Pictures of Ghosts: Caught in a California Home - Real, or not?

Argyll
reply to post by JiggyPotamus

 

Why is someone claiming this is "an obvious hoax?" And why is someone else claiming this "looks badly photoshopped?" What makes this so obvious that it is a hoax, and what about it specifically looks photoshopped? I hate those types of comments

Maybe you should read all the thread before you comment?......then you would know why it is a hoax.

Not at all! The claim that it was a hoax was made before the ap photo was found and was unsupported by any evidence at the time of its posting. Jiggypotamus' complaint is therefore fully justified. Anyone who says "obvious hoax" when really it is not obvious at all is just deluding people. If it had been, those calling this an obvious hoax would have been able to give their reasons for calling it that. But they couldn't because it was NOT an obvious hoax even when it was finally proved to be a hoax. It only became obvious when one saw the image of the face on the ap page.

reply to post by micpsi


It was however.....and obvious hoax .......was it not?

reply to post by micpsi


The 4th post shows the enlargement, and the 5th post explains the problem that makes the "hoax" claim fairly obvious. "When you blow it up that much, you can clearly see a square outline around the head (especially at the bottom) indicating it was pasted into the original image". Pixelation not being even in enlarged photos is a telltale sign that an image has been manipulated. The clear square "edge" below and to the right of the face, and the different quality of pixelation on the face itself are both common indicators of a "photoshoped" image.