Eerie photograph I took, analysis needed.

I theorize that is a dimensional anomaly

For some reason, the photo reminds me of the Solway Firth Spaceman Photo, particularly because the anomaly appears only in one photo in a sequence.

Source

a reply to: NarcolepticBuddha

You're right man, that exactly what I see!! Kind of freak!! that's pretty clear that it's the shape of a person. Right next to him, we can see a pair of leg's running or walking... but nothing over the waist!! Very strange!!

Very nice picture BTW

Initially I thought the picture looked like a grown adult facing the water with a child behind.



HL = Humanoid Leg
PL = Partner leg

The area darker than the rest was discounted as it could be a residual of the background. With that said, just as how in this dimension people will take their pets with them on their walk to the beach, maybe in another dimension this was a humanoid with a similar companion, if not their child.

Very interesting! The figure to the left can easily be identified as looking humanoid, as for the image on the right..

There's some odd shadow effects, and it somewhat bugs my eyes to try to interpret it...At first I was thinking some weird bird figure, since those shadows are the most easily seen, but looking closer it seems I can make out something else.. what it looks like to me, is a person wearing something like a cloth wrapping around their waist. Only their legs can really be made out but if you look above, it kinda looks like the upper part of the figure is.... phasing? I'm not sure the word exactly, but the shadow is not as obvious, but still there if you look hard.

I'm going to toss this out there since I had a chance to interview Dr. Michio Kaku (Theoretical Physicist) who believes the following.

He says:"there are vibrations of different universes right here, right now. We're just not in tune with them. There are probably other parallel universes in our living room - this is modern physics. This is the modern interpretation of quantum theory, that many worlds represents reality."

According to him, if we were to get the vibrations right similar to as in tuning a radio, we would see all sorts of weird and wild things that exist (but we just can't see them because were out-of-sync).

Nobel Prize winner in Physics (1979) - Professor Steven Weinberg supports the idea of a multiverse. He says that there are an infinite number of parallel realities coexisting with us in the same room.

"There are hundreds of different radio waves being broadcast all around you from distant stations. At any given instant, your office or car or living room is full of these radio waves. However if you turn on a radio, you can listen to only one frequency at a time; these other frequencies are not in phase with each other.

Each station has a different frequency, a different energy. As a result, your radio can only be turned to one broadcast at a time. Likewise, in our universe we are tuned into the frequency that corresponds to physical reality. But there are an infinite number of parallel realities coexisting with us in the same room, although we cannot tune into them."

Multiverse



With that being said, or,,,,,

It could just be an anomaly such as a flying piece of sea foam, trash (or other) that was in the several seconds of time-lapse and were using our pareidolia to make it into something that our brain can accept...

Or,

it's an reflection anomaly or even perhaps a 'ghost image' from a prior photograph burn-in

Or,

It's a smudge created on a filter placed in front of the lense as part as some experiment to see what kind of analysis and answers you'd get.

Hi there,
I'm new here and this just happened to be the first thread I've read through. It attracted me because I am a photographer by trade - have been for well over 10 years. Lovely images - I also live in the Western Cape, just further south, and I also enjoy taking these type of time-lapse shots of the ocean shore. You asked for analysis, and I'm only going to say what I see as a photographer and will try to be unbiased. I see that Rob (I think) has already commented in a similar vein. Time lapse image in the late afternoon/evening in summer on heavily overcast day, so the 4 second exposure at F22 seems a reasonable length of time to give that amount of fogging effect on the water. Judging from the aerial images provided in the thread, where the ghost-image figure is standing would certainly be shallow.
What I see is this: a person has walked into the frame, creating first the far-right hand, more vague shadow, then stopped creating the more solid shadow, but is slightly turned towards the photographer (the left hand, most clear of the figures). Then he noticed that you are trying to get a shot, possibly 'ducked'as people tend to do when they suddenly notice they are in a phptgrapher's way unintentionally, and has been good enough to turn around and walk out of frame again - creating that middle image where some people have thought it was perhaps an animal because the knees are the 'wrong' way. I have played around with this kind of imagery quite a bit (it's great fun) and even had an exhibition piece up with three such shots. Now - I know that you are quite adamant that you saw no one walk into to your shot's frame, but another thing I know from personal experience is that when I am intently focused on getting the shot, whether it's action or landscape work, sometimes things end up up in the shot that I wasn't even conscious of at the time of shooting - I only see them after reviewing or loading the images on to the computer. I don't think that you are in any way deliberately trying to mislead anyone, and I'm certainly not saying that more supernatural explanations are completely out of the question - but unfortunately as has already been stated, photographs are the least convincing evidence of ghosts/supernatural occurances. For me, knowing what I know about photography, it's the most likely explanation. Have I seen things I can't explain? Absolutely - but I don't think this is one of them - sorry

a reply to: VreemdeVlieendeVoorwep

Tell me how accurate I am VVV.

