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.
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 practically impossible (and so makes the "never proved fake" title pointless if its very hard to actually prove)
Click to expand...

It would be impossible to prove it wasn't a long or double exposure if done properly. Thus anyone who claims that it has been proven not a fake is most definitely wrong.
So you have it the wrong way round, it is practically impossible not to conclude it was a long or double exposure.
 
Edrof said:
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.
Click to expand...

I know for a fact that nobody was standing there, hence the confusion. Also if you know the location where this was taken (opposite the crown court in Stafford) there is no wall directly behind the figure and the crossing is just to its right. The building its standing in front of has apparently had strange things happen there, it was a solicitors when the picture was taken. Not sure how true that was however as I never witnessed anything the few times I was actually inside.
 
Last edited:
D.P. said:
So in other words you have absolutely zero proof.
I will highlight the important part of your sentence:



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
Click to expand...

I don't recall saying i had any proof oddly enough.
 
D.P. said:
It would be impossible to prove it wasn't a long or double exposure if done properly. Thus anyone who claims that it has been proven not a fake is most definitely wrong.
So you have it the wrong way round, it is practically impossible not to conclude it was a long or double exposure.
Click to expand...

thats what i mean the people saying "its never been proved fake so must be real" arnt saying if its even possible to prove fake, if its impossible to prove its a trick by certain methods it invalidates the claim.
 
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...
Good evening gentlemen; there follows the objective consideration of Dr Gowel and Mr Newton, acclaimed authorities upon the subject of forensics, with respect to the oft-debated provenance of said iconic image -


Good night gentlemen.
 
Last edited:
Apologies gentlemen, I am unfamiliar with your modern technology. I believe the source is now available, ; the critical moment arrives upon the tolling of five minutes and sixteen of your english seconds.
 
Not reading 9 pages to see if anyone already pointed this out, but of course it is fake - Look at how the altar and the "ghost" are framed in the photo. Left edge of altar to far left of frame. "Ghost" in far right of frame. If the photo was going to be of just the altar then would the photographer not have centred the altar in the frame? Of course he would.....
 
BDEE said:
Not reading 9 pages to see if anyone already pointed this out, but of course it is fake - Look at how the altar and the "ghost" are framed in the photo. Left edge of altar to far left of frame. "Ghost" in far right of frame. If the photo was going to be of just the altar then would the photographer not have centred the altar in the frame? Of course he would.....
Click to expand...

Only problem is... that is how he framed it... The example in this thread is cropped. Here's the original - http://i.huffpost.com/gadgets/slideshows/260530/slide_260530_1707261_free.jpg
 
Do people really still believe in ghosts? :D

We have more cameras than every these days including CCTV and oddly enough the best we get is weird stuff like this, it's fake or an interesting accident.

There are is no such thing as ghosts.
 
ebilcake said:
Do people really still believe in ghosts? :D

We have more cameras than every these days including CCTV and oddly enough the best we get is weird stuff like this, it's fake or an interesting accident.

There are is no such thing as ghosts.
Click to expand...

People believe in God, dont see how Ghosts are any different but of course they are a load of tosh.
 
Columbo said:
People believe in God, dont see how Ghosts are any different but of course they are a load of tosh.
Click to expand...

I once saw a proper ghost and posted a thread on it.
I saw a person go into the toilet and I followed them in and there was nobody there, it proper freaked me but thought there would be an explanation.
It was a while later and I was going somewhere with a female colleague when she said she needed to go to the loo but I wondered where she was going because that was the male toilet.
She walked past the male toilet and behind a wall that was jutting out and the female toilet was behind that wall.
I finally had my explanation.

There's a story in there somewhere about seeing ghosts.
 
NewbySpectre said:
Good evening gentlemen; there follows the objective consideration of Dr Gowel and Mr Newton, acclaimed authorities upon the subject of forensics, with respect to the oft-debated provenance of said iconic image -


Good night gentlemen.
Click to expand...

Be interested to see if updated techniques could explain away the photo or not.


Part 1 is pretty amusing, the guy who says he can "think" photos onto film looks like he's taking a very large dump.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom