Christmas Day Unknown Man Photo(updated version)

Originally posted by Ross Cross
Hello,

Sorry if this has already been mentioned, but I was just wondering about the area immediately behind the entity's neck. Is that distinctive line you see part of the door, or perhaps some decorations? It almost looks like cable.

I thought it could be a lampshade in front of his face. Is there a shade anywhere there or maybe a christmas decoration?

OK, stop. Just stop.

I am literally agog that this thread has gone on for 29 pages. I am literally stupefied. OP - nothing personal in my comments here, but I will elaborate exactly why I feel the way I do...

Firstly, I honestly believe that the only reason you have chosen this photo to post is because the child in the foreground is clear and sharp, and the guy standing in the background is blurry and ethereal-looking. If you GENUINELY want to know why, then read this post about a similar image, which has many comments by professional photographers with decades' worth of combined experience in dealing with this - and believe me - it's a very, very common, everyday occurrence with non-DSLR digital cameras:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

It's only 8 pages long - if you read it all, it will explain what's happening in your photo. If you want the short answer it's this: the camera sensor has detected the face of your nephew, and adjusted the timing of the flash (which was used in this photo) accordingly. The problem with this is that people that are standing at a different distance to the camera are not illuminated properly, and the result is usually a blurred appearance. Contributing to this photo is the light which is entering through the glass panes in the door. Due to the camera using the flash setting, this is resulting in over-exposure, which explains the blurry light around the guy's outline, and (believe it or not) perfectly explains why he has certain areas looking 'out of proportion' (such as a 'super skinny neck'). We know the camera model is a Sony DSC-H70, which is a compact camera. Compact cameras (ie. non-DSLR) or notorious for this. The height of the person is simple perspective. The additional photo you added somewhere around page 10 demonstrated from a slightly different angle the actual length of that hallway/entrance.

I honestly believe that if this figure in the background wasn't blurry with weird lighting surrounding him, you would not by trying to pass the photo off as anything else. Honestly, the link to the post I entered above has all the photographic experts you need explaining this phenomenon.

I will go one step further. It's Christmas morning. Your Dad is away on a business trip. Fine. But why is your nephew with you and your Mum opening Christmas presents? Why is your nephew not at home with HIS parents (your aunt and uncle) on Christmas morning? Why are HIS parents not there when you're all opening your presents? The present opening ritual of Christmas morning is a pretty important part of a family's Christmas. Did the nephew's parents just drop him off at your place for the morning, then leave? To pick him up later after the presents were open? On Christmas? This whole scenario is just nonsensical.

If this is genuinely your nephew, then I would suggest that the guy in the photo is your uncle, as in the father of your nephew who has brought the child around as part of a Christmas family function.

Look, I don't want you to actually do this, because I believe in people's privacy, but I can almost guarantee that if you posted a photo of your entire family (extended family - uncles and aunts inclusive), we would instantly be able to work out who this person in your photo is.

Look, as to whether this is a hoax or not - there is one thing leading me to suggest it is. Not trying to be personal here, but the fact that you have added to your story that this single photo makes you too scared to go into your own basement, and you have added embellishments throughout like Ouija boards and a Coat of Arms, and pot lids being moved during the night, just implies that you're trying to add a little extra 'scare factor' to the story.

Speaking of the pot lids photo - have you uploaded the original of this photo so the exif data can confirm when it was taken? The exif data will confirm the date, and the camera used (as you claim your mother had a number of cameras during this time frame). You obviously have it somewhere, as you were able to produce a copy of it, and I don't believe for a second that you 'cropped the original and only have the modified version', as you claimed with another photo. Nobody crops photos and deletes the originals, and NOBODY would bother cropping a picture of pot lids and alcohol bottles. Can you upload the original pot lid photo, please?

Regards,
Rewey

reply to post by Rewey

Speaking of the pot lids photo - have you uploaded the original of this photo so the exif data can confirm when it was taken? The exif data will confirm the date, and the camera used (as you claim your mother had a number of cameras during this time frame). You obviously have it somewhere, as you were able to produce a copy of it, and I don't believe for a second that you 'cropped the original and only have the modified version', as you claimed with another photo. Nobody crops photos and deletes the originals, and NOBODY would bother cropping a picture of pot lids and alcohol bottles. Can you upload the original pot lid photo, please?

