Need Analysis of this picture - Please help

reply to post by The_Modulus



The original JPG without the anomaly is gone. He cleared out his recycling bin and I'm not sure if he can undelete/retrieve the file.

Originally posted by nenothtu
reply to post by thechi

 

@spacepunk: why would the DPI resolution matter to you? are you printing the picture out to view it? The original is only 72 dpi, which tells a printer how big to print it, not how big the image is, or how fine the actual resolution of the image is. The resolution of the original image is 3264x2448 pixels, which would print out at 115.1 cm x 86.4cm at 72 dpi. The dpi resolution can be altered to whatever you like, without affecting the image quality. It will only affect the print out size and quality.

In comparison, a normal 35mm image is 300 dpi (the grains on the film). 72 dpi is for screen use, and not much else. From what you are saying, people could consider a 640x480 image is a good as a 1280x1024, and that there's no difference.

I'll have to call it a fake without a better picture.

Originally posted by thechi
The original JPG without the anomaly is gone. He cleared out his recycling bin and I'm not sure if he can undelete/retrieve the file.

Figures......

But no matter. I believe the people wanting the original Ebay photo only want it to proof that both pictures were taken in the same timeframe (see: spec of dust for proof!!!) and the spooky one was edited afterward so to proof this a HOAX.

I really don't care about the Ebay photo not being found (expected it) 'cause i still think your friend is pulling your leg.

But people need to remember the title of this thread " Need Analysis of this picture - Please help ", i do believe you never stated it was real you just requested help in answering the question of what you're seeing.....well, glad to be of assistance.

I think it looks like a small picture was in the other side of the lens when the pic was took. That's my $.02!

It looks like Buzz Lightyear flat out!

hmmm, well I see a dead person lyin on the grass with his feet as a close up. but hey thats me, i see weird stuff anyway

it also looks like an old chevy

wonder what it is

reply to post by thechi


It looks like a reflection of outside, or a picture of outside, with trees in the backround, and maybe a house? and it looks like the front of a person off to the right side with a hand or arm pointing at something

I was watching the latest installment of the Librarian series the other night. There is a scene where the librarian finds exactly this type of object. He notices an image too, and then uses a light to project the image. This apparently is the correct way to use this object.

Honestly, call me crazy, I see a person lying across on the yellow object and if you look just right of the crack down the lens you can see possibly another person...Probably just making something out of nothing...

First, I don't see how you get an image to appear on a lens, then disappear in the second photo. The second photo is still on the flickr page, 2nd image.

If there really is a picture, it looks like a white-shirted arm on the right, and someone laying or falling back, knees up, and dressed in white. Got a white blindfold on, too.

Could be a table of sorts behind the "arm" and in front of the trees

[edit on 10-12-2008 by jdub297]

[edit on 10-12-2008 by jdub297]

To Thechi, (and eveybody who's still puzzling)

I have been kinda busy working last week but i'm also still trying to find out what's in the pic......so we haven't given up hope but where the h*ll is Thechi. We haven't heard anything from you anymore.....

I have found some other interesting features but i have to put them in MSpaint (the greatest program on earth...... )to point 'm out......

Believe me ,i'm gonna find out what is in this picture............but if your friend could give us some pointers here Thechi it would be much appreciated!!!

Oh ps: one more question, you say it was taken on a Elmer's science project display. But how the h*ll was this thing setup. I mean was it upright like you're suppose to use it or is one of the "flippy side thingy's" used as the base on which you placed your lens????

Get back to me on that one ,will you???.....thanx.

[edit on 10/12/2008 by operation mindcrime]

It looks like buzz lightyear laying on a table with some bushes in a room with off white walls

reply to post by operation mindcrime


I'm still here, I just don't have much to say about this pic anymore. I don't think we are going to ever see what's really there, that's my .02 cents

reply to post by thechi


HeThechi,

Do you think you could get me a photo of the camera your friend used??

Why??

Well because of this:



So i really need to see the front of the camera to see which color it has and possible damage.......

It is supposed to be a Sony Cybershot DSC T70...

Thanx


[edit on 11/12/2008 by operation mindcrime]

That victorian staircase seems to be the "Y" in Sony........ The frontplate with the sony logo on it seems to be reflective so what we're looking at is the object being photographed refelecting in the camera reflecting in the lens. And only the Sony logo isn't reflecting....that's why it's the only sharp image in the lens reflection.....are you still with me???


Peace......

