I've been sent a ghost snap.

elmarko · 26 Jul 2013 at 11:36

AJK said:
Look at the entire photo, it's all like that. Long exposure = blur and things overlapping.

This thread is rubbish.

Ay hehe, my first thought was photo-shop but I sure you guys are right on the exposure point.

stoofa · 26 Jul 2013 at 11:36

Me thinks somebody is trying to drum-up business fro their Inn

Edrof · 26 Jul 2013 at 11:38

this_is_gav said:
It's a technique I used recently at work to capture this image.

Long shutter (1/2 second), flash, disco lights and other ambient lights created some ghost-like figures whenever light hits person. If light hits a subject more than once while the shutter is open and that subject (or the camera) moves, you'll have 2 or more captures of them, making a ghost-like image.

Interesting, thanks. Just the kind of information I want. Does that also explain the point elmarko made and the second 'face'?

[FnG]magnolia · 26 Jul 2013 at 11:38

this_is_gav said:
It's a technique I used recently at work to capture this image.

Long shutter (1/2 second), flash, disco lights and other ambient lights created some ghost-like figures whenever light hits person. If light hits a subject more than once while the shutter is open and that subject (or the camera) moves, you'll have 2 or more captures of them, making a ghost-like image.

All I see are fat tweens who should exercise more and keep their fat noses out of the fridge, apart from the large-headed guy, top-right back who is wearing a belt around his head.

AJK · 26 Jul 2013 at 11:40

Edrof said:
It's interesting that you are against people looking for a rational explanation:

Dude, it's a blurry photo of a person standing behind a door, who moved their head during the exposure (hence "two faces"). Boom, rational explanation.

dirtychinchilla · 26 Jul 2013 at 11:40

HecFam said:
Could be the ghost of cubone's mother, if i was you, i'd get out of lavender town ASAP. Unless of course you have the silph scope in which case you can reveal the ghost's true identity and solve this case.

Damn tower.

Captain Chaos · 26 Jul 2013 at 11:40

Spooky. Why would someone randomly take a photo of a door? Or did said photographer see the spook, run, grab his camera / phone and go happy snapping Ghostbusters styley.

Edrof · 26 Jul 2013 at 11:40

[FnG]magnolia;24668714 said:
All I see are fat tweens who should exercise more and keep their fat noses out of the fridge, apart from the large-headed guy, top-right back who is wearing a belt around his head.

Ha! Nice.

Sliver · 26 Jul 2013 at 11:42

Captain Chaos said:
Spooky. Why would someone randomly take a photo of a door? Or did said photographer see the spook, run, grab his camera / phone and go happy snapping Ghostbusters styley.

I think you've just solved the case Columbo. With 7 billion on the planet, most of which have camera phones, this was bound to happen sooner or later. Now, where did I put my Ouija Board ? :cool:

Edrof · 26 Jul 2013 at 11:44

I've just remembered, this was in the news yesterday. After Effects?

It's the dude's introduction that does it for me.

Sliver said:
Now, where did I put my Ouija Board ?

They don't work old chap!

L0rdMike · 26 Jul 2013 at 11:45

If I saw a ghost I would ran after it and try punch it in the face.

elmarko · 26 Jul 2013 at 11:46

Edrof said:
Interesting, thanks. Just the kind of information I want. Does that also explain the point elmarko made and the second 'face'?

I believe it does, the thing which looked out of place (which to me seemed photoshopesque was the over-lap & the almost brush style strokes on the pattern of the figure behind the door).

The shutter explains the two faces as it would have been a person who remained in two specific places for longer, it also could have been touched up after using photoshop.

Given enough camera tricks I could do some really strange stuff (move my body but keep my head static, move it once - keep moving my body, move to a third position) it will give the impression of 3 floating heads I believe.

Edrof · 26 Jul 2013 at 11:47

Hmmm, is it possible to analyse something like that and prove that it has been fiddled with by PS?

Captain Chaos · 26 Jul 2013 at 11:47

Sliver said:
I think you've just solved the case Columbo. With 7 billion on the planet, most of which have camera phones, this was bound to happen sooner or later. Now, where did I put my Ouija Board ?

Meh

this_is_gav · 26 Jul 2013 at 11:48

Edrof said:
Interesting, thanks. Just the kind of information I want. Does that also explain the point elmarko made and the second 'face'?

If the door or camera has moved slightly, yes. I can't see the 2nd face, unless you mean the one on top of the other, where one is facing the right-side of the photo and the other facing the camera, in which case, again that's just shutter speed. It's a shame the exif data has been stripped from the photo, but it's clearly a long exposure.

[FnG]magnolia;24668714 said:
All I see are fat tweens who should exercise more and keep their fat noses out of the fridge, apart from the large-headed guy, top-right back who is wearing a belt around his head.

Well, there were only really 2 sources of light there - my flash and the disco lights, which is why the image is usable. The kids in the foreground are primarily lit by the flash, and those dancing in the background are lit by the disco lights. If there was more ambient light it likely would have appeared more like the original post - a messy blur.

And fat? Bit harsh! To be honest, not one of the kids who's torso is visable could in any way be described as fat. It's just an unflattering focal length.

Cosimo · 26 Jul 2013 at 11:57

Moments before....

Spooky....

Pabl0 · 26 Jul 2013 at 12:00

Firstly, rather then focusing on the 'ghost' let's look at the framing of the photo and actually what the photo would be of if it didn't have a 'ghost' centre stage. Oh, nothing it would be a terrible photo of a pub and of no use what so ever.

Looks like a photo I would take testing my flash before using it for a photo, happened to take a picture of a bar man behind a door with a semi slow shutter speed.

I won't start with the only rational thing it can be is ghost lol

[FnG]magnolia · 26 Jul 2013 at 12:08

this_is_gav said:
It's just an unflattering focal length.

So how do you explain the fact that belt-round-head guy looks so rad?

ChrisJSY · 26 Jul 2013 at 12:10

There's something to be said for people who immediately jump to the far fetched on strands of "evidence". Not even strands, we're talking plucking molecules apart.

It isn't kind either. :X

Cosimo · 26 Jul 2013 at 12:11

"Fooled you all"