Cant' wait to hear his excuse. It would only be the umpteenth time in this thread that he has not provided this and other data requests. He always has a pat answer like, my mother is using the computer, I am on the road, I am at the beach. What'll it be this time?

Originally posted by Pressthebutton
reply to post by 3NL1GHT3N3D1

 

Its a nikon, and it looked enough like a real person she didnt think much about and she was snapping so fast that she didnt pay much attention. Please dont doubt me

Gimp list the camera make as Sony, could it have been taken with another camera?

Originally posted by Pressthebutton

Its a nikon, and it looked enough like a real person she didnt think much about and she was snapping so fast that she didnt pay much attention. Please dont doubt me

Actually - that's one other inconsistency. You say your mother didn't notice the man when she took the photo because she was "snapping so fast".

But you posted another photo (somewhere around page 10, I think), which you claim was the photo taken immediately before the one in your original post, and that you couldn't find the photos taken after it.

But this photo immediately before was from a different angle and viewpoint. If she was really 'snapping so fast', you'd have a whole series of photos from virtually the same angle. But you don't.

So, I'm sorry, but this combined with my post just a few above is why I doubt you...

Regards,
Rewey

reply to post by Pressthebutton


nice thread OP. listen, the most important piece of data you can give us for investigation is to TAKE A PICTURE OF YOURSELF STANDING WHERE THE MAN IS from the same low angle where the original picture was taken. that will give us a clear idead of size/floating/etc.

the most convincing aspect of the photo is the cord wrapped around the man's neck and going down his back. Georgia has a rich history of war and native americans, so the woods where your house was built holds history.

please upload the 'perspective' photo before you hit vacation, k? thanks.

reply to post by Rewey


I just wanted to say that I crop and delete my photos when I resize them to post them online. I had no idea it even made a difference until this thread, so I don't think it's that crazy if he doesn't have the original.
I also don't think it's crazy if his mother didn't notice a figure in the background until after the photo was taken. On Christmas morning, I am always the one to take the pictures, and I don't stop to examine each photo on the tiny screen of my camera. While we're on the subject of cameras, I have 3, my new one, my old one, and my compact one, and I would not expect my teenage son to have any idea which one I used for any photo taken inside the house.
Also, you wouldn't be creeped out in your house if you had a picture like that? I'm scared to go in my own basement sometimes, and I am an adult. Without a photo of a creepy giant ghost in my house.
And it's not so crazy that the nephew is over for Christmas morning. The baby's mother could have had to work, or more likely she was present. I have been following this thread for the past day, have read every page, and I don't think he mentioned whether she was there or not- he only mentioned that he and his nephew were the only males in the house.
I have no idea if this picture is real or a hoax, but it is one of the more convincing ones I have come across. If it is real, he should email the photo to some ghost websites and see what they say. Maybe even get a paranormal investigator inside the house.

reply to post by sirbadazz


aha, finished the thread and see you did the size perspective shots.. so the man definately was not 8 feet tall. it was just an angle thatmade him look that way. other than getting more clarity on the cord on his neck, which doesnt look like part of the window in any way, there doesnt seem to be much more you can get. there could have been 100 guys hanged in that part of georgia during the war and no record would exist.

good luck with that knee brace. im wearing one of those right now..ugh.

reply to post by Rewey


I think you are the one who should "just stop". The points you have made have already been made, and for the most part addressed. If you dont like the thread, then leave- no-one is forcing you to be here.

Originally posted by Pressthebutton
reply to post by DancedWithWolves

 

I figure someone might come along and ask for proof that im really at the beach haha!

edit on 25-7-2012 by Pressthebutton because: (no reason given)

Photographs or I don't believe you are at the beach

Great comparrison pics (side by sides) ... even if the 'ghost' guy was closer I think he was not touching the floor level (suspended / floating etc) this is why he looks so tall ... such a shame that box was in the way ... then there could have been something else for the naysayers to deny

Have a great time at the beach

Woody

Originally posted by intrptr
reply to post by Rewey

 

Cant' wait to hear his excuse. It would only be the umpteenth time in this thread that he has not provided this and other data requests. He always has a pat answer like, my mother is using the computer, I am on the road, I am at the beach. What'll it be this time?

Hilarious intrptr ... most of us have a life off ATS you know ... maybe you should try it sometime

The OP has done an amazing job in this thread and his manners are impecable ... he is a credit to ATS membership and it's a true shame there are not more like him both here and in the 'real world' (that's the place not on the internet FYI) ... it's really not cool to be such a 'jobsworth' makes you come across as blinkered and anally retentive ... the guys on holiday and he's still posting when he can ... give him a break and relax a little.

