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.

 

What do you think of this? Affectionate ghost?

page: 1
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 02:37 AM
link   
About 8 years ago now, this picture was taken in a small grave yard smack bang in the middle of the town I used to live. When the picture was taken, there was, as always, nothing of note, no-one was smoking, there were no effects used such as dry ice or anything.
The photo was submitted to the news paper for further investigation, and they agreed that it was not smoke, and it wasn't an atmospheric effect.

I wasn't the photographer, but I was in attendance at the photo shoot (group of about 10 of us, from ages about 15/16 to mid thirties) and we were split into two groups, so two photographers were present in different parts of the cemetary.

It looks as though that there is an ethereal form holding its arms around the subject, or if you want to get sinister about it, trying to pull his head back to gain access to his neck?





Do you think that this is an actual apparition, or something else? There are other photos with the same guy in it, and there is nothing else around him.
Is this a protest by the graves owner, who doesn't wish their remains to be stood on or the scene of a photo shoot? Or is this a welcome from someone who has laid lonely for many years?




posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 02:43 AM
link   
In my opinion the person taking the picture is smoking a cigaret. Mother use to ruin pictures because she sometimes smoked while taking them leaving the same type of impression as the picture you posted.



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 02:43 AM
link   
In my opening paragraph I stated that no-one was smoking, and I have worked the photographer before and he does not smoke.



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 03:13 AM
link   
reply to post by Lulzaroonie
 


Explanation: S&F!

Uhmmm?


I think it is reflections off of any of the following possible reflective items ...

1] The tin foil scrunched up and in the grass between his legs at the base of the grave!

2] His very shiny black buttons & shiny black boots!

3] His various silver chains and zippers!

OR it could have something to do with the light streaming through the tree canopy at the top of the picture!

Personal Disclosure: I hope that helps!



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 03:19 AM
link   
Your really gona hate me, but it looks like photoshop to me.



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 03:22 AM
link   
reply to post by bluemooone2
 


Well the same photographer did badly pinch in my waist in a photoshoot once, using photoshop (I was mildly insulted!) but the people who examined the photo and the camera would have immediately called him out on that if it was shenanigans



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 07:20 AM
link   
Even ghosts hate emo kids.



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 11:09 AM
link   
reply to post by Lulzaroonie
 
He does not look like he's been there for years he's far too modern, reminds me of keith doherty high on cocain




posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 01:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Lulzaroonie
 


You never know. Last year I took some photos at one of my hubby's job sites and had a very similar thing show up on the photo. I took two photos of the same spot in quick succession, but one has the green fog and the other doesn't. Coincidence? Some kind of reflection? Possible, but it sure looks weird.








posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 05:17 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 05:28 PM
link   
Is the guy wearing the hat the ghost?



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 05:33 PM
link   
definitly smoke from cigarette emo, fake grave stone, probably was going for that look gotten this affect many times in smokey bars



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 06:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Lulzaroonie
reply to post by bluemooone2
 


Well the same photographer did badly pinch in my waist in a photoshoot once, using photoshop (I was mildly insulted!) but the people who examined the photo and the camera would have immediately called him out on that if it was shenanigans


It's either smoke, (Sometimes it doesn't show up until the flash hits it) OR It's Photoshop dodge tool set to about 9% / shadows.



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 07:00 PM
link   
reply to post by Lulzaroonie
 


Sweet baby Jesus and the orphans!......I must be getting old!

Nice boots


The smoke....I have no idea......the boots .......definitely not of this world



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 11:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Lulzaroonie
About 8 years ago now, this picture was taken in a small grave yard smack bang in the middle of the town I used to live. When the picture was taken, there was, as always, nothing of note, no-one was smoking, there were no effects used such as dry ice or anything.
The photo was submitted to the news paper for further investigation, and they agreed that it was not smoke, and it wasn't an atmospheric effect.

I wasn't the photographer, but I was in attendance at the photo shoot (group of about 10 of us, from ages about 15/16 to mid thirties) and we were split into two groups, so two photographers were present in different parts of the cemetary.

It looks as though that there is an ethereal form holding its arms around the subject, or if you want to get sinister about it, trying to pull his head back to gain access to his neck?





Do you think that this is an actual apparition, or something else? There are other photos with the same guy in it, and there is nothing else around him.
Is this a protest by the graves owner, who doesn't wish their remains to be stood on or the scene of a photo shoot? Or is this a welcome from someone who has laid lonely for many years?


Sorry this is a hoax. I'll get to that in a second. YOu state with certainty that it wasn't smoke in the picture because the photographer doesn't smoke. You don't know unless you were there. And you were so defensive about it, especially because you weren't there, well, it put up a red flag. But it isn't smoke.

