Help Analyze a Photograpic Anomaly

page: 1
34
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on May, 21 2011 @ 12:54 PM
link   
First, let me open this thread by stating it is absolutely imperative that everyone understands THIS IS NOT A DOCTORED PHOTO. It has not been manipulated in any fashion, hence, do not post in this thread if that is what you have to say, for it adds nothing to the analysis and is as unintelligible as calling the static heard on vinyl 'added audio'. This is for productive debate on what this anomaly could be. Call it some kind of light artifact or digital glitch if that is your opinion, but don't post that this photo has been altered, because that's a waste of everybody's time.

I originally posted these pictures in the thread New Ghost Picture - Who is haunting St. Martins Cave? for its similarity in nature, but it received little to no (productive) analysis and I felt it deserved its own thread.

Here's some background on the pictures:

Apparently it's a house in Quebec know colloquially as the Addam's Family house because it was supposed to resemble it somewhat. A friend of mine's mother and her friend were on a bus tour and they were told that it was a pretty unique house, so they got out to take a few pictures. My friend was the one that uploaded the pictures from their trip onto a computer, and she said that the her mother's friend who took the picture is technologically challenged and thus would be unable to pull off any sort of photo manipulation. The house isn't known to be haunted. There were no people standing in the foreground of the house. Apparently it was abandoned at the time the pictures were taken in 2007. They were taken with a Sony digital camera, so it's not due to picture bleed because of film.

Here's the house without the anomaly:



...and here's the picture with it:




+11 more 
posted on May, 21 2011 @ 01:05 PM
link   
It is my opinion that the second photo has been manipulated digitally. I have been working in visual communication design for many years, so my opinion is not irrelevant even though you don't want it to be mentioned in your thread, which in itself is highly questionable. Dont get me wrong, but...:


My friend was the one that uploaded the pictures from their trip onto a computer, and she said that the her mother's friend who took the picture is technologically challenged and thus would be unable to pull off any sort of photo manipulation.

.. isn't a valid argument when it comes to questioning the authenticity of the presented evidence.

edit on 21-5-2011 by Clairaudience because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 21 2011 @ 01:07 PM
link   
It's the exact same picture, maybe ran through MS paint and edited with the eraser stensil.
edit: i was wrong *hangs head*
edit on 21-5-2011 by binkbonk because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 21 2011 @ 01:12 PM
link   
Photoshop Dodge and Burn tool, yes.

Anomaly, no.



posted on May, 21 2011 @ 01:12 PM
link   
reply to post by binkbonk
 

If you look at the clouds where they meet the house on the top right, you see that they are not the same picture, but taken just after each other, as the clouds are similar but have moved a bit..



posted on May, 21 2011 @ 01:13 PM
link   
No photographic expertise at all, but as a viewer of photographs, it looks fake as hell to me. Not even, "hmmm" fake, but
fake.



posted on May, 21 2011 @ 01:14 PM
link   
Sorry but I am a photographer and digital artist and
I believe this photo has been altered. Strange that
you didn't want anyone to say that but as
it is we can pretty much say what we believe
as long as we are within T&C rules.



posted on May, 21 2011 @ 01:17 PM
link   
reply to post by OrganicAnagram33
 


Okay... I know nothing about digital manipulation so I cannot comment on that aspect. But the first thing I notice about the two pictures is that they look the same - the clouds are the same in both, same lighting, etc.

The only thing is they are cropped differently (if that is the correct term ?) - in the first one the camera seems to point higher up so you see more sky and less ground, but the opposite of the second picture (does that make sense).

Were both pictures taken straight after each other?

As for the 'thing', it almost looks like two figures, one slightly taller than other, standing close together - I know there are only two 'legs' but somehow the impression I get is of two 'people'. I have no idea what it is though - it doesn't look like it/they are standing on the ground, the perspective isn't right



I would so love to live in that house though



posted on May, 21 2011 @ 01:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by binkbonk
It's the exact same picture, maybe ran through MS paint and edited with the erasure stensile.


Actually it's not the same picture the angles are slightly off if you try to line them up.

As for it being shopped, in all actuality it probably is not. though that doesn't mean it's a ghost or unexplained.

the most likely reason is that there was a reflective surface shining light directly into the lens, most likely a moving source such as a car. that would explain the slight motion blur.

although the shape is a little weird and ghost like, it is most likely light Wash Out. I used to get images like these when I was experimenting with time-lapse photography in college.

hope that helps.