That was a friend and you know of the older photo it's from. You "did something to your camera" that caused this.

Hi there VVV,

I have not read all the replies, so if I repeat anything, I do apologize.

I think it might have been someone behind you who's silhouette has been cast against some water mist that was there in the air for a moment. Not too sure where the natural light is coming from though, it seems like the sun was towards the right. Never the less, I believe it is possible for the natural light to cast that silhouette against the mist, and your shutter being open at the perfect moment. It might even be your silhouette.

Either that, or it is the ghost of Ingrid Jonker Assuming you are from SA (Which I got from your name).

Just my two cents, might be wrong, might be right.

Lekker Dag!

Nobody seems to be mentioning this, but a ghost would be impossible to capture with long exposure.

Their appearances - assuming they are real - are short, very "light" in presence and usually gone in seconds or a blink of an eye.

Those kinds of rapid movements are impossible for the camera to pick up. That's actually the reason why the rocks are focused and the sea is blurry. In a 5 second exposure, the rocks don't move, which means they will appear perfect. However, the ocean doesn't stop for those 5 seconds, which means that the camera is going to smear those movements all over the picture, making it blurry.

That means that a figure like a ghost wouldn't even be there long enough to be captured in the picture, the same way even a person passing in front of the camera would appear as a smoke trail and not as a shadow or human figure. And that's a person, a solid object with volume and matter, and it becomes a blur...

...so something that is already a blur... you get my point, I'm sure.

I don't have an explanation as to why the person taking the photograph didn't see anyone in front of the camera, but I would first consider being distracted by something else (like a text message or whatever) than betting on ghosts...

originally posted by: nomadone407

originally posted by: NarcolepticBuddha

originally posted by: VreemdeVlieendeVoorwep
a reply to: NarcolepticBuddha

Here is a crop of the artifact in question.

vvv

Noticed it right away! Definitely looks like the shape of a person. The proportions are exact and unmistakable.

I see a boy and his dog.

I suggest you get your eyes tested or do you mean, it looks kinda like.. etc.


What I see

Could it be a reflection?
Was there anybody near?

a reply to: JohnnyAnonymous

I love the idea of parallel realities, and science-fiction films that depict this probability. Star Trek's Mr. Data used a device to shift himself to a higher vibration to see and stop a species that was killing/eating humans.

One thing that puzzles me is why these parallel realities exist right on the Earth's surface where we are. For instance in the photo that's the subject of this thread, why isn't this person(s) standing hundreds of feet above us, or below us. Why must his "Earth" take the exact same position in space that ours occupies? Is the Earth vibrating at millions of frequencies simultaneously....creating a "reality" for everyone, regardless of his/her/its vibration frequency?

Wouldn't it be cool if you died, and was born again as a baby at a different vibration on Earth again? Live a million lives without ever leaving the planet. (Until it eventually goes cold, or is destroyed)
-cwm

originally posted by: GarrusVasNormandy
Nobody seems to be mentioning this, but a ghost would be impossible to capture with long exposure.

Their appearances - assuming they are real - are short, very "light" in presence and usually gone in seconds or a blink of an eye.

That means that a figure like a ghost wouldn't even be there long enough to be captured in the picture, the same way even a person passing in front of the camera would appear as a smoke trail and not as a shadow or human figure. And that's a person, a solid object with volume and matter, and it becomes a blur...

Makes sense.

It almost looks as if a man is facing something. He appears to wear a hat, maybe sunglasses, blue shorts, and a short sleeve shirt. The other figure may be another figure bent at the waist with his face looking at the camera. I don't know. I've been on ats for 5 years now and just finally made an account. So hello all you crazy, intriguing, brilliant people. My mind has been confined for far too long, I'm letting hell break loose

a reply to: VreemdeVlieendeVoorwep

Well being also a keen photographer for 30+years here is my thoughts.

Very interesting image exif data was still attached so Nikon D3100 18-55 mm Lens set at 18mm iso 100 f22 4 second shutter speed and if your clock was set correctly taken on 15th of March 2014.

Looks to me like someone walked into the field of view, the part that looks like a pair of legs and possibly the body ie not a complete figure looks like the person walking just a you start your exposure then stopped and the rest of the exposure was long enough to record his shape.

You wouldn't be the first person not to notice someone walk into a shot after the button is pressed and you wont be the last.

Hi everyone, I apologize for not being on here much, but yeah, work work work.
I will address some questions in this post though.

JonathanandHeather:

Also the apparition facing you looks fairly young. Are you in the age range of the average surfer?

Why were you taking pics?

Did you sense anythjng there?

See anything with your naked eye?

Have you been there before? Have you been drawn back?

If you mean in middle twenties, then no, I am not.

I was taking pictures because I love taking pictures, and this area makes for some beautiful pictures.

I did not sense anything there, also saw nothing with my naked eye.

