“I have a pair of photographs I would like you to see. They were taken by my father in law around 10 years ago. They are a pair, taken on a very old digital camera and apparently very close together time wise. Oner of them is normal, the second one has a full blown apparition of a woman in the background. To explain, the two children are his grandkids. Above their heads is a square glass aparture that allows light into the hallway. As you can see, behind this on the second picture is a woman, as clear as day. Nobody in the family recognizes this woman or knows who she is. Any thoughts or comments would be appreciated.”
What do you think? Comment and vote now!
Ghostly photographs from Hauntings 
March 29, 2009 at 7:37 pm |
I think the white circles were drawn on MS Paint, hardly a ghost-related mystery.
March 30, 2009 at 1:13 am |
I want to know why the hell people keep thinking that comment is funny. It gets old. Nobody wants their kids faces plastered over the internet! ¬_¬
April 3, 2009 at 8:06 am |
actually thats not the mystery the mystery is that there is a GHOSTLY WOMAN in the 2nd pic.
April 4, 2009 at 11:41 am
He knows,he was just making a joke dear.
April 15, 2009 at 9:56 am |
Maybe it’s a thief.
March 29, 2009 at 7:38 pm |
That is quite clearly a woman standing on the other side of the opening.
March 29, 2009 at 8:12 pm |
In the first picture, there is a blue cloth or curtain hanging. In the second picture it is gone. Someone could have been standing there the whole time and then moved the curtain for the second picture.
March 29, 2009 at 10:24 pm |
I agree, this is either a curtain or a screen, which appears to have been pulled back to reveal the woman in the second picture, the bottom of the left sleeve of her coat also seems to be visible in both pictures, judging by the proximity to the vases.
April 3, 2009 at 8:08 am
Well yes but it could be that it is a real ghost just waiting did ya eva think about THAT HU!
March 29, 2009 at 9:02 pm |
they are sitting the exact same way in both pictures. the only difference in the pitures is the first one has a blue cloth in the opening, while the second it is gone.
April 1, 2009 at 10:10 pm |
Actually, if you look at the boy on the right, his hands are different. It looks like two pics taken in quick succession.
March 29, 2009 at 9:05 pm |
That woman can’t be on the other side. If you notice, the “wooden pole” coming down from top center (the brown thing on the other side) can be seen through her head. She must be standing on the side of the photographer (reflection?). Yes, there might be a reason why there’s a curtain in the first but not the second…Now, no one recognizes the woman…that’s weird. Either they do and they say they don’t or…Didn’t the father notice this while he was taking the picture? It seems pretty obvious that anyone would notice this before they snapped the photo. Therefore, it is very likely that this is a real person’s reflection on the glass. If there is a real person next to the photographer, the photographer would not notice. But because he knows that she’s there, he wouldn’t care…
What I find strange is that the shadow from the flower vase is darker in the second photo. In addition, the blue design vanishes in the second photo. Could it be that there’s someone on the other side because the shadow wouldn’t be darker unless someone block the light from the other side…….
March 29, 2009 at 9:25 pm |
Well I guess it could have been faked, that seems the most obvious explanation, but assuming the submitter is reporting honestly and her father in law is not on a wind up, this one is the most convincing I seem so far!
March 29, 2009 at 9:39 pm |
Always skeptical, I initially assumed that these 2 were the same photo, 1 being the original and the 2nd being digitally altered. However, the positioning of the boy on the right’s left hand is noticeably different (one is a closed fist, other slightly open) and the boy on the left’s head is angled more in the second picture than in the first.
But even with that cleared up, I’m still skeptical because there looks to be so much altered in the second, with regard to the woman. Where did that wooden pole come from? What is that dark object directly to the left of the vase?
March 30, 2009 at 3:53 pm |
Uh that would be the shadow of the vase.
March 29, 2009 at 9:48 pm |
This id obviously a fake. The wooden post is still there in the second one, but the second pic (theone with the figure) was lightened up before the image was superimposed. If this was a reflection or someone behind the glass you would still see the wooden pole. It disappears in the second pic because the image was superimposed OVER it.
March 29, 2009 at 9:58 pm |
that man utd kit was out about 5 years ago
March 29, 2009 at 10:06 pm |
This really does look like the image has been photoshopped. It is not a copy the same photo – the boy on the left has his head in a different position. The real giveaway is the quality of the light in the images. It is almost identical in both photos apart from in the aperture where it is generally darker. This points towards digital alteration rather than a reflection or anything supernatural.
