Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 2
None of the above

Ghost Photographed In London Dominion Theatre

46 posts in this topic

i think it could be an actual picture behind them, like a poster for a horror movie type thing.

It's awfully convenient that the couple is posed so all edges of a poster behind them would be blocked. The ghost also doesn't have the traditional transparency we've seen in other ghost pictures.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's awfully convenient that the couple is posed so all edges of a poster behind them would be blocked. The ghost also doesn't have the traditional transparency we've seen in other ghost pictures.

yes i agree, i'm suggesting they took the pic knowing it was there and placed themselves deliberately for the effect

the ghost is too solid and too different in 'texture' as well. i don't mean in pixels - it's something i can't really explain but i know it when i see it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd say it was a girl in white makeup behind them before I'd jump on the ghost bandwagon. People hoax things all the time, so I'd say this girl was

in on the hoax, and of course they swear no one was behind them, just them in the theatre, blah bla bla bla etc..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i think it could be an actual picture behind them, like a poster for a horror movie type thing.

i don't know much about photoshop other than when the image is obviously done, but this just looks too fake to be anything but fake. lol

That is exactly what I think it is also... A poster/picture of some sort behind the couple...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, that is how predictable these claims have been....

By the way, I said it was real, so there.

AWESOME! lol Funny as always my friend.

Wow you're right. The realism is astounding. It could be nothing else but a ghost. I can't believe I didn't see it at first.

Wonder if the haunting is a residual one? Wish Ghosthunters would go there and do a 2 hour special.

lol!!!!! :clap:

The problem is that even if it were somehow real then it wouldn't matter as it's all down to personal perception and we'll never know the actual truth anyway, it LOOKS like a poor photoshop effort but then again there are compelling pics floating about that look like the correct presence of a ghost but the majority of them are bound to be fake.

I recently commented on another forum and it seems to fit perfectly here. So, I'm going to add it:

This statement always makes me laugh. When pictures are provided, they're never accepted as "evidence" or proof. This brings us to an ongoing conundrum. What, if anything, would be an accepted medium for "proof?" You see, the problem lays with the internet itself. We've been flooded with millions of faked, forged, insanely real but still hoaxed media: ie; pictures, video clips, testimony, audio files etc. Due to this, an absolutely genuine article could be presented to the world and it would automatically be discounted as fake.

This is why websites such as this are rather funny to me in that aspect. People get on here to present "evidence" and try to prove, disprove etc but, it's always the same. No breakthroughs will be accomplished here. No proof of Extraterrestrial Life, Ghosts, Demons, or Cryptids will be established here. To believe so is just uneducated non-sense lol. And the reason being what I previously mentioned in this response.

However, if you're coming to websites and communities such as this to learn, discuss theories, pastevents, current events and share News about these subjects and just make online friends of a like mindset, then more power to ya! That's exactly why I come. However, I believe it's time for people to start waking up, pull their heads out of the clouds, and face reality. If you're wanting be the person to make these discoveries and find actual "evidence," then get off the computer and start your research in the real world.

Without having looked at the rest of the tread, I reckon it'll not belong before someone say's its photoshopped or a ghost app. That's how predictable this forum has become.

Personally there's only one explanation that I'm prepared to give: it's a ghost.

I just commented above and think you should read it. Might help you out a bit.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If this was real then why aren't they dead?? lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's awfully convenient that the couple is posed so all edges of a poster behind them would be blocked. The ghost also doesn't have the traditional transparency we've seen in other ghost pictures.

When you consider that most ghosts are NOT transparent and look like ordinary people, and that you only discover the person you have seen walking along a dark corridor or who has just been having a conversation with you suddenly vanished or disappeared into a wall, then it won't come as any shock to discover that the ghost in the photo isn't transparent.

I may also be willing to believe that it is nothing more than a poster if it was actually the case that the "poster" was parallel with the wall behind it, which isn't the case.

It's also interesting that the ghost in the photo is that of a child, because the theatre - the Dominion Theatre on Tottenham Court Road - is actually haunted by a ghostly child. Many times workers and theatre-goers have heard the sounds of an unseen child giggling.

Benkid77_Dominion_Theatre,_London_100809.JPG

Who could the ghostly child be?

Well, in 1814 Tottenham Court Road was where the London Beer Flood took place. On 17th October a huge vat at the Meux and Company Brewery containing over 135,000 imperial gallons of beer ruptured, causing other vats in the same building to succumb in a domino effect. As a result, more than 323,000 imperial gallons of beer burst out and gushed into the streets. The wave of beer destroyed two homes and crumbled the wall of the Tavistock Arms Pub, trapping teenage employee Eleanor Cooper under the rubble. The brewery was among the poor houses and tenements of the St Giles Rookery, where whole families lived in basement rooms that quickly filled with beer. Eight people drowned in the flood or died from injuries. Those who were not immediately injured by the disaster began to drink the beer off the streets, scooping it up in their hands or in pots.