[edit on 11/12/2008 by operation mindcrime]

reply to post by operation mindcrime

sometimes with digital cameras the ccd and autofocus will show the reflection off of glass or a shiny surface, what you are seeing is a reflection of light and the image outside of the storage unit probably the perimeter of the storage area i cannot see any human forms and the angle of the glass is obscuring the photographers reflection if you dispute the sensitiity try looking at your at remote while pressing buttons with the cameras view screen you will see the little IR light blinking, yes the ccd is that sensitive but is not sensitive enough to register military type IR illumination. this is probably a waste of writing time as im sure this wont be posted i believe the grammar and spelling i this post to be correct ===============================================

It got a plasmatic image. Mirrors, crystals, candles, etc. gets charged with energy when situations loaded with emotions happens. Mirrors are said to become inter dimensional portals. A roughly similar ESP phenomenon happened in this situation: www.youtube.com...

If you believe in radiesthesy you might want to confirm using a pendulum or a rod.

reply to post by Ramkar


Plasmatic image....my *ss. What we see here is simple science. When you know the kind of camera that was used and you learn a little about how lenses work and what reflections are then you can come to the same conclusion i did.
But the sh*tty part about 5 days and nights of constantly looking at a picture and trying out new theories that eventualy nobody cares anymore.

Were are you now, Chi....comes to mind. Cause he posted on ATS that he needed help. I have given him this to my best ability and what do you get ...........................

I'm real sorry if this didn't turn out to be something mystical as you may have hoped but that just the way it is. Please apologize to your friend on my behalve 'cause he wasn't pulling your leg and what you both saw in the picture is indeed very real..

"If you believe in radiesthesy you might want to confirm using a pendulum or a rod."

And if you believe in logic you will read the intire thread and draw your own conclusion........

Peace and def. out...............

ps: it's been fun................

edit: ahhhh...finaly...we can get some rest....oh and coffee!!!!

[edit on 11/12/2008 by operation mindcrime]

reply to post by operation mindcrime


Well, I got about as far with it as I could, and then ran nose-first into a brick wall. I finally pulled the EXIF info out of the e-bay copy, but it didn't jive with the EXIF of the "anomalous" photo, and was off by nearly a year. I'd have to conclude that one or the other was doctored, but couldn't say by whom. Could be as simple as an EXIF re-write if the ebay image. No doubt though that both were taken at the same time, based on the dust specks you pointed out. Even I couldn't manage to leave the same two dust specks alone for a year.

Also, the crop you did of the upper half of the image showed that the scene was quite a bit closer than the "reflected" version would indicate, and if you compare YOUR reflected image with the original, you'll see that they are nearly identical, with a wee bit of distortion.

I can't get much further on it, but roger THAT on the coffee!

nenothtu out

Well obviously thechi isn't going to react anymore so waiting for a couple of requests i placed is useless. So i'm gonna sum up what we've got so far and ask moderator to close this thread.

Let's start with what was provided by thechi:

Ofcourse the picture



The camera used

Sony Cybershot DSC T70



Now we've already concluded that it was strange that the org. Ebay photo and the "spooky" photo had different time stamps but since thechi wasn't able to provide us with the org. Ebay photo we cannot conclude anything from this.

Second is the story about his friend magikshroom that doesn't seem to make any sence. Obviously his friend wasn't banned from ATS as he stated and only made one post with his account.

magikshroom post history

Leaving this for what it is let's continue.....

Looking at the "spooky" photo we've also concluded that whatever image could be seen in the lens it is cut right down the middle and reflected in the bottom half.



This something lenses do when looking at it from a certain distance and angle. You can look at the image as if made up from a couple of stages.
first you have the blurry image and below it is an even blurrier image and the right of the image you have a clear image of a white object (staircase)
with every step the image looses focus and become blurrier.
The white blob on the right (which looks like a staircase) seems to be more "clear" and "focussed" then anything else in the photo.
The only thing that could have caused this if this part was reflected less times than the image itself......

Now given the front surface of the camera it appears to be reflective metal and when taking a picture the object being photographed would reflect on the surface of the camera. Because of the lens infront of the camera the reflected image of the surface of the camera would reflect in the lens.

So you've got an object reflecting in the camera - reflecting in the lens - made a picture of. The only piece of surface not reflecting the org. object would be the letters "SONY". They would only be reflected once in the lens therefor appearing much clearer then the rest of the image.



Well that's my point of view anyway.....damn shame thechi never responded anymore but i think he'll read this and i hope this will explain his question. Analysing the rest of the image is pointless cause of the distorsion by being reflected twice....

Thankx to nenothtu for all the tech. input and hope to run into you on other threads!!!

Peace.....out