March 29, 2009 at 10:27 pm |
I agree with Carrie, there appears to be a curtain or screen which has been pulled back to ‘reveal’ the woman, the bottom of her left sleeve appears to be visible in both pictures, judging by the proximity to the vases.
March 30, 2009 at 12:53 am |
I think the second one is a genuine photo with a woman, who is standing to the right of the photographer, reflected in the window
I would guess that it is the first one that has been ‘photoshopped’!
– the woman has been replaced by a slightly out-of-place looking curtain…
– the send of the photo hopes to fool us by saying the second one is the unusual one, when it’s actually the first one that’s the fake…
March 30, 2009 at 1:19 am |
I have had the abilty to see Spirits all of my life and I can tell you that is extremely rare to see one manifested as densely as this one…even in photos. The woman in this picture is a living woman. But, what I find ironic is that there IS in fact a Spirit in this photo. Look at the cropped version…just below the neck, you can clearly, or at least I do…see the Spirit who popped in. I don’t think they realize that in trying to prove a Spirit was there that they did actually capture one..just NOT where they thought. This is the way they usually appear in photo’s…
May 12, 2009 at 2:27 am |
“I have had the ability to see Spirits all of my life”
Sure you do, sweetheart.
Now take your pills.
September 23, 2012 at 4:46 pm |
Funnily enough, i’ve been seeing living people all my life and this just looks like how one would look in a manipulated photograph.
March 30, 2009 at 3:42 am |
I agree completely with Samantha. Woman’s hair and face reflect light…she´s alive.
March 30, 2009 at 4:13 am |
Samantha – I liked what you wrote but when I reviewed the photo and look below her neck: that is actually the reflection of the photographer that you think is the unexpected ghost – you can even see the camera if you look carefully. Interestingly what everyone else seems to think is a curtain or fabric, looks to me like the glass reflection or something if you check carefully. Either way it’s fun to look at them!
March 30, 2009 at 4:17 am |
I think she wants to know if the kids want it Super-Sized.
March 30, 2009 at 9:11 am |
It’s a reflection from the window to the above-right. She was probably walking by, doing a little people-watching. There is no mystery here.
March 30, 2009 at 9:11 am |
I don’t think it’s a curtain but rather a door with a curtain on which is opened in one photo and closed in the next and if you look at the reflection of the vase the colour of it is much darker in the second photo suggesting someone (the women) is standing on the other side of the glass and causing the reflection to contrast against her own reflection. So my guess is she’s real and was indeed standing there but because the photo was taken at an odd angle the light is refracted from the window her image has become slightly transparent (like a reflection of a reflection because there appears to be plenty of windows in the image)
March 30, 2009 at 11:51 am |
Obviously a reflection of a woman standing to the right of the photographer who is looking at the reflection of the photographer from her point of view. Don’t know her? Smells of nonsense to me. This is easily reproduced with no digital manipulation.
March 30, 2009 at 1:35 pm |
Judging by the light sources and the curtains in the room this could even be an obtuse reflection of someone walking past/checking their reflection in the window (out of shot on the right hand side of the photo), especially if there is more than one glass surface in the room – the fact there seems to be another window behind the one you can see the lady in….light can do all sorts of funny things to images on glass.
March 30, 2009 at 2:17 pm |
The picture is interesting, she is obviosly standing in front of the blu curtain but why the shadow from the vase darker in the second one? Sometimes it kills me how many excuses people will make to cover up a simple ghost picture! C”mon people,give it up!
March 30, 2009 at 3:53 pm |
Why would anyone bother to take two “identical” photos?
March 30, 2009 at 6:06 pm |
They are not identical, look at the boy on the rights hand. We are all sceptic in this house, however everyone has agreed that this was a pic of me around 10yrs ago!!!!!!!!!!!!! HOW WEID IS THAT?
March 30, 2009 at 6:08 pm |
PS…. if we look a bit closer, what appears to every1 as a curtain is obviously blue wallpaper.
March 30, 2009 at 8:23 pm |
Hi guys,
This is my submission, and I promise you this has not been photoshopped. My father in law is in his 60’s and has no interest in faking this and wouldn’t know how to. We have had other pictures from his house (polaroid) that have shown spirits too, though none as clear as this. There is one (though I’ve not seen it) with my wife’s dead grandfather and their dead dog on it.
