Poll: Newby ghost photo - ever proved a fake?

Do you think the Newby Ghost photo is real or fake?

  • Real

  • Fake

Results are only viewable after voting.
Out of curiosity just how easy is it to tell if something like that is a fake with only access to the photo no negatives and the photo being very old already?
 
Ok, I'll bite...

I won't mention the Django-esque lynch hood with the badly cut eye holes.

Just look at the proportions and posture of the 'ghost', there are so many issues with this picture I don't know where to start.

Capture_zpsf0166132.png
 
Gerard said:
Ah, so apparently nobody had a clue about photography when it was taken, as i've yet to read anything besides the usual "online armchair experts" that say much about it one way or the other. :o
Click to expand...

Please post 1 single credible source that shows the photo was not done by a long exposure. just one will do, thanks.
 
D.P. said:
Please post 1 single credible source that shows the photo was not done by a long exposure. just one will do, thanks.
Click to expand...

And where's the "credible sources" that show that it was done by a long exposure? So far all I've seen as said above is the usual internet armchair experts.

All i know about the picture is it was supposedly examined and not found to be the result of forgery, its been in numerous books apparently and that's about it.
 
no what i mean is how easy is it to actualy tell all these things even with physical examination of the actual photograph rather than didigtal reproductions online.

is it easy or is it practicaly imposisble (and so makes the "never proved fake" title pointles if its very hard to actualy prove)
 
Tefal said:
no what i mean is how easy is it to actualy tell all these things even with physical examination of the actual photograph rather than didigtal reproductions online.

is it easy or is it practicaly imposisble (and so makes the "never proved fake" title pointles if its very hard to actualy prove)
Click to expand...

That's a really good point. I've read about quite a few of the 'classic' ghost photographs having been cleared of any tampering by experts.
 
Tefal said:
no what i mean is how easy is it to actualy tell all these things even with physical examination of the actual photograph rather than didigtal reproductions online.

is it easy or is it practicaly imposisble (and so makes the "never proved fake" title pointles if its very hard to actualy prove)
Click to expand...

I'd say practically impossible, there's just too many tricks of the trade if you spend enough time doctoring a photo, especially one so old and presumably crumpled/aged, any discrepancies in the fake could easily be lost just due to that... even more so if the photo had been touched up and re-photographed at the time to a reasonable standard.

Also I can't see how double exposure can be ruled out, it looks like classic double exposure to me.
 
Gerard said:
And where's the "credible sources" that show that it was done by a long exposure? So far all I've seen as said above is the usual internet armchair experts.

All i know about the picture is it was supposedly examined and not found to be the result of forgery, its been in numerous books apparently and that's about it.
Click to expand...


So in other words you have absolutely zero proof.
I will highlight the important part of your sentence:
Supposedly
Click to expand...


You don't need to be an expert to know it is fake, that is like saying you need to be a mathematician to know that 1+1=2, while you are suggesting 1+1=3 without a single shred of evidence.


Prove to me how the photo cannot be done by a long exposure. You can't
 
Flack88, your YouTube tags aren't inputted correctly so the video won't play. The anomaly could be a variety of things: a person with a dark hood, the back of a person with long black hair, something leaning up against the wall behind. The person didn't appear in the previous shot because he was bent down or kneeling, perhaps.

It should be written like this (removing the asterix):

[youtube*]5Tm8UntMiDk[/MEDIA]

 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom