Ghost ship

This from the person that sent it in:

This was an opportunity chanced upon while more or less idly viewing the ever changing pattern of feluccas on the Nile: a favoured Aswan pastime. It was unusual and I had my wife’s camera with me so I took a photograph.  Unsure what had been recorded I checked the image.  This is it.  I decided to repeat and possibly improve the shot but by the time the camera had been raised to implement the intention the chance had gone.  Photograph taken from Elephantine Island looking downstream in the channel which separates it from Kitchener’s Island at 14.39 local time on 23/2/2009, aperture f5.6, exposure 1/400s, focal length(35mm equivalent) 282mm, brilliant sunshine, moderate heat haze.

copy20of20p1010391

What do you think? Comment and vote now!

48 Responses to “Ghost ship”

  1. Mark Ribbands Says:

    I say this chap has implemented his intention to have a laugh! Pointless photograph; pointless fake.

  2. Atrueoriginall Says:

    I say double exposure. Possibly unintentional but then again they would have remembered taking the picture of the boat previously on the same roll of film.

  3. Briscoe Says:

    I say Photoshop!

  4. Alex Pryce Says:

    Surely in order for a ghost to exist there has to have been a living organism. I can never get my head around images of ghosts which are of boats or cars or trains. Here in Edinburgh there is supposedly a ghost carriage from days gone by which rockets down the Royal Mile.

    Where is the sails “soul” or the rudders consciousness? How can a boat be a ghost?

  5. PDR Says:

    double exposure

  6. Privet Says:

    double exposure

  7. Bob Says:

    Unintentional double exposure.

  8. David Jackson Says:

    It could be a fake, or it could be a coincidental alignment of various waves and ripples. On a gusty day I often see peculiar shapes on our local lake.

  9. Justin Says:

    Intentional fake.

    The photographer was taking a photo of empty sea ? and the ghost ship just happens to be perfectly placed ?

  10. Alan Says:

    If a physical object actually produces a perception of a ghostly event in an observer, (the familiar ghostly stagecoaches etc) it must presumably be something in the nature of a vision or a hallucination. It seems somewhat unlikely that such subjective experiences could be captured by a camera………..

  11. Ryan Says:

    I’m going with a double exposure on this one.

  12. Me Says:

    It’s not double exposure. If it were there would be waves of the boat while it was there.. I go with Photoshop..

  13. Steve Says:

    This is not a website for ghost sightings, it’s a website for funny and unusual tricks of the light. All this would never constitute anything like a serious investigation to prove or disprove the existence of ghosts.

    Could the investigators attempt something more scientific please?

  14. Noel Says:

    Badly faked. Photoshop

  15. ZeroCorpse Says:

    Double exposure or fake.

  16. Sally Says:

    The comment: “Unsure what had been recorded I checked the image.”seems to suggest presumption. So, I’d guess pre-arranged, or manipulated!

  17. Nobby Says:

    It’s a feluccing bad fake!

  18. Susanna Says:

    It’s either a double exposure or deliberate fake, and I’d tend toward deliberate fake.

  19. Siddharth Singh Says:

    It could be a reflection on a glass of a boat at the back.

  20. Harri Says:

    This could have been taken behind a glass object since there seems to be a reflection of a street in the background near the top of the photo and this could have been a reflection of a model behind you.

  21. lotsapockets Says:

    There appears to be 3 images, a boat at rest with no sails, a boat in motion Sails full and the rocks. unless there were a noticeable and convenient fault with the camera (images are nicely aligned it, is a deliberate fake.

  22. MV Says:

    We are cheat by our eyes

  23. Lilith Says:

    hahahaha

  24. JJ Says:

    No schip was so near to this rocks

  25. Denise Says:

    you should be ashamed… make a better hotoshop work next time!

  26. Denise Says:

    you should be ashamed… make a better photoshop work next time!

  27. João Paulo Brazil Says:

    Its fake…. Its Obivious!!!
    But…..There is Jacks Sparrow and Black Pearl….

  28. aliice Says:

    ridiculous !

  29. javis Says:

    Obvious double exposure…unless it’s a digital camera!!!!!! OoOOOOHHhhh! Spooky!

  30. Evil Dwarf Says:

    my boat.. my boat… return it to me, you thieves!!!

  31. Cintia Says:

    double exposure or photoshop, it´s possible make this…so easy

  32. Mandy Says:

    It look’s like a drowning dinosaur, with it’s head and one wing out of the water. Looks good!

  33. Bubba Says:

    double exposure

  34. Deep Says:

    Come on, that’s got to be a fake!

    If it’s not, then it’s the best ghost picture out, but….. I don’t buy it. Submitter… I think you are stringing us along!

  35. Snark Says:

    A fake a child could make. Either double exposure or photoshop blending. Laughable!

  36. Mick Horsman Says:

    This, like many of the more convincing photos seem to have figures in them that are relevant to the environment they are in, for example the beach ghost in Welly’s and hood, the person washing their feet in the stream. Is it possible tht in some way we don’t understand yet – light is able to produce mirages – perhaps the beach figure was standing on the beach at a different spot on that very day and the light was bent by some natural process, perhaps a property of photons at the quantum level (I don’t really understand quantum physics – so apologies if this sounds ridiculous!) – resulting in the capture of an image, is it possible that light could also preserve images from the past in some way? After all when we see a star we are lookng at the star as it was in the past, could a similar phenomenon account for sightings of ghosts and of ghost images?

  37. Chuzzy Says:

    Get a life!!!

  38. Deep Says:

    I’ve had another look at this photo using ‘photo editor’ and I can’t see any evidence of cut and paste, but I can think of ways around that in this case. The extreme choppiness of the water intrigues me, as does the hint of pink at the stern of the boat and again a little bit in the sail.

    I suspect a picture merge.

    • Deep Says:

      I notice the rocks look intact and clear, and the water between them is smooth – though that might well be expected if it’s sheltered there, but i do wonder if they could have been ‘cut’ around.

  39. Cly Says:

    Looks like a photo taken through glass. Reflection.

  40. Clarence Birdseye Says:

    Fake, clearly.

    This raises an issue though. If non-human remains should not “come back”, how come all ghosts are not naked?

  41. Vicky Says:

    Photoshop!!! I would say that it might have been double exposure but it is so blatantly and intentionally faked. Its mind-bogglingly bad…

  42. Eric Says:

    Ghost ship
    This is an example of an increasingly common illusion observed in the vicinity of two sheets of high quality, coated, plate glass arranged at about a right angle. It occurs in some modern shop fronts be they in a mall or a shopping street e.g.Princes Street in Edinburgh. The usual physical laws of reflection and refraction apply but the illusion is rarely noticed because of the high intensity of background visual ‘noise’.

    Ghost ship is unusual in that the ‘noise’ is minimal. This is attributable to spotlessly clean plate glass, a nondescript dominant background of choppy water, the sun being behind the observer, inter alia.

    The only contact the image had with Adobe is that Photoshop Album 2.0 was used to file and catalogue the images.

    Contextually the image fits the local Aswan story of “Kitchener’s Felucca”.

  43. Pan Says:

    Photoshop.. looks like someone rendered a ship and then used the dodge tool over where the ship would sit on the water and deleted the actual ship image so the water stays lightened up but the ship is not actually there..

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: