MyOtherAccount Posted August 25, 2014 #26 Share Posted August 25, 2014 (edited) I will try this again.... First I had two entries that were the same. Now it has turned into one entry that is empty. Here is a different alteration that may aid in seeing, at least, the baby doll. If the camera CCD wasn't starved for light, you wouldn't get that superfluous stuff. Edited August 25, 2014 by MyOtherAccount 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astra. Posted August 25, 2014 #27 Share Posted August 25, 2014 What a cheeky little madam you are! Of course I have/had my specs on. (Although possibly not the right ones ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astra. Posted August 25, 2014 #28 Share Posted August 25, 2014 I will try this again.... First I had two entries that were the same. Now it has turned into one entry that is empty. Here is a different alteration that may aid in seeing, at least, the baby doll. If the camera CCD wasn't starved for light, you wouldn't get that superfluous stuff. Wow! MOA.... your really getting into this...good job!...I reckon you'll crack this mystery soon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Gomes Posted August 25, 2014 #29 Share Posted August 25, 2014 It is an just a illusion of our esyes... I think there is nothing in this picture ... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whisperer Posted August 25, 2014 #30 Share Posted August 25, 2014 Its the Phantom....well thats what I thought when I first saw it but cool pic, though theres no way to tell if its a Ghost or not... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simbi Laveau Posted August 26, 2014 #31 Share Posted August 26, 2014 Very cool image. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MyOtherAccount Posted August 26, 2014 #32 Share Posted August 26, 2014 My curiosity brings me deeper into this. Time for an experiment. This is how my Canon G6 (about a $700 camera) acts when deprived of light: First photo-typical photo Second photo light deprived--was black--altered to use all of the RGB scale (0 through 255 normalized image) Although modeling exists, it does not resemble the previous image. Therefore there was no persistence noted. Perhaps the supervisor is pulling someone's leg... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Merc14 Posted August 26, 2014 #33 Share Posted August 26, 2014 If possible can you take a photo with a different camera in the same place, same angles, same lighting, same settings and then maybe a flash photo at same angles? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stubbly_Dooright Posted August 26, 2014 #34 Share Posted August 26, 2014 If possible can you take a photo with a different camera in the same place, same angles, same lighting, same settings and then maybe a flash photo at same angles? That would be a good experiment, but even then catching it, if it's paranormal, is a gamble. I can see it would probably show the same effects like the OP's original picture. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Merc14 Posted August 26, 2014 #35 Share Posted August 26, 2014 That would be a good experiment, but even then catching it, if it's paranormal, is a gamble. I can see it would probably show the same effects like the OP's original picture. I wanted to see if there is something in the background or structure of the place that causes these shapes to appear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JesseCuster Posted August 26, 2014 #36 Share Posted August 26, 2014 Way back when... if a camera we would call it a double exposure; if a video (videcon tube or orthocon tube) we would call it burn-in--like old computer monitors when left on. It would surprise me if CCDs have any kind of burn-in! But what do I know about the new stuff? Others will have to answer if that is possible from CCDs. I reproduced the large photo with alterations, hopefully improvements and it looks like this (click thumbnail): Note that the left-most image is of a 3 or 4 year old dressed appropriately for the 1920's. (I grew up in a home with a picture of Dad like that.) Likewise the next image to the righ... a 2 or 3 year old girl (white laced "bib" is the give-away) Between that second image and the third one appears to be adults sitting on a couch-not sure about that one... then a third image more to the right that looks like a Mr. Peppermint (use google) era advertisement. Then next are people in a semi-circle from the right edge to behind the third image. Above the third image are what appears to be dolls on a shelf. In fact they all appear to be dolls! Some areas look like there was edge enhancement (a modern camera trick) and others don't. I would guess the image is the result of a picture of a doll collection or panorama at a doll museum somehow ending up imprinted on the original dark pic. The thing doing the imposing would necessarily have to have persistence unless it is a "negative" of a photo. Oh, one more thing, the greenish-yellow smudges at the bottom of the photo are identical to what I get with when I scan in antique photos that were handled without gloves, i.e. mold growth! Perhaps the scanner has persistence!!! That's my opinion of as much as I can interpret. Is it just me, or does all of that make absolutely no sense? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Higgsbossin Posted August 27, 2014 #37 Share Posted August 27, 2014 I'm new to this site, and I'm looking to share a post and include pictures. I have no idea how to attach pictures can anyone help me ??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sakari Posted August 27, 2014 Author #38 Share Posted August 27, 2014 If possible can you take a photo with a different camera in the same place, same angles, same lighting, same settings and then maybe a flash photo at same angles? No. I have no clue where exactly it was taken. This is the biggest Copper mine in the United States. I know about where, what belt, and the belt is almost a mile long. I work in the process side, and work long ass hours. ( 16 to 18 a day with my drive time ). I have been there a year, and only been to the mine once. Wish I could for you, but will not happen. I will be posting two more " ghost " pics from people at work claiming to have captured some.....Tomorrow. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sakari Posted August 27, 2014 Author #39 Share Posted August 27, 2014 I'm new to this site, and I'm looking to share a post and include pictures. I have no idea how to attach pictures can anyone help me ??? Click on the icon above ( when you reply ) that is the 11th from the left. A square, looks like a picture. Then insert the file and post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Q-C Posted August 27, 2014 #40 Share Posted August 27, 2014 Poor baby. Her babushka's on too tight. Or maybe the flowers she's picking have thorns? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ColoradoParanormal Posted August 30, 2014 #41 Share Posted August 30, 2014 Have to make this quick. Need to go to bed. Most know me, and know how I feel about these things. At my work, Morenci... http://en.wikipedia....ki/Morenci_Mine Very old place with many stories. When equipment breaks down, pictures are taken. This one at around 2 AM. Most people take a few random pics to make sure the camera is working. A supervisor at work saw this, and shared it to a few. You tell me......No original, just this. Hey brother Sakari! Long time, and being it's you I figured I'd break my silence and reply! Is there anyway possible this picture was taken on a phone or something like a tablet? That "Ghost" looks a HECK of a lot like a Ghost app creation... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sakari Posted August 30, 2014 Author #42 Share Posted August 30, 2014 Hey brother Sakari! Long time, and being it's you I figured I'd break my silence and reply! Is there anyway possible this picture was taken on a phone or something like a tablet? That "Ghost" looks a HECK of a lot like a Ghost app creation... I thought ghost app also. But not there. And it was a digital camera. A old junkie one actually. They use them at work for accidents and such. You get caught with your phone, on property, and immediate termination. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XenoFish Posted August 30, 2014 #43 Share Posted August 30, 2014 The pic in the OP looked like double expose to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JesseCuster Posted August 30, 2014 #44 Share Posted August 30, 2014 The pic in the OP looked like double expose to me. With a digital camera? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stubbly_Dooright Posted August 30, 2014 #45 Share Posted August 30, 2014 I wanted to see if there is something in the background or structure of the place that causes these shapes to appear. Well, true, and like I said, that would be a good experiment. I see your point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now