All I can say is that a) This is nobody we know or recognize and b) I don’t think anybody has tampered with the picture. If this were a refection, she would be bigger, as the scale of the room is all wrong. We’ve tried to fake this with no success. The reason that there are two pics so close together is that it was Christmas and the camera was a present, the photographer was experementing. The fact, if you believe me, that nobody from the family recognizes this woman should speak volumes. Look at her clothes and hairstyle, they’re hardly fashionable for the time, I thought late 70’s.
Believe me, this is genuine.
April 6, 2009 at 1:26 pm |
I think a little amateur psychology reveals all here.
You wrote “We’ve tried to fake this with no success”. That is to say, this is a fake and it’s not going down too well as a genuine ghost photograh.
Maybe if you had written “we’ve tried to RECREATE this picture with no success” then I would have believed you.
March 20, 2011 at 2:23 pm
your a fking idiot
March 30, 2009 at 8:40 pm |
You got a visitor!!
March 30, 2009 at 9:49 pm |
the bouquet has double appearing reflection :
first the flowers are reflected on the womans’ left shoulder, in continuity with the normal reflection, whereas in photo 1 the reflected blossom stops with what everyone calls the “pole” (which seems to be the siding of a doorway or passage).
second, if you look in the enlargement at the woman’s other shoulder, it seems clear that the same flowers and vase are visible AGAIN, they occupy all the space above the ceramic dog. It actually looks as if the woman had flowers on her shoulders.
So either there are reflections of reflections of reflections, a small error in photoshopping, or artificial floral bouquets have souls as well (even when they are not dead).
March 31, 2009 at 4:16 am |
Purposely faked. Simple as that.
There is obvious manipulation taking place at the time the photo was taken, as has already been pointed out. The curtain disappears and the person can be seen behind the curtain in the first photo.
I can understand someone mistaking something for a ghost, but purposeful fraud is disgusting.
March 31, 2009 at 8:35 am |
Sad attempt at faking a ghostly picture. Apparently, when ghosts appear, window curtains and window wood accents disappear. Must be a decorating ghost?
March 31, 2009 at 8:43 am |
Hi Ben, I think it would be interesting to speak to you. I got the fright of my life yesteday when I saw this pic and when I showed it to many of my family and friends, without saying a word evey 1 of them shrieked ” thats you”. Now in saying that, it looks like me 10yrs ago, co-incidence maybe as I am certainly still alive…lol. My 23yr old son who doesnt belive in ghosts or anything to do with it is completely amazed and shocked. He even recognised the scarf and jacket!!!!
March 31, 2009 at 3:16 pm |
Yay joyce! Go ahead and feed those delusions.
March 31, 2009 at 3:38 pm |
hi Ben
I trust you, but the Joyce’s message proved it: the girl isn’t ghost, she’s alive! Maybe it’s a case of “bilocation” (be in two places at the same time)
March 31, 2009 at 4:36 pm |
Dont know wot u r getting at Shayalon, I have only expressed what we all thought, as I said I AM ALIVE AND KICKING SO OBVIOUSLY NOT A GHOST!!!! I was merely wanting to speak to this guy to find out where it was taken and whether there was some sort of connection. I could have been passing by outside the house at the time….if it is me! Failing that there must be a ghost who looks identical to me!!
March 31, 2009 at 6:21 pm |
well by looking at either the clock or borometer on the far wall i would say the hands are different !!!
March 31, 2009 at 6:24 pm |
Hello again,
There have been many interesting replies to this. It upsets me to be accused of faking this, I haven’t. If I was going to fake this, do you not think I would have made it less obvious and more subtle? I understand that this it is rare to see such things, but I agree, people passing off crappy fakes as real is disgusting. If this is a reflection then the angles involved are ridiculous.
Joyce, the photo was taken in Grimsby. If you live anywhere around here, get in touch. I’d like to see the resemblance!
April 1, 2009 at 11:44 am |
If you look at the first photo i swear you can just see her right sleeve then when you look at the second photo it is in the exact same place but with her in full veiw can anyone else see this.
April 1, 2009 at 5:11 pm |
I did a check in an image manipulation program and was able to get a 3D effect from the face in the window which suggest it’s a real person outside of the window looking in.
April 1, 2009 at 6:20 pm |
SHE IS BEING REFLECTED IN THE WINDOW, FROM THE SAME SIDE OF THE PHOTOGRAPHER. THE SHADOW OF THE VASE ON THE WINDOW IS DARKER BECAUSE SHE IS IN FRONT OF IT. THIS IS GENUINE, FOLKS. SHE CANNOT BE OUTSIDE OF THE WINDOW, LOOKING IN, AS THERE IS A CURTAIN WHERE HER FACE WOULD BE.
April 1, 2009 at 10:32 pm |
Karakas Muiito Ilarioo essa foto eh de arrepiar !
April 2, 2009 at 12:33 am |
It’s obvious the curtain(or whatever) is hanging on the outside of the window and the woman has placed her self between the curtain and the window.
April 3, 2009 at 8:04 am |
Dear whoever showed the pic i belive you beacause im a daughter but eny way I hope that 1 day I can go somewere that I can hopefully get a ghost 2 b my friend i may not know everything about ghosts but I dont care what enybody says because i want to 1 day be friends with a ghost
I BELIVE IN GHOSTS!!!!!!!!!!!!!
April 3, 2009 at 11:42 am |
Probably a fake perhaps to scare the two subject children, it would have freaked me out if it were me. My arguments being:
1) Doubtful if she could be reflected in the window that big and stay out of shot.
2) The darker colouration around her body and left arm suggest a picture of the lady has been made fairly transparent and inserted over the existing image.
3) The location of the lady means that she would have to be ‘in’ the glass to avoid objects which are still visible on the other side of the glass i.e. the sliding door/curtain/blue thing, the pole and still be behind the dog statue and the vase on the camera side.
4) The light on her face suggests that she couldn’t be on the other side of the glass cause the wall would block most of it out, there is a window behind her but there is light on her nose suggesting it’s coming from approximately where the edge of the wall is.
5) Based on the age of the football top (01/02 season Man Utd centenary away shirt) this would be an easy picture to create using software that came with most home computers and wouldn’t require any particularly advanced skills.
Oh and by the way, taking more than one photo of something is not that unusual, I take anywhere from 2 to 10 photos of the same thing sometimes just to cover any problems which may occur with a single shot.
April 3, 2009 at 4:50 pm |
Mate, you’re approaching this as if she should be a real, whole, physically manifested person. If this is real, she is not. She’s a ghost and you couldn’t even begin to comprehend why the light hits what what way and how she’s where she is or whatever.
April 3, 2009 at 8:50 pm |
I never said anything about the way the light hits a ghost. If you read what I said properly I was trying to find arguments against why it was a REAL LIVING PERSON on the other side of the glass. Please read comments properly before criticising. If anything I was supporting the idea it’s potentially supernatural by ruling out the presence of an actual person in most ways except being edited in digitally.
April 3, 2009 at 8:55 pm
Seeing it again now, I think it is edited.. but yeah, sorry, excuse my confusion.
April 3, 2009 at 4:51 pm |
And Henning, she is being reflected IN the window. She is not physically behind the window, in front of the curtain.
April 3, 2009 at 6:01 pm |
I can cleary see the arm of the woman in 1st picutre
April 4, 2009 at 6:02 am |
I think this is an inadvertently faked photo. There is an old theater trick to create transparent ghostly images on stage with a clear piece of glass and precisely angled light. The Muppet Show used to use that trick to make ghosts appear on the stage with the “live” Muppets. If there is glass in that cubby hole on the wall (doesn’t look like a window to me, just a hole in the wall for knick knacks) and someone was standing facing the couch at the right angle, that would explain the transparent nature of the image.
April 4, 2009 at 11:46 am |
Personally I think the second photo is just an edit of the first. All the creases in the cloths are exactly the same in both and the kids are sitting the exact same way in both photos. kids always fidget so u would think that there would be something alittle differnt with the kids in one photo from the othere.
Sorry if anyones pointed this out already I haven’t read many of the comments.
