001 total): 04
Codes of length 05 bits (001 total): 05
Codes of length 06 bits (001 total): 06
Codes of length 07 bits (001 total): 07
Codes of length 08 bits (001 total): 08
Codes of length 09 bits (001 total): 09
Codes of length 10 bits (001 total): 0A
Codes of length 11 bits (001 total): 0B
Codes of length 12 bits (000 total):
Codes of length 13 bits (000 total):
Codes of length 14 bits (000 total):
Codes of length 15 bits (000 total):
Codes of length 16 bits (000 total):
Total number of codes: 012


*** Marker: DHT (Define Huffman Table) (xFFC4) ***
OFFSET: 0x000001E7
Huffman table length = 181
----
Destination ID = 1
Class = 1 (AC Table)
Codes of length 01 bits (000 total):
Codes of length 02 bits (002 total): 00 01
Codes of length 03 bits (001 total): 02
Codes of length 04 bits (002 total): 03 11
Codes of length 05 bits (004 total): 04 05 21 31
Codes of length 06 bits (004 total): 06 12 41 51
Codes of length 07 bits (003 total): 07 61 71
Codes of length 08 bits (004 total): 13 22 32 81
Codes of length 09 bits (007 total): 08 14 42 91 A1 B1 C1
Codes of length 10 bits (005 total): 09 23 33 52 F0
Codes of length 11 bits (004 total): 15 62 72 D1
Codes of length 12 bits (004 total): 0A 16 24 34
Codes of length 13 bits (000 total):
Codes of length 14 bits (001 total): E1
Codes of length 15 bits (002 total): 25 F1
Codes of length 16 bits (119 total): 17 18 19 1A 26 27 28 29 2A 35 36 37 38 39 3A 43
44 45 46 47 48 49 4A 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 5A 63
64 65 66 67 68 69 6A 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 7A 82
83 84 85 86 87 88 89 8A 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99
9A A2 A3 A4 A5 A6 A7 A8 A9 AA B2 B3 B4 B5 B6 B7
B8 B9 BA C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 C7 C8 C9 CA D2 D3 D4 D5
D6 D7 D8 D9 DA E2 E3 E4 E5 E6 E7 E8 E9 EA F2 F3
F4 F5 F6 F7 F8 F9 FA
Total number of codes: 162


*** Marker: SOS (Start of Scan) (xFFDA) ***
OFFSET: 0x0000029E
Scan header length = 12
Number of img components = 3
Component[1]: selector=0x01, table=0x00
Component[2]: selector=0x02, table=0x11
Component[3]: selector=0x03, table=0x11
Spectral selection = 0 .. 63
Successive approximation = 0x00


*** Decoding SCAN Data ***
OFFSET: 0x000002AC
Scan Decode Mode: No IDCT (DC only)
NOTE: Low-resolution DC component shown. Can decode full-res with [Options->Scan Segment->Full IDCT]

Scan Data encountered marker 0xFFD9 @ 0x00013D1B.0

Compression stats:
Compression Ratio: 29.31:1
Bits per pixel: 0.82:1

Huffman code histogram stats:
Huffman Table: (Dest ID: 0, Class: DC)
# codes of length 01 bits: 0 ( 0%)
# codes of length 02 bits: 1064 ( 9%)
# codes of length 03 bits: 10300 ( 84%)
# codes of length 04 bits: 444 ( 4%)
# codes of length 05 bits: 359 ( 3%)
# codes of length 06 bits: 121 ( 1%)
# codes of length 07 bits: 0 ( 0%)
# codes of length 08 bits: 0 ( 0%)
# codes of length 09 bits: 0 ( 0%)
# codes of length 10 bits: 0 ( 0%)
# codes of length 11 bits: 0 ( 0%)
# codes of length 12 bits: 0 ( 0%)
# codes of length 13 bits: 0 ( 0%)
# codes of length 14 bits: 0 ( 0%)
# codes of length 15 bits: 0 ( 0%)
# codes of length 16 bits: 0 ( 0%)

Huffman Table: (Dest ID: 1, Class: DC)
# codes of length 01 bits: 0 ( 0%)
# codes of length 02 bits: 5580 ( 91%)
# codes of length 03 bits: 454 ( 7%)
# codes of length 04 bits: 106 ( 2%)
# codes of length 05 bits: 4 ( 0%)
# codes of length 06 bits: 0 ( 0%)
# codes of length 07 bits: 0 ( 0%)
# codes of length 08 bits: 0 ( 0%)
# codes of length 09 bits: 0 ( 0%)
# codes of length 10 bits: 0 ( 0%)
# codes of length 11 bits: 0 ( 0%)
# codes of length 12 bits: 0 ( 0%)
# codes of length 13 bits: 0 ( 0%)
# codes of length 14 bits: 0 ( 0%)
# codes of length 15 bits: 0 ( 0%)
# codes of length 16 bits: 0 ( 0%)

Huffman Table: (Dest ID: 0, Class: AC)
# codes of length 01 bits: 0 ( 0%)
# codes of length 02 bits: 40754 ( 40%)
# codes of length 03 bits: 7106 ( 7%)
# codes of length 04 bits: 28546 ( 28%)
# codes of length 05 bits: 9974 ( 10%)
# codes of length 06 bits: 7090 ( 7%)
# codes of length 07 bits: 4312 ( 4%)
# codes of length 08 bits: 1575 ( 2%)
# codes of length 09 bits: 1637 ( 2%)
# codes of length 10 bits: 528 ( 1%)
# codes of length 11 bits: 247 ( 0%)
# codes of length 12 bits: 41 ( 0%)
# codes of length 13 bits: 0 ( 0%)
# codes of length 14 bits: 0 ( 0%)
# codes of length 15 bits: 1 ( 0%)
# codes of length 16 bits: 115 ( 0%)

