Full bodied apparition or something else???

As many of you may know I am involved with a paranormal society anjd we have a forum, as is the norm.

A forum member has been out to the Dower house, Northamptonshire.
The member claims this picture is genuine. He took the photo, has sent me the originals after posting it in our forum and has given me permission to post here for all to see.

I cannot certify the authenticity of the image captured and this is why i bring it here. I hope we can all have a civil discussion as to what has been cpatured.
Is it a genuine full bodied apparition or is it a camera trick using the exposure time and movement of a model??

I have no reason to doubt the photographer but I also have no reason to fully trust what we are seeing.

i hope I am understood here. No offense is meant, just keeping an open mind...

Anyway, the photo was taken at 20:40 on the 9th of the 9th 2012, with a second photo whithin the same minute.

Here is the original photo.


The second pic is just the same but without the central figure.. Should anyone want this posted then i will.. just seems like it's going to be a bit big here on this page so will save it for later..

Here are the cropped and adjusted versions provided by the photographer.. i have not touched any of these, so feel free to do as you wish with them to prove or debunk..





There are a couple of things here that do seem to be a bit unusual to me, but that's not to say it could have been arranged. i'll wait to see if anyone else comes up with the same thoughts..

so, there you have it.. let's get this lot looked at and see what we can come up with..
real or fake?

I see a goat head, for one damn thing, with a curly horn to boot.

I also see a pair of denim jeans with the legs crossed.

Oh yeah, there's that face too.

I'm curious, did the photographer state why the photo was taken? Did he see something or was it just a random "hope a catch something" shot?

I first thought i was a huge black picture, then saw the scroll bar underneath.....interesting pic...interested to see what people knowledgeable in photgraphy have to say about it.

reply to post by OneisOne


From the email sent to me with the pictures.

I didnt see anything but i know there is something here due to other experiences.
Upon taking the photo I noticed that the LCD on the back of the lumix has a bright light from the front of the ruin.
There was no lights infront of us,we seen nothing? I would love to tell you i see that person standing infront of that ruin but i didnt and neither did my 3 friends.
They were more interested in looking at the stars as it was an almost crystal clear sky.
I just carried on taking photos and left the lads to it.Upon taking that photo i called my mate ben who was stood to the right of me to have a look.I could at the time on the camera only see what looked like a glowing dog or goat?
Obviously upon coming back and upoading it i realised i had caught something very special but i just dont understand why we didnt see it?
I certainly have heard spirits a lot! but i havent seen them with my eyes open.

He did say they had some K2 spikes in another area..

Originally posted by research100
I first thought i was a huge black picture, then saw the scroll bar underneath.....interesting pic...interested to see what people knowledgeable in photgraphy have to say about it.

i do know of one way as to how it could have been done, but there are a few things that do not match that method according to my knowledge.

One of those things is the length of the wiggly light to the right of the picture. If it was a long exposure and a light was moved across then it would leave a trail, but then the person would also leave a smudge of themselves or their arm. The light is too long for the left arm to reach out with a light from that position.. but that's not to say it's not impossible.

reply to post by Extralien
I don't know. The creases and folds in the trousers are just a little too real for me. I call CGI.

reply to post by Jaellma


great..call it.. now help to prove it..

It might be.. it might not..

In my mind, there may be something special about those trousers..

reply to post by Extralien

Thank you for that.

I just thought the camera settings were a little odd for a random photo.

From the EXIF data:

Exposure Time 8
F Number f / 2.80
Exposure Program Normal program
ISO Speed Ratings 100
Metering Mode Pattern
Flash Flash did not fire, compulsory flash mode

If that data is correct, it makes me suspicious.

As for the light trails, the first thing I thought of was a light-up yo-yo. (I like playing with lighty-up things and slow shutter speeds. ) A slight movement of the arm for the yo-yo could account for the 'ram's head' glob.

I used to make these types of photo's with my camera back in High school when 35mm was still in. All you have to do is set your shutter speed to 30" + seconds, walk behind your subject, who stands still, with a flash light or some type of light source and Whalah! YOu have a ghost picture......

NEXT.

reply to post by OneisOne


it's the exposure time that bugs me..
perhaps you could enlighten us on anything else you feel don't sit right there.

I am with you on the exposure though.. it would not be too difficult to create something like this with 8 seconds..

but...

I am still left with some questions.. there's no other apparent movement.. stand still and move a light and dont create a blur of your face or legs in an 8 second shot.. the trousers.. something about them..

reply to post by OneisOne

Here is the exif data


There is something very odd about it being ISO 100, thats usually for very well lit sunny days, couple that with the flash not firing so the camera is basically set up to take the worst possible night time images.

reply to post by davespanners


so a possible lack of knowledge or a deliberate attempt

This from the email

,i was having a problem using my slr and was a bit frustrated that i couldnt figure out how to take night photos with it(The shame lol).
so i quickly changed it over with the lumix and then placed it on its own night setting and started taking photos.

so there may be something wrong with the camera used, or he didn't set it correctly..

reply to post by Extralien


Could possibly be a mistake, however all cameras that Ive ever come across if your not sure how to use them you just stick it on automatic and press the button and it takes perfectly acceptable night shots. Turning the flash off and changing ISO usually takes more knowledge then not doing it.

I guess he could have just pressed randomly at buttons in confusion and got the same result though

I maybe in totally the wrong area here, but it looks to me as though somebody has taken a photograph in a grave yard...

The photo seems to be of one of those ornate angelic headstones from the 1800's, but I could be wrong....

Interesting though............

I wonder if you could ask him if he has the shots taken immediately before and after that one to compare things?

reply to post by davethebear


and what ou've said there is what I find interesting about the trousers..
The period they may possibly be from..

From what I can tell, they seem to be the type that end at the knee and then long socks worn below.. there may be some form of patterned material at the end of the trouser leg at the knee.. the cloth is also loose enough to resemble the same..

To go to the extremes of getting this type of clothing item to set up a trick photo is a bit beyond the norm, but not impossible.. The photographer has not made wild fantastic claims about how genuine the pic is, or tried to pawn it off as anything above and beyond.

His very first sentence from the forum post he made is simply that he is baffled by it..

That photo is really strange for sure...

Here is what I can come up with just be looking at it.

1. 1 entity with multiple observable "components" of itself
2. Multiple entities overlapping in the same image
3. 1 entity (or multiple entities) with strong capacity for illusion (aka glamour)
4. A rift in the space-time continuum that has created an eerie optical illusion
5. An indescribable event that may never be explained
6. A photo produced by an excellent graphics artist with a vivid imagination

reply to post by davespanners


I'll ask about the before shot, but here is the after shot..

Originally posted by Extralien
reply to post by davethebear

 

and what ou've said there is what I find interesting about the trousers..
The period they may possibly be from..

From what I can tell, they seem to be the type that end at the knee and then long socks worn below.. there may be some form of patterned material at the end of the trouser leg at the knee.. the cloth is also loose enough to resemble the same..

To go to the extremes of getting this type of clothing item to set up a trick photo is a bit beyond the norm, but not impossible.. The photographer has not made wild fantastic claims about how genuine the pic is, or tried to pawn it off as anything above and beyond.

His very first sentence from the forum post he made is simply that he is baffled by it..

The other thing that came to mind after looking at this photo is this.....

Have you seen those people that dress up to look like marble statues and stand on a plinth and stand still for ages with a tin in front of them for people to leave money? You get them quite often in Leicester Square in London, it's a bit similar to busking but they don't actually sing songs they just stand still for hours and hours.........It reminds me of that kind of thing.....

Just a thought...........