Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Tired of the Doom and Gloom, Tell me what you think of this picture

page: 1
6
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 04:27 PM
link   
Was taken about 1936, This is Grandma (Louise) and Grandpa(Alvin). they had been dating for awhile and had a lover's tift about something long forgotten now, and Alvin excepted a date with a former girlfriend. They went to the mountains for a picnic. Girlfriend took a picture on her camera.Alvin didn't have a camera.
Louise stayed home and caused all kinds of discontent,
Wouldn't talk to Alvin. Got a letter in the mail from the girlfriend but threw it in the trash. Her father told her to read it. It was this picture. what happened? We have been told that it could be a double exposure but Louise had never met the girlfriend.




posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 04:31 PM
link   
reply to post by copperhead12
 


What an interesting pic, and story Copper! It does appear to me, at least, a double exposure. But, still slightly chilling to look at...

Thanks for posting....


Des



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 04:32 PM
link   
interesting photo, maybe 1 of the resident experts could advise as i really don't know.
it kind of shows they where meant to be



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 04:36 PM
link   
Thats really bizarre OP. I dont really have any answers. Maybe someone will have idea.



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 04:43 PM
link   
Cool picture and great story!

I believe it looks like a double exposure or some other processing issue. For me the giveaway is the clear line that shows where the two pictures overlap. (See, for instance, the clear line down his leg.) A true apparition I wouldn't think would come encased in a perfectly rectangular form. So based on the picture alone I wouldn't say this is simply a double exposure.

But, the story is curious. If this came off of the girlfriends camera and she never was around this woman. How certain is that story? Could have been changed over time - is it possible this was actually your grandpa's camera and not hers?

And... maybe I just need more coffee... but I'm assuming the woman in the photo was deceased at the time the picture was taken so the implication is that this is a ghost?

Thanks for posting!



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 04:59 PM
link   
The woman, Louise, was not deceased. She was only about 28. Stories get embellished all the time. But I have heard the same story all my life. It does look like a double exposure, I have always thought it was. But I still have questions. Guess I always will. Just had to tell the story and see what you guys thought.



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 05:22 PM
link   
Double exposure, almost certainly -- camera is on a tripod and the photographer, while getting the shot set up, accidentally exposed 1/2 the film, didn't advance it, and once your grandparents were in place, took the second exposure.



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 05:30 PM
link   
Neither of them were there in the mountains that day.The perspective and shadows in the photo are wrong.



These are telegraph poles (or a fence?) I'd guess I've highlighted,if so Alvin and Louise must be at least 100 feet tall.Even if they are standing on the edge of a steep slope and looking down into a valley,they don't appear to have anything to stand on unless they're balancing precariously on the edge.

The shadows from the trees in the background show the light source to be in front of them and to the right,while the shadows on him indicate it to be immediately to their right or even behind them.

I think the photo was faked by sandwiching the two negatives together to make it look as if they'd been to the mountains that day,all to make Louise jealous.



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 05:40 PM
link   
reply to post by copperhead12
 


Odd, I just replied to another user about his weird picture.

Like everyone else, I think your picture is double exposure, but I wouldn't rule out thoughtform.

Here's the other person's thread. My replies there may interest you - if you're into weird stuff.



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 05:55 PM
link   
reply to post by Imagewerx
 


What are the odds of a photo being manipulated like that by a common person in 1936? Do you doubt the authenticity of the OP or just the picture? Killjoy much?



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 06:15 PM
link   
That lady needs to get some sun. I know pale skin was fashionable back then, but c'mon, she looks like a ghost!



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 06:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by Bleeeeep
reply to post by Imagewerx
 


What are the odds of a photo being manipulated like that by a common person in 1936? Do you doubt the authenticity of the OP or just the picture? Killjoy much?