Huffman Table: (Dest ID: 1, Class: AC)
# codes of length 01 bits: 0 ( 0%)
# codes of length 02 bits: 8850 ( 75%)
# codes of length 03 bits: 560 ( 5%)
# codes of length 04 bits: 1444 ( 12%)
# codes of length 05 bits: 635 ( 5%)
# codes of length 06 bits: 277 ( 2%)
# codes of length 07 bits: 48 ( 0%)
# codes of length 08 bits: 57 ( 0%)
# codes of length 09 bits: 5 ( 0%)
# codes of length 10 bits: 1 ( 0%)
# codes of length 11 bits: 0 ( 0%)
# codes of length 12 bits: 1 ( 0%)
# codes of length 13 bits: 0 ( 0%)
# codes of length 14 bits: 0 ( 0%)
# codes of length 15 bits: 0 ( 0%)
# codes of length 16 bits: 0 ( 0%)

YCC clipping in DC:
Y component: [255= 0]
Cb component: [255= 0]
Cr component: [255= 0]

RGB clipping in DC:
R component: [255= 0]
G component: [255= 0]
B component: [255= 0]

Average Pixel Luminance (Y):
Y=[ 88] (range: 0..255)

Brightest Pixel Search:
YCC=[ 1014, 0, 0] RGB=[254,254,254] @ MCU[ 58, 0]

Finished Decoding SCAN Data
Number of RESTART markers decoded: 0
Next position in scan buffer: Offset 0x00013D1A.7


*** Marker: EOI (End of Image) (xFFD9) ***
OFFSET: 0x00013D1B


*** Searching Compression Signatures ***

Signature: 01DC499064BA9264D591FDE9071DFD89
Signature (Rotated): 0175BAF3251040E0EFB2930B73328E7F
File Offset: 0 bytes
Chroma subsampling: 2x2
EXIF Make/Model: NONE
EXIF Makernotes: NONE
EXIF Software: NONE

Searching Compression Signatures: (3327 built-in, 0 user(*) )

EXIF.Make / Software EXIF.Model Quality Subsamp Match?
------------------------- ----------------------------------- ---------------- --------------
CAM:[OLYMPUS OPTICAL CO.,LTD ] [C2000Z ] [ ] No
CAM:[OLYMPUS OPTICAL CO.,LTD ] [C40Z,D40Z ] [ ] No
CAM:[OLYMPUS OPTICAL CO.,LTD ] [C700UZ ] [ ] No
CAM:[SONY ] [DSC-H9 ] [ ] No
SW :[Apple ImageIO.framework ] [050 (Normal) ]
SW :[IJG Library ] [080 ]

The following IJG-based editors also match this signature:
SW :[GIMP ] [080 ]
SW :[IrfanView ] [080 ]
SW :[idImager ] [080 ]
SW :[FastStone Image Viewer ] [080 ]
SW :[NeatImage ] [080 ]
SW :[Paint.NET ] [080 ]
SW :[Photomatix ] [080 ]
SW :[XnView ] [080 ]

NOTE: JFIF COMMENT field is known software
Based on the analysis of compression characteristics and EXIF metadata:

ASSESSMENT: Class 1 - Image is processed/edited

This may be a new software editor for the database.
If this file is processed, and editor doesn't appear in list above,
PLEASE ADD TO DATABASE with [Tools->Add Camera to DB]

NOTE: JFIF COMMENT field is known software
Based on the analysis of compression characteristics and EXIF metadata:

ASSESSMENT: Class 1 - Image is processed/edited



posted on Apr, 14 2011 @ 10:03 AM
link   
^ Of course it's "edited". It was uploaded to a hosting website, which is considered an "edit".



posted on Apr, 14 2011 @ 10:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by CanadianDream420
^ Of course it's "edited". It was uploaded to a hosting website, which is considered an "edit".


You asked for feedback.

The only available evidence is this photo which has been edited.

If you have this unedited version to be looked at, then post that.



posted on Apr, 14 2011 @ 10:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by dodgygeeza
The pink object appears to be your hand gripping the camera you are taking the picture with. The thing that looks like a neck scarf looks more like your sleeve. Follow the sleeve up to where the hand is.



The face and camera are obscured by the very bright camera flash.



For reference:



An extreme close up of your reflection in a dripping wet glass window can create some marvellous hoaxes.
edit on 14-4-2011 by dodgygeeza because: (no reason given)


Excellent debunking!

I was beginning to suspect something, yes it looks like leatherface, but closer look you can indeed make out the person taking the picture



posted on Apr, 14 2011 @ 10:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by Furbs
The only available evidence is this photo which has been edited.


That data means squat.

I'm afraid JPEGsnoop is about as reliable as a turd at identifying "shopped" photographs. It's more a tool for finding out the settings used to take the picture and what camera was used. I could give you many examples of using RAW photo's and it identifying them as "High Probability to be Processed/Edited."


If you have this unedited version to be looked at, then post that.


Judging by the tiny resolution they either used a 1-2 Gen Digital Camera or it was scaled down during the upload process. Thus giving us the results of being "Edited or Processed".

I'm not saying this is the 'real deal' - Im just pointing out where people are going wrong...
edit on 14/4/11 by TristanC because: Typo...



posted on Apr, 14 2011 @ 10:33 AM
link   
the conditions were perfect for her to capture her true reflection. very rare.

this is what we all really look like.




posted on Apr, 14 2011 @ 10:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by TristanC
I could give you many examples of using RAW photo's and it identifying them as "High Probability to be Processed/Edited."


Please do, I am very interested in seeing what evidence you have to support a claim that a product valued by members of the forensic photography community could be compared with fecal matter.






top topics



 
11
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join