Woody

... then there could have been something else for the naysayers to deny

Woody

Oh, Woodywitch, you won't believe it, but we skeptics would THANKFULLY take *any* evidence gladly where one can see there is clearly something "unnatural" worth investigating. Be it a floating person, or WHATEVER else which merits deeper investigation.

Sadly...in this case (and in 99% of similar ones) we have NOTHING - in fact, the pic, if anything, proves its not a ghost but a normal person. ALL we have is the claims of the OP

Originally posted by flexy123

... then there could have been something else for the naysayers to deny

Woody

Oh, Woodywitch, you won't believe it, but we skeptics would THANKFULLY take *any* evidence gladly where one can see there is clearly something "unnatural" worth investigating. Be it a floating person, or WHATEVER else which merits deeper investigation.

Sadly...in this case (and in 99% of similar ones) we have NOTHING - in fact, the pic, if anything, proves its not a ghost but a normal person. ALL we have is the claims of the OP

reply to post by Shadowcast


Interesting. Something immediately came to my mind when the people were discussing that man in the picture, and how the guy believes that aliens in human form walk among us. In the bible, god says that we entertain angels, unaware. Perhaps as some people believe, angels can be translated to alien or interdimensional being or whatever. We entertain aliens unaware. We entertain interdimensional beings unaware.

Originally posted by tl1977
reply to post by Rewey

 

I just wanted to say that I crop and delete my photos when I resize them to post them online. I had no idea it even made a difference until this thread, so I don't think it's that crazy if he doesn't have the original.

Hi tl1977... I'm saying that in this particular case, it is unlikely with regards to the pot lids photo. The reason I believe that is because he's already said the pot lid incident was a few years ago - I believe it was 2010. According to the OP, he's been able to go back and find this photo on his computer, and crop a version to upload here. He hasn't cropped the photo earlier for sharing online. So there should be no drama in sharing the original with us. It might only be a small issue, but one the OP was certainly adamant to share. I'm just saying it's also one element that's remarkably easy to verify, so no harm in asking for it...

Originally posted by tl1977
reply to post by Rewey

 

And it's not so crazy that the nephew is over for Christmas morning. The baby's mother could have had to work, or more likely she was present. I have been following this thread for the past day, have read every page, and I don't think he mentioned whether she was there or not- he only mentioned that he and his nephew were the only males in the house.

Again - I believe the OP has clearly stated that the only people present were himself, his mother and his nephew... but I could stand corrected...

Regards,
Rewey

So your thread has reached that point where the bullies mascarading as skeptics are taking their "I can't believe you people are still falling for this" shots. Keep your chin up OP and know that some posters will never give you the benefit of the doubt, no matter what you say, post or research. It is nearly impossible to prove something with one piece of evidence which is unproven in our material world, like the paranormal.

It's that digital ego thing that makes the bullies so insulting in their posts....and, I suspect, fear making them deny any and all proof, explanation and good faith effort you provide. All you can do is keep trying and let those who attack fester in their own unproven, as well, resolve.

I found in my long thread on the rocking horse that you reach a draw of sorts. The skeptics move on to the new flavor de jour and you have contributed what you can to the paranormal topics on ATS with your family's personal experience. All we can be is another piece of the puzzle snapped into place...questions will always linger.

Please pass onto your mother how very, very proud she has a right to be over the young man she has raised. ATS can bring out the best in people, but it can also easily bring out the worst as posters don't have to "own" their anonymous deriding pot shots. You - have demonstrated tolerance and kindness far beyond the ilk of most teens and adults. It has been an honor to read this thread because of your patient and respectful handling of the many questions any evidence raises.

At this number of pages, posters will not necessarily have read the thread and that is to be expected. You will reanswer questions that you have answered before and will suffer the driveby drivel from those who expect you to prove the entire existence of the paranormal field from your one photo. Every story brought to ATS in this category is dismissed by some because only a holy grail will do. That OP- is not your burden - regardless of how skeptics throw it upon you.

Hang in there OP and I have one very important piece of advice for you given all that you have shared in this thread. That advice is to bring your neglected girlfriend a nice gift from your stay at the beach - and perhaps an ATS t-shirt.

You have done a great job OP and are a credit to this site. Have a fun vacation!