The OP asked for any possible explanations of the photo,I gave what I thought was the most plausible one which is the story is true but the photo isn't.Image manipulation goes back,quite some before 1936,they just had to wait another 50 or so years before the clone tool came out.
edit on 17-12-2012 by Imagewerx because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 12:05 AM
link   
reply to post by copperhead12
 
Thanks for posting this and the details add some historical colour too


For me, I'd immediately opt for exposure-error because of their poses. Grandpa Alvin's leaning in towards Grandma Louise and they're both doing that awkward 'face to camera' thing that always looks so...ahem...natural.

If either of the figures was a ghost, phantom or psychical love imprint, one would have to ask who the other thought they were posing with?



posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 12:08 AM
link   
reply to post by copperhead12
 


There is at least a double exposure there, otherwise Grandpa Alvin has a LOT of starch on his left pant leg...





edit on 18/12/12 by Chadwickus because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 01:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by Chadwickus
reply to post by copperhead12
 


There is at least a double exposure there, otherwise Grandpa Alvin has a LOT of starch on his left pant leg...





edit on 18/12/12 by Chadwickus because: (no reason given)


First thing I noticed as well! Someone has done some sort of overlay, by the looks. Or taken a double exposure.

edit on 18/12/12 by pretty_vacant because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 10:06 PM
link   
Gra'ndpa all ways had alot of starch, that said,,,,,, Grandma didn't even didn't not even know the girl friend's name
when the argument happened. She was just upset and threw a fit.
Girlfriend sent the pic to Grandma and there was Grandma holding tight to Grandpa. Girlfriend backed off and Grandma got Grandpa.
Girlfriend sent a present before the wedding because she knew Grandma had him. The picture told her .May very be a double exposure but Grandma was not there in person.... just in spirit.
If you love him, hold him....like Grandma!!!!
No telephone poles, no double exposures. Just hold her or him.
Will send the back of the photo tomorrow. what Grandma said!!!!
edit on 22-12-2012 by Kandinsky because: edited out the excessive spaces tut tut



posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 01:36 PM
link   
It looks to me that it was intentionally created. Back in the day this is how hoaxers created some ghost photographs, and they look almost identical to this photograph. I do not know who would have hoaxed it, but the edges around the woman give it away in my opinion.



posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 05:02 PM
link   
I only just realised from the second post by the o/p above that it's supposed to show a "ghost".

I reckon it was done using an early home made version of a Cokin double exposure filter like this......

Cokin Double Exposure Filter

I used to have a whole Cokin filter set back in the pre-digital days and used one of the above filters quite a lot.The trick was to get the overlap between the two exposures on some natural feature such as a lamp post,telegraph pole,tree trunk etc so it wasn't as obvious as it is in the photo in question.



posted on Dec, 21 2012 @ 08:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by Imagewerx

Originally posted by Bleeeeep
reply to post by Imagewerx
 


What are the odds of a photo being manipulated like that by a common person in 1936? Do you doubt the authenticity of the OP or just the picture? Killjoy much?


The OP asked for any possible explanations of the photo,I gave what I thought was the most plausible one which is the story is true but the photo isn't.Image manipulation goes back,quite some before 1936,they just had to wait another 50 or so years before the clone tool came out.
edit on 17-12-2012 by Imagewerx because: (no reason given)


Not manipulated, back in the days when I owned a camera I got my coffe table in England turn up on a picture taken in a windmill in Holland. I have no idea how that happened but I wouldn't have a clue how to manipulate a picture.I'm going to guess that the developers messed up.
edit on 21-12-2012 by LEL01 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 21 2012 @ 11:46 PM
link   
I agree double exposure! I see the lines.I see the poles. However Grandma had never met this girl. Grandma was alive and well and wanting her man. Not everyone had an Iphone .r anything else in the 1930's. Okay I buy it... the company/person who did the developing made a booboo. But they double exposed a pic of Grandma onto Grandpa's photo made by a girlfriend that Grandma had never met. Into the camera of the girl friend. WHAT... just for fun?
How would the developer know? Coincidence? Well, Grandma and grandma married and here I am.
What if some photo developer had put someone elses pic there? Was it fate?





new topics

top topics



 
6
<<   2 >>

log in

join



atslive.com

hi-def

low-def