Eleanor Cooper was one of the eight fatalities. She was about 15 years old when she was killed, so it could very well be her ghost - and I like to believe it is - which has been heard giggling in the theatre - and which decided to make an appearance in that photograph 200 years after her death. The Meux and Company Brewery was demolished in 1922 and the Dominion Theatre was built on that very spot in 1929. The threatre is also haunted by a former brewery employee and even Freddie Mercury's ghost supposedly haunts it, probably because the theatre is the home to the Queen musical "We Will Rock You".

Edited by TheLastLazyGun

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This statement always makes me laugh. When pictures are provided, they're never accepted as "evidence" or proof. This brings us to an ongoing conundrum. What, if anything, would be an accepted medium for "proof?" You see, the problem lays with the internet itself. We've been flooded with millions of faked, forged, insanely real but still hoaxed media: ie; pictures, video clips, testimony, audio files etc. Due to this, an absolutely genuine article could be presented to the world and it would automatically be discounted as fake.

This is why websites such as this are rather funny to me in that aspect. People get on here to present "evidence" and try to prove, disprove etc but, it's always the same. No breakthroughs will be accomplished here. No proof of Extraterrestrial Life, Ghosts, Demons, or Cryptids will be established here. To believe so is just uneducated non-sense lol. And the reason being what I previously mentioned in this response.

However, if you're coming to websites and communities such as this to learn, discuss theories, pastevents, current events and share News about these subjects and just make online friends of a like mindset, then more power to ya! That's exactly why I come. However, I believe it's time for people to start waking up, pull their heads out of the clouds, and face reality. If you're wanting be the person to make these discoveries and find actual "evidence," then get off the computer and start your research in the real world.

I agree with you. We can all come on here and give our opinions as to whether or not ghosts exist, but most of us aren't exists and cannot know for sure. The best way to prove that ghosts don't exist - or vice versa - is to go out and do your own research. Do investigations in haunted houses or become a parapsychologist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Am I the only one who thinks the mans shoulder looks suspect where it meets with the ghost? I believe in ghosts but I'm not sure about this one, its too much of a coincidence that its peeking exactly between them.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When you consider that most ghosts are NOT transparent and look like ordinary people, and that you only discover the person you have seen walking along a dark corridor or who has just been having a conversation with you suddenly vanished or disappeared into a wall, then it won't come as any shock to discover that the ghost in the photo isn't transparent.

The vast majority of reports of ghosts are of transparent figures roughly shaped like humans. The reports of "conversing" ghosts like you describe are extremely rare.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What I'm thinking looking at this photo is why it couldn't just be another patron standing in line behind them? Cell phone cameras are notoriously crappy and screw up colors all the time. If the camera exposed for the warmer tones of the skin of the people in the foreground and the person behind them (who in my opinion looks like "she's" staring down at a cellphone in her hands out of view) is bathed in the cool LED light of say a phone, then the colors could be off like we are seeing, creating the pallid hues that someone would associate with a dead person.

It doesn't look like a photoshop, or a ghost to me. It just looks like another person standing in line. What amazes me is how little it takes to make the news these days. BLah.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Am I the only one who thinks the mans shoulder looks suspect where it meets with the ghost? I believe in ghosts but I'm not sure about this one, its too much of a coincidence that its peeking exactly between them.

Isn't that what the ghost should be doing? Wouldn't it want to be in the photo?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What I'm thinking looking at this photo is why it couldn't just be another patron standing in line behind them? Cell phone cameras are notoriously crappy and screw up colors all the time. If the camera exposed for the warmer tones of the skin of the people in the foreground and the person behind them (who in my opinion looks like "she's" staring down at a cellphone in her hands out of view) is bathed in the cool LED light of say a phone, then the colors could be off like we are seeing, creating the pallid hues that someone would associate with a dead person.

Dang it, you're making me look at this stupid photo again!

The color of the "ghost" is closer to dark purple than light blue so my eyes want to say it's not a case of clashing color temperatures. There's no trace of the incandescent light on her anywhere yet the background behind her is also brightly lit with incandescent light -- somehow she would have to be in a dark shadow between the couple and the wall and lit only by another light source. I don't see how that's possible without some effort.

I'd eliminate a phone as a light source because of how she's lit. The tip of her nose and cheeks are lit but her mouth and chin are in shadow and her nose is casting a shadow down to her mouth. That light isn't coming from below her face, but from above it. Also her clothes are evenly lit so that would have to be a large phone.