Yes, I live actually very close to this area, and I am drawn there many times.

Staroth:

I see a male standing there with what looks like a cat. (?) Are there any tales/stories from this area on ghost or maybe a death past or recent?

Except for some of the stories that some members posted. One story is of a young man that drowned there in early March of this year.

Rob48:

He was only in the water up to his ankles.

I have told you the water there is deeper than that. As part of trying to find a rational explanation, I am going to try this weekend (weather permitting) to go to the exact spot and verify this. Of course conditions won't be exactly the same, but it might give us a good indication.

Moresby:

No it would only prove you can duplicate the image using that technique.

Mate, I know exactly what you mean. However, for the sake of accuracy, I think best would be if I go back and do some comparison shots. The water depth is a big factor. If someone stood in the frame, ankle depth, as some believe, then we will know. I know however it is deeper than ankle depth there. It would be impossible for someone to stand there as they do in the artifact, if indeed the water is more than ankle depth.

Pizzavan:

I have got a question for the op, have you ever taken a picture since you have had that camera Nikon D3100 of a guy or dog/cat standing in that position that is showing up as this anomaly?

I seriously doubt it. But then again, I have taken thousands of pictures with this camera, very difficult to say. However, only about 400 on this 16gig card that was in the camera at that time. And on that card, no human or animal standing in that position.

Imagewerx:

My apologies if you've already explained this. When you took the photo,was the camera on a tripod (it has to have been for a 4 second exposure),and did you use the automatic timer function to open the shutter and stand back while the photo was being taken,i.e. you weren't looking through the viewfinder. (Yes I know the viewfinder goes black when taking a photo when the mirror comes up,but I thought I'd ask anyway.)

Yes, indeed it was on a tripod. Correct, I use the automatic timer, set to a 2 sec delay, before the shutter is released. Its done to elimanate any movement, thus elimanate blurring. I was not looking through the viewfinder as this took place. I was looking at the scene, and my equipment.

JohnnyAnonymous:

Or,

It's a smudge created on a filter placed in front of the lense as part as some experiment to see what kind of analysis and answers you'd get.

Mate, I have not spoken to you in a long time! Thanks for replying in this thread. I know you also quite an avid photographer yourself. Honestly mate, a smudge on a filter to get reaction on here? That I would never do. However, I can understand having to mention all possible possibilities. There was no filter on the lens at this time. I do occassionally use polorizing and neutral density filters, but in this instance, no filter was used.

Stina7

Judging from the aerial images provided in the thread, where the ghost-image figure is standing would certainly be shallow.

The aerial images were not taken on the day or time of day the pictures was captured. This was 2 to 2 and a half hours before low tide, so the tide was still rather high, not high tide, but not as low as those aerial shots indicate. The water was deeper than ankle depth.

Muzzleflash:

Tell me how accurate I am VVV.

That was a friend and you know of the older photo it's from. You "did something to your camera" that caused this.

Not very accurate at all my old friend. I would not deliberately do something like this.

Metodex:

Could it be a reflection?
Was there anybody near?

A reflection, I do not know. I was setup on the rocks you see in the picture.

wmd2008:

Looks to me like someone walked into the field of view, the part that looks like a pair of legs and possibly the body ie not a complete figure looks like the person walking just a you start your exposure then stopped and the rest of the exposure was long enough to record his shape.

You wouldn't be the first person not to notice someone walk into a shot after the button is pressed and you wont be the last.

As a photographer, this was my first thought, and the most reasonable explanation. But I am sure there was no one in the shot. The depth of the water there, also makes it difficult, since they would be at least up to their knees in water, or even more.

This is why I will try to go this weekend back there, and take some shots with the help of an assistant. I am searching for an answer, as much as everybody else on here.

vvv

It would probably haunt me at night.

a reply to: JiggyPotamus

And you know what? Last night I dreamt about it. I put it down however to the constant thinking of a possible answer, or solution to this artifact. My mind just won't rest until I am satisfied.
As a photographer, I would agree with others, that its someone in the shot. But I also know, there was no one in the shot.

If someone moved into the shot as it was being taken, the "ghost trail" would have been longer, and more towards the right of the frame. If it was someone standing there, there sure as hell I would have noticed it.

vvv

Its not a ghost at all, but an echtoplasmic manifestation. Bending down to feel the water when feet felt wet, then straightening up(so both images are of one person only) and skimming over the water, but feet only immersed ankle deep. Meeting some people dressed like your av at the other end and ending up in a complex metallic structure/ spaceship, could even be of alien origin and told to go into an area room no S 22 for something to do with blood tests . When asked someone(human looking in a grey dress, kind of space suit with epaulettes) where am I? They say Malaysia
reply to: zazzafrazz

Its a young male with a hair cut that reminds me if a bowl type cut in cargo pants knit belt and he's looking back. The rest of the image is of 2 others older. That's what i see.