You also made a point to tell us the age of the photo, 8 years. Which is before the iphone and droid ghost apps. But if that photo is saved to your tablet or phone then it's fair game for those ghost in the photo apps. After some experimenting with a couple apps I ran into success on the droid app for ghost in the photo where the icon is a skull. It instantly injects a mist or a wisp or a full bodied apparition into any photo that you have saved on your device, your flikr gallery, facebook, imageshack, etc... Anyway on the skull icon ghost in the photo app there is a wisp that duplicates the one in your photo exactly. 100% match. If it was similar but not exact there is still the chance it could have been paranormal, but with 100% match it's a different story. It's been altered by the droid app with the skull icon under the ghost in the photo apps. So either your photographer is hoaxing you or you're pulling April Fools on us a few months early.

Sorry about that, but nothing paranormal here. If anyone doubts, download the app it's free and it shows the icon when you search for it. You may have to alter a couple hundred pics until you get the match but it's in their image files.



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 11:45 PM
link   
Now it could be a coincidence that the app matches the wisp in identical fashion. But the guys hand is behind his back, like he's holding a cigarette. But if you can actually copy the newspaper article and photo from the paper from 8 years ago that would give it more credibility and prove the phone app being an exact match is just a coincidence.



posted on Jan, 12 2012 @ 02:50 AM
link   
It looks paranormal to me... Smoke never, or super rarely ever has a tendril keeping form for the entire length of what is visible... This smoke like figure holds thickness throughout it's length which screams :"not smoke" to me...

for you smoker types, go try and recreate what is in this photo... bet you can't even come close, using even a cigar...
edit on 12-1-2012 by alienreality because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 12 2012 @ 02:55 AM
link   
reply to post by alienreality
 


I will take some tomorrow while holding a cigaret and show you that it looks the same. I am not saying that this is what occurred in the OP's picture but that is what it looks like.



posted on Jan, 12 2012 @ 11:18 AM
link   
reply to post by DrJay1975
 


What the hell? I WAS there when the photo was taken... I didn't say I wasn't...

Also, the photo has been saved to my Photobucket account since it was taken, along with hundreds of other photos from years ago.

Please show me an example of this '100% ghost app match' and I'll accept you think I'm lying.

I think it's hilarious you think everyone on this forum is out to lie to others, I have nothing to gain by lying or making it up.


EDIT: I have contacted the photographer to ask whether he still has the article and also began searching for the article online. I shall try to contact the paper too.

This is the EXIF data, if that helps. If it had been edited, it usually loses some of its values.
EXIF — this group of metadata is encoded in 770 bytes (0.8k)
Image Description Minolta DSC
Make Minolta Co., Ltd.
Camera Model Name DiMAGE 7Hi
Orientation Horizontal (normal)
Software Ver.1.00e
Modify Date 2004:07:12 19:28:20
7 years, 5 months, 30 days, 13 hours, 19 minutes, 34 seconds ago
Y Cb Cr Positioning Centered
Exposure Time 1/45
F Number 2.80
Exposure Program Program AE
ISO 200
Exif Version 0220
Date/Time Original 2004:07:12 19:28:20
7 years, 5 months, 30 days, 13 hours, 19 minutes, 34 seconds ago
Create Date 2004:07:12 19:28:20
7 years, 5 months, 30 days, 13 hours, 19 minutes, 34 seconds ago
Components Configuration Y, Cb, Cr, -
Brightness Value -6
Exif Image Size 1,920 × 2,560
Exposure Compensation 0
Max Aperture Value 2.8
Metering Mode Multi-segment
Light Source Unknown
Flash On, Fired
Focal Length 8.5 mm
Subject Area 1280 960 2560 1920
Flashpix Version 0100
Color Space sRGB
Interoperability Index Unknown (%01%02%01%09)
Interoperability Version (1 bytes binary data)
Custom Rendered Custom
Exposure Mode Auto
White Balance Auto
Digital Zoom Ratio 0
Focal Length In 35mm Format 33 mm
Scene Capture Type Standard
Gain Control Low gain up
Contrast Normal
Resolution 72 pixels/inch
Saturation Normal
Sharpness Normal
Subject Distance Range Distant
APP0
Ocad Revision 14,797
JFIF
JFIF Version 1.02
Resolution 1 pixels/None
File — basic information derived from the file.
File Type JPEG
MIME Type image/jpeg
Exif Byte Order Little-endian (Intel, II)
Encoding Process Baseline DCT, Huffman coding
Bits Per Sample 8
Color Components 3
File Size 178 kB
Image Size 810 × 1,080
Y Cb Cr Sub Sampling YCbCr4:2:0 (2 2)

Aperture 2.80
Scale Factor To 35 mm Equivalent 3.9
Shutter Speed 1/45
Circle Of Confusion 0.008 mm
Field Of View 57.2 deg
Focal Length 8.5 mm (35 mm equivalent: 33.0 mm)
Hyperfocal Distance 3.32 m
Light Value 7.5

Please feel free to use any EXIF data checker online and with the URL of the photo and see for yourself
edit on 12-1-2012 by Lulzaroonie because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 12 2012 @ 11:43 AM
link   
reply to post by leawyoming
 


A fake gravestone in a cemetery hundreds of years old? Get real, this cemetery is older than YOUR COUNTRY...



new topics

top topics



 
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join