If you look at the image in black and white to eliminate the color temperature, you still see a girl with very large dark circles under her eyes and featureless clothes that look like a nightgown. It sure looks like a ghost to me but much more like a girl standing behind them. Maybe it was an accidental picture of someone behind them which looked spooky enough to make someone decide to ghost her up in Photoshop.

You do have the simplest possible explanation. It certainly could have been someone behind the couple with spooky makeup on.

It reminds me of the fabulous Wem Town Hall Ghost hoax. Young girls just make for great ghosts.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Isn't that what the ghost should be doing? Wouldn't it want to be in the photo?

If it's an attention seeker perhaps ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dang it, you're making me look at this stupid photo again!

The color of the "ghost" is closer to dark purple than light blue so my eyes want to say it's not a case of clashing color temperatures. There's no trace of the incandescent light on her anywhere yet the background behind her is also brightly lit with incandescent light -- somehow she would have to be in a dark shadow between the couple and the wall and lit only by another light source. I don't see how that's possible without some effort.

I'd eliminate a phone as a light source because of how she's lit. The tip of her nose and cheeks are lit but her mouth and chin are in shadow and her nose is casting a shadow down to her mouth. That light isn't coming from below her face, but from above it. Also her clothes are evenly lit so that would have to be a large phone.

If you look at the image in black and white to eliminate the color temperature, you still see a girl with very large dark circles under her eyes and featureless clothes that look like a nightgown. It sure looks like a ghost to me but much more like a girl standing behind them. Maybe it was an accidental picture of someone behind them which looked spooky enough to make someone decide to ghost her up in Photoshop.

You do have the simplest possible explanation. It certainly could have been someone behind the couple with spooky makeup on.

It reminds me of the fabulous Wem Town Hall Ghost hoax. Young girls just make for great ghosts.

You make some really valid points on the lighting that I overlooked. The shadows are wrong for her to be lit from below. I'm going to go with the explanation that it was just another person behind them in line but that this person was doctored on a color level to make her seem spookier. Go team!

Another ghost photo bites the dust. :tu:

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even though I don't think it's the most likely explanation, I like it. Say you take a picture of your friends and some girl makes a creepy face behind them as a joke. Everyone laughs but you think, "Hey, a few minutes in Photoshop and I could make her look even creepier." That would be funny, right? So you select her face and slid the tint over so she's purple, kind of like Reagan in the Exorcist. Whoa, that looks way better than you had imagined. And it was so easy.

So an hour later you're airbrushing in creepy shadows and enormous dark circles under her eyes and blurring her clothes to look like a nightgown (again using Reagan from the Exorcist as a model) and the result is beyond what you had imagined. That silly joke now looks like a gen-u-ine ghost photo equal to many other classic ghost photos. But what to do with it? Why not pull the whole world into the joke?

I think sometimes people don't intend to create a hoax but when they play around with a photo and discover how easy it is, they just can't help themselves.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even though I don't think it's the most likely explanation, I like it. Say you take a picture of your friends and some girl makes a creepy face behind them as a joke. Everyone laughs but you think, "Hey, a few minutes in Photoshop and I could make her look even creepier." That would be funny, right? So you select her face and slid the tint over so she's purple, kind of like Reagan in the Exorcist. Whoa, that looks way better than you had imagined. And it was so easy.

So an hour later you're airbrushing in creepy shadows and enormous dark circles under her eyes and blurring her clothes to look like a nightgown (again using Reagan from the Exorcist as a model) and the result is beyond what you had imagined. That silly joke now looks like a gen-u-ine ghost photo equal to many other classic ghost photos. But what to do with it? Why not pull the whole world into the joke?

I think sometimes people don't intend to create a hoax but when they play around with a photo and discover how easy it is, they just can't help themselves.

That is what I'd be doing. Maybe I'm doing it right now. You'll never know......mwahahahahahahah

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The vast majority of reports of ghosts are of transparent figures roughly shaped like humans. The reports of "conversing" ghosts like you describe are extremely rare.

No. Most ghosts are completely solid, exactly like living people.

http://theassap.blogspot.co.uk/2011/09/rare-transparent-ghost.html

Edited by TheLastLazyGun

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No. Most ghosts are completely solid, exactly like living people.

http://theassap.blog...rent-ghost.html

Most reports of ghosts are transparent blobs in the rough shape of a human or are invisible.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok then, if most ghost are supposedly solid, then why do most purported ghost photos depict transparent beings? You can't have it both ways - you can't claim that ghosts are solid like real folks and then also claim that all the ghost photos are real too - when they tend to show transparent figures. Either one is mostly BS or the other is.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks fake but someone had explained to me before about proof of the reality of the afterlife: "Nothing in this world can mimic the realities that we dream in our minds, therefore an afterlife exists."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 2

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.