Opinion On Ghost Photo

Hello all! A friend of mine sent me this photo weeks ago. He was shooting a short film for tv in the Dennis Severs house in London. The description as follows:

"So I was at Dennis Severs House on Folgate St this morning. It’s a Victorian terrace house that has been pretty much un-touched since the 1880's. In the room where the shoot occurred, I took this reflection and don’t recall if anything was behind me...."

When asked about possible shadows he went on to say:

"No shadows, we were just shooting natural light today - and the shape is totally different, the wall is another 5 foot back. Trust me, I did ask all of the crew what the set up was, just to be sure."

I had sent this photo to Dave Schrader from Darkness Radio who says it's fake because of the blurriness around the reflection. I also sent it to Jim harold of Paranormal Podcast who is on the fence.

I am on the fence also though I have no reason to believe that my friend would b.s. me as he has always been skeptical of such things and this shook him up pretty good. I have two photos. One is the untouched file he sent me and the second is the same photo that I have cropped and adjusted the contrast in photoshop to make out the figure better. I appears to be a figure wearing a cloak of some sort.

This is my first thread and I would like everyone's opinion. Is it faked?

reply to post by jtrenthacker

I am no photographic expert, but something just doesn't seem right about this one. In the close up, it looks like the shadow is bleeding onto his face.

Seems whomever tried to add this shadow person just didn't get it quite right.

No offense, but it doesn't quite look real to me.

I'm no expert on photography but if i had to go with my gut feelings I'd say totally fake.

Maybe someone else on ats could have better look at it

reply to post by Sissel


That may be from the adjustments I made in photoshop to the contrast settings.

Originally posted by jtrenthacker
reply to post by Sissel

 

That may be from the adjustments I made in photoshop to the contrast settings.

.Having had experience with Shadow people, the one in the photo just seems uhhmm, too solid, rigid, and plastered in there? Nothing like I have seen or experienced.

Originally posted by jtrenthacker
reply to post by Sissel

 

That may be from the adjustments I made in photoshop to the contrast settings.

yes, he has a shadow bleeding onto his face in the 2nd pic because the original has a shadow on his face.

I dont know if you can capture a 4d being with regular photo equipment. Also the darkness should not reflect any light, but that being is reflecting light off its cover which makes 1 think possible fake. Maybe if no light was reflecting off cover it would look more real sort of like how dark the beings were depicted in the movie attack the block somewhat, that type of extreme dark no light escape like wearing black hole technology cloaks.. I am no image specialist to add so just my observation input.

NAMASTE*******

At first I was quite impressed with it when he sent it to me. However the more I look at it, the more it looks staged to me. Almost like some clothes hanging on a coatrack or something. That's why I wanted to post it here to see if others can confirm my suspicions.

I'm no expert either but this looks fake. Like somebody wanted to cover something of someone in the picture and did so with some kind of drawing tool in a photo editor.

Just my opinion.

"He was shooting a short film for tv in the Dennis Severs house in London."

Publicity stunt.

All we have is some random guys word that there was no-one standing behind him. What has he got to gain from this? Is the short film to do with "ghosts" perhaps?

reply to post by jtrenthacker


I don't know if its real / fake but it surely looks scary .

The 2nd photo looks like it's been heavily edited... especially around the face. The shadow on the face is completely different than the first photo.

You know posting deliberate hoaxes is against the TOS on ATS right? Could get you banned....

reply to post by jtrenthacker


The image behind him looks like a KKK member, only dressed in black. While I can't put my finger on it, the whole scene is somehow extremely offensive to me.

reply to post by yg2bfkm


I see what your getting at, but this "random guy" is a friend of mine who sent this to me personally because he knew I was interested in this sort of thing. He may be pulling my leg because like you say the only thing to go on is his word but I don't believe it was a publicity stunt. This place is used for fiming quite often because it is basically unchanged from the early 1800's.

I see a guy

reply to post by Blarneystoner


You did read my original post right? The second photo looks heavily edited because I cropped it and adjusted the contrast to make out the figure behind him. I don't know if the photo is faked or not, hence the reason for this thread.

reply to post by jtrenthacker


In that case, the most obvious solution is....

..it's the guys shadow.. the light on the left hand side of his face correlates nicely to a lower lefthand light source to the shadow behind him, and the shadow is elongated at the top because the shadow stretches unto the ceiling.

The zoomed in photoshopped "enhanced" version is giving false positives of a "material like cloth" due to jpeg image contraints...?

Case closed?

I just recently discovered Error Level Analysis...Determines whether a Photo has been altered in any way by Photoshop or photo altering software.

Here's the link I went to to check Foto Forensics

Im not too good with this yet, and I know the OP has said he has made some changes in photoshop already, but I think someone of those changes were made to the "ghost".

reply to post by Diggz


Cool site. I uploaded the original photo and here is what I got from ELA:




It the metadata info it uncovered, it does show he was using a a Fuji camera. I asked him what he was using and he did mention to me that he was using his new Fuji in video mode while panning the room. This is a still from that. Not sure what to make of the rest of the info though.

Originally posted by jtrenthacker
reply to post by Blarneystoner

 

You did read my original post right? The second photo looks heavily edited because I cropped it and adjusted the contrast to make out the figure behind him. I don't know if the photo is faked or not, hence the reason for this thread.

I did read it.... I'm not talking about contrast and brightness correction. I mean someone has actually done pixel level editing. It's obvious.