Pardon all the "Most Likely's" I've been up for almost 2 days
edit on 21-5-2011 by Poker because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 21 2011 @ 01:28 PM
link   
Well after looking at the headers of the images,

CREATOR: gd-jpeg v1.0 (using IJG JPEG v62), quality = 80


It is clear the images were created using the GD library www.boutell.com...

So can it be because you uploaded the images here at ATS it's possible, if you have the originals and link them then we can start by looking at the headers of the originals.Make and model of the sony camera would also be a plus.



posted on May, 21 2011 @ 01:28 PM
link   
I reiterate: I don't appreciate the 'its altered comments'... because its not. It was taken by a middle-aged woman who knows little to nothing about technology. They didn't even see it until my friend loaded the pictures from their trip onto the computer. You're wasting your time and mine.

Please, at least have the sense to say its a digital glitch or a light reflection or something.



posted on May, 21 2011 @ 01:35 PM
link   
Here are the original file names before I uploaded them to ATS:

Picture without the anomaly:

n1666740045_128129_6402

Picture with the anomaly:

n1666740045_128128_6074



posted on May, 21 2011 @ 01:36 PM
link   
This looks shopped. I can tell by the pixels and by having done quite a few shops in my time.

No, seriously. I call hoax. Alerted. No flag for you. No Star. Do not pass Go, do not collect $200.



posted on May, 21 2011 @ 01:47 PM
link   
reply to post by OrganicAnagram33
 


I hope you realize that you will face a ban if this is proven to be fake right???

Posting hoaxes/fakes claiming they are real is not allowed....so....if you do know that it was manipulated you had better own up before your account is banned.

Looks like photoshop to me...going to do some analyisis myself, and suggest other members do the same so this can be thrown in the correct forum....(HOAX)

EDIT: Look at the clouds in both pics....identical....so both pics were taken at the same time. Look at the shadows in both pics....identical....sooooo....ones been altered and we know which one that is lol.
edit on 21-5-2011 by loves a conspiricy because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 21 2011 @ 01:51 PM
link   
reply to post by loves a conspiricy
 


The clouds actually ARE NOT the same in both pictures. As others have already pointed out.



posted on May, 21 2011 @ 01:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Illusionsaregrander
reply to post by loves a conspiricy
 


The clouds actually ARE NOT the same in both pictures. As others have already pointed out.


i think you need to look again.

They are TOO similar to be taken at different dates. There is no way you get almost IDENTICAL clouds in the same position anytime....it just doesn't happen.

They aren't 100% identical....second photo may have been taken 10 seconds later.



posted on May, 21 2011 @ 01:56 PM
link   
Could be an honest mistake, for example the picture with the anomaly was taken through a passenger side window then she stepped out to get a clearer shot. Probably a short lens in that case less than 35 mm equivalence since the anomaly is not blurred too much.



posted on May, 21 2011 @ 01:56 PM
link   
As emberscott said, load the originals. Simple as that. Otherwise you're expecting everyone to give you information without your having giving any information except "what is this and don't say it's fake."

It's not enough for you to say it's not fake because granny can't do fakes....



posted on May, 21 2011 @ 02:02 PM
link   
reply to post by loves a conspiricy
 


You are right that they are not likely to be from different dates, but clearly they are two separate pictures taken within minutes of one another, not one picture altered.

You said the clouds were identical. And, clearly they are not. Time has elapsed between the two photos and the while they are the same clouds, they are no longer identical.


+4 more 
posted on May, 21 2011 @ 02:14 PM
link   
Nice post OP S&F!!!!!!
Thanks for posting.
I've seen many, many so called paranormal photos, some I knew were not faked, and I think this is an authentic photo, because I've seen some similar to yours. I'm not 100% sure, because I didn't take the photo, but come on guys, give the guy a break. He came to us for real a analysis, and you guys can do is say it's photoshoped. I'm so tired of people always screaming fake at ANY photo that has something unexplained in it. According to skeptics, every single one is faked, and people that see and experience the paranormal are mentally ill or it's some sort of mass hysteria when there is more than one witness. NOT ALWAYS, THAT'S IMPOSSIBLE. Mass hysteria is a made up excuse used by skeptics to explain the unexplained. I have never been fooled or drawn into any panic where I saw things that weren't there, and to say all people are that gullible is just lazy. Science will never admit that spirits exist, because that would prove there is life after death, and they can't have that in their quest to destroy religion, so instead, they make everyone feel like they're psycho's. Shameful.





new topics
top topics
 
34
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join