I would like to share a case with you all that is a couple years old but still need analysis from fellow professionals. I've capture an anomaly on film in a 200+ years old restaurant in Old Town, Alexandria, VA. According to the managers and employees, strange Poltergeist type activity have been going on in this establishment for years. I have been investigating paranormal cases for years so I know it is not a lens glare, dust particle, nor smoke. If I may provide a link to a detailed report:
http://hometown.aol.com/facadefx/1.html

Thanks for posting.

I am not sure what to make of that red mark...The only thing that comes to mind is when I used 35 mm film to take pictures and accidently opened the case which exposed the film to a little light the same kind of red mark would show up...I don't know enough about film though to know if that is the case here, but that is the first thing that comes to mind when I see your picture.

As for the "orb", they are a pet peeve for me; orbs are good old fashioned dust floating about...I have yet to see how folks use "orbs" as any kind of evidence in a haunting as it is so plainly dust particles...

It looks like a reflection from whatever is to the right of the blob (above the pictures). It almost looks like a red spotlight is shining on the thing above the pictures.

Can anyone make out what the red and yellow round thing is above the wall of pictures?

Take a look at the lighting around the restaurant. You'll notice there is Tiffany style lighting all over. (That's the stained glass light fixtures). I think you likely have some lens/lighting interaction there. Remember, any time you have low light levels and you add a flash, if there are ANY reflective surfaces nearby, light will refract/reflect, and cause anomalies like the one in your pic. What's different is yours is red, which is pretty cool. Unfortunately, I can clearly see red stained glass in the pic. Sorry, don't mean to be overly critical. That's what any realistic paranormal investifator would tell you. That, and try to reproduce that shot, using digital and 35mm film. It would be cool if you could.

I agree completely. The overhead light or flash probably refracted off the stained glass onto the lens creating this effect. There's also the possibility that it came from a different direction and reflected back off of a mirror or glass or any reflective material. It may be possible to reproduce standing in the same position if you take enough photos.

This reminds me of the Vatican City ghost video, discussed here.

my impression was there are too many stained glass lamps/lights at ceiling level with red and yellow sequencing that resembled the object shown- appears to be a reflection from those lights. Interesting photo anyhoo :}.

Were any other photos taken of that location? Not going to rule out reflection but why would it pick up only one color if it is from the lights?

Cool pic

As other folks have said, it looks like a reflection of the stained glass lamps that are hangin' around.

At first, I did thought it was my flash reflecting off...something, but these reflections or lens glares normally take shape of a circular flares that are yellowish white, not red, and the shape of this anomaly is rather unusual. I am not saying that it is a "spirit" but it does make you wonder, especially with the history of this place, paranormally speaking. I have taken numerous photos at the same spot with no results of this red thing.

Thank you for your input!

Well good job, I say.

At least it's not an orb or an obvious fake or something I've seen a million times.

Keep in mind, if the red glass is an odd shape, not flat or circular, flares may appear as streaks or even malformed blobs. I've seen some weird patterns off of chadeliers too because of the faceted crystal.

again im sorry, I have seen this before on my camera. I hope to one day get some pics on here so I can prove my point, but for some reason, I feel I have most likely erased those kinds of pictures due to them being just crappy quality. I also don't have a scanner readily availble but, I just thought this was a common thing that occured with digi's, cuz it happens to me all the time.

Its a film error, or possibly just a photo shop. It looks so much like an amature mistake though.

Its a film error, or possibly just a photo shop. It looks so much like an amature mistake though.

This was with film? it looks as though your camera has let in light or the film has been exposed to light as others have said. i had a similar type of colour appear on a photo when i was doing a course, i put it in my book thing as an example of film messing up, it was a macro leaf shot type thing but somehow the light had covered perfectly half of the image, made it look kinda cool

Xrays can also fog film, but i dont know if it does it in any colour.

I agree with this ...

I've been a writer and photojournalist / photographer since 1985.
I've seen this same thing happen to 35mm film on occasion.
It can be caused by a light leak, but most light leaks are white or at least lightly colored.
However, this sort of red spot occurs when film has been exposed to high temperatures, such as the camera left in a car on a hot day. Heat affects the chemicals in the color film. These red spots are usually vertical because the film is on a roll and it may stick to itself while on the roll.
I would strongly suspect that the film was subjected to some high heat.
Film that has not been used for years tends to look somewhat foggy, because the chemicals are weakened. The damage is not so site-specific.
Or, as has been noted, perhaps the red lamp is to blame.
Or perhaps you caught Santa Claus in the middle of his disappearance act! Did you happen to find any ecto-poop from reindeer about? ;D

So it's abnormal to find ecto reindeer poop?

Did anyone see my negative? I agree when film have been left in a hot area and/or exposure to light may create a similar reddish streak onto the film but as to my negative, one must step back and view the whole picture (no pun intended). If film is exposed to heat or light, it would affect the film drastically, at least 3 to 4 frames of the negative (if not the whole roll) not just a miniscule 5mm (3/8inch) spot on a precise area of one frame. The camera I used was brand new and had the film processed at a camera lab a day after the investigation, owned by a friend of mine. I've showed this photo and negative to both he and his assistance and they did not know what would caused such an anomaly. I never had any problems with my film processing at this lab before.

I am a professional investigator (since 1984) and please be very careful of accusing me of utilizing "photoshop" to fake this photo, I'm not saying this because of my fragile ego but rather, in my view, it simply tells me (and others) that you're not very experienced in this type of analysis or you're a skeptic and looking to ridicule someone.

Gatofeo:
I was impressed reading 3/4 of your post until you got real silly with the Santa Claus bit.

I say that you need to get more photos of the area. I still think it's likely some light anomally or other technological quirk, but that's just my guess. I don't think photoshop is involved (thats too low budget). Keep up the good work.

Hi Paranorman
I did not write, but watched this page for a while. In the meantime I have been looking for a forum or site, that investigates this matter seriously, and where you are not rediculed for believing different; Comments about Santa and reendeer poop, or people saying they want to vomit because somebody wrote he/she believes orbs are spirits, do not sound serious to me but childish...
Happy new year...
I let you know when I'm satisfied that what I found is not just another site SOME (only a few) people use to kill their time...

Tell you what, you go make up your own website with message board and then you can post what you like, and keep out the people you deem NOT serious. As IF you have all the answers.

Agreed.

And make sure you have everyone leave their sense of humor at the door.

Agreed. I think a little less tension is in order. You are not a proffessional photographer from what I've gathered, thusly you cannot 100% determine whether the photo is anything but a flaw in the exposure, which Jonb or Gatofeo has suggestion.

Same old story... when someone wants soooo badly to believe, those damned inconvenient facts rudely barge in...

I would like to thank Jonb and Gatofeo for their input. There ARE some here who appreciate an expert opinion.

edited to add: There are also some here who appreciate humor too!