Peace

Originally posted by Thunda
reply to post by Rewey

 

I think you are the one who should "just stop". The points you have made have already been made, and for the most part addressed. If you dont like the thread, then leave- no-one is forcing you to be here.

I'm sorry, Thunda - I thought this was a forum where people can discuss their thoughts. All I have done is discuss what i honestly believe, and then backed it up.

You say the points I raised have already been made - please show me where in these 30 pages anyone has addressed the issue of why compact cameras create images like this? For the first 10 or so pages, a number of people, INCLUDING THE OP, said they were hoping that photographic experts could join the discussion. I have joined the discussion, outlined EXACTLY why the camera has taken the image it has, and then included a link to another thread that has another EIGHT PAGES explaining exactly what the OP asked for, with further photographic examples.

So no - I was providing EXACTLY what the OP has asked for - some perspective from a person with photographic experience, and provided examples.

How about instead of suggesting I leave, why don't you stand up and point out how my analysis of the photographic aberration is wrong? Then perhaps provide your own suggestion rather than hiding behind a two-line retort?

Regards,
Rewey

Originally posted by Rewey

OK, stop. Just stop.

I am literally agog that this thread has gone on for 29 pages. I am literally stupefied. OP - nothing personal in my comments here, but I will elaborate exactly why I feel the way I do...

No - you didn't just provide photographic expertise. You asked - no - you demanded that the thread be stopped. Just stopped. You asked for no more pages to be added in discussion.

Your photographic expertise is very, very welcome. Your expertise, however, cannot address the fact that this photograph is of a man, regardless of where he was standing, who OP says was not there.

Your demands in your opening were nonsensical. That is what is being questioned. We are on a discussion forum and you demanded discussion cease based on photographic analysis that doesn't answer one of the main questions - how did his mom photograph someone who wasn't there?

Contributions from experts are very welcome - but you clouded your resume with demands that were inappropriate from the get go. That's why, I suspect, you are getting the responses you got. It has nothing to do with your analysis. So yes, please stay to discuss, but your demands to stop, just stop are unlikely to be met so satisfying you will be - well - impossible if that is the bar you set yourself. Give the kid a break. Honestly. He has done an amazing job in this thread. The rest of us should follow his lead...on decorum.

Peace.

Originally posted by DancedWithWolves
So your thread has reached that point where the bullies mascarading as skeptics are taking their "I can't believe you people are still falling for this" shots. Keep your chin up OP and know that some posters will never give you the benefit of the doubt, no matter what you say, post or research. It is nearly impossible to prove something with one piece of evidence which is unproven in our material world, like the paranormal.

It's that digital ego thing that makes the bullies so insulting in their posts....and, I suspect, fear making them deny any and all proof, explanation and good faith effort you provide.

Hi DWW... Honestly - I don't believe it's a case of bullies masquerading as skeptics, and I certainly disagree with the digital ego thing, on my part anyway.

I see it this way (as I outlined above in my first contribution to this thread): If that photo was a crystal clear, sharp image of a person, and the OP came to ATS and said 'I can clearly see the person, but he wasn't there when i took the photo', you find it very difficult to believe him.

That's why I took the time to outline why compact cameras (which we know was used for the photo) have a very, very common issue with regards to using flash settings when people are different distances from the camera. I even found an old thread in which different photographic experts discussed it in great detail, and provided photos of their own in support.

So to many of us, this photo is simply a picture of a guy standing in the hallway, and it is 100% consistent with everything we know about the limitations and flaws of compact cameras. My entire argument above was simply that - if it was a nice clear photo, this thread wouldn't exist.

Honestly, to everyone who wants to berate me for contributing - the motto of the site is 'Deny Ignorance'. I believe I have very clearly established why the blurry, ethereal photo looks the way it does, and it is nothing more sinister than a simple, common camera aberration. If you want to ignore that and attack me instead, then go right ahead... I was just hoping to outline why I don't believe the OP. I do not need to believe every thread that is created on ATS. I am still entitled to, and capable of, independent thought...

Regards,
Rewey

Originally posted by transubstantiation

Originally posted by Ross Cross
Hello,

Sorry if this has already been mentioned, but I was just wondering about the area immediately behind the entity's neck. Is that distinctive line you see part of the door, or perhaps some decorations? It almost looks like cable.

I thought it could be a lampshade in front of his face. Is there a shade anywhere there or maybe a christmas decoration?

There was a reef on the door kinda where his belly is