April 4, 2009 at 12:41 pm |
I think this one, while on the surface it looks very mysterious and confusing, actually has a simpler solution than would be immediately apparent. It is nothing more than an illusion. Who are we seeing? Most likely the photographer, and probably somebody standing behind him, but they have merged in the image, to appear as one person. It is our minds that make it out to be a woman’s face, while it is, in fact, two separate people superimposed in the glass (or possibly the photographer, and something behind him. As has been mentioned elsewhere, we are hard-coded to recognize faces. Remember the “Face on Mars” image from several years ago? I think every tabloid in the known universe published that one! Yet, later photos of the same formation from other angles showed it was really nothing like a face. 🙂
Why would the glass be darker in one photo and not the other? Simple–clouds. I have taken many photos only seconds apart, yet the lighting was completely different due to clouds moving overhead, and creating different lighting effects and shadows.
I would just remind people that a digital camera of a decade ago couldn’t have been above 2 megapixels. That is a very low pixel count to be able to enlarge to get much genuine detail. Also, if the ISO was at all bumped (and probably was not super low), the noise introduced at the sensor would also add its own patterns, etc. to the image. Even more important, for the sake of this discussion, it would be very difficult to photoshop something this complex into such a low-res image without it being obvious–at least to the experienced eye. I do not think that this photo was photoshopped. It’s just an illusion of light and objects, creating the effect of a woman’s face.
-JOn
April 4, 2009 at 3:27 pm |
If is a reflection of a woman standing to the right of the photografer, she should be there watching he take the photos. So, why is her reflection looking directly to the camera and not to the kids?
April 4, 2009 at 5:31 pm |
Faces merging? Buddy, it’s more likely a ghost than merging faces. I’m all for rational explanations, but you’re taking it a bit far just too explain this.
April 4, 2009 at 7:31 pm |
@EndAll…. so, what you are saying is that your eyes are not deceivable? That this is too obviously a “ghost” because that is all you can see? Hm. What you have here is a horribly low-resolution photo that gives the appearance of a woman’s face, yet, at the same time, you can see the man’s camera, etc. I’ve spent probably hundreds of hours, staring at digital images on my computers. I’ve seen a lot of stuff in my time. And before that, probably more hundreds in a darkroom, under an enlarger. What I am describing is not at all unique nor that outlandish, or I wouldn’t have bothered even _posting_ here. It’s just not worth my time. So, you can believe your own easily-deceivable eyes (and everybody’s eyes are easily deceived), but I will trust my experience and knowledge. I’m not asking you to believe me–just not trust your eyes.
-Jon
April 4, 2009 at 7:39 pm |
My eyes can be deceived, sure, but to a certain extent. Deceit is not this blatant, though. The face on mars was not as clear as this. If anything, it has been photoshopped… more likely than a ghost, and much more likely than your long winded attempt at explaining it.
April 4, 2009 at 7:44 pm |
So, I’m long-winded–shoot me. All you are saying is that if you can’t digest it in a few sound bites, then you can’t accept it. Not everything in life can be solved in the time span of a tv sitcom, nor the attention span of a 5-yr-old. I shall bow to your superior wisdom and graspt of things. It is a ghost. i was wrong and stand corrected. How could I be so stupid to think that what I saw was anything but. You have convinced me.
-Jon
April 4, 2009 at 7:46 pm |
I just said it was more likely photoshopped than a ghost. Perhaps your attention span is lacking, Jon.
April 4, 2009 at 8:12 pm |
LOL! Could be. But I read the “photoshopped” as referring to the face in Mars as the closer antecedent…. And yes, from that point on…. I didn’t pay too much attention. You got me on that one. 🙂 But I still don’t see Photoshop in this one. It would have to be very subtle work at a pixel level–that is beyond the means of your average hack-job. Part of the problem is that the closeup _has_ been enhanced. It’s not simply blown up. But one detail I will point out from the image. If you notice her left arm, where it is next to the white. There is a purple tinge there, and all the way up the wall there. That is called chromatic aberration, and is not easy to get rid of without artifacts. Nor is it easy to work around, again, without artifacts, yet, if this photo _is_ photoshopped, somebody succeeded _very_ well–and I mean _very_ well–not that I won’t discount it, but the story of the ancient camera, etc. kind of made me suspect that Photoshop wasn’t involved….
…Now, something I just did, and don’t know why I didn’t think of it before. I copied both images as separate layers into one file, with the “ghost” image on top. I then reduced its opacity slowly to 0%. Interesting result….
One thing I’ll point out. Notice the cat on the window sill in front of her. It’s not the same shape in the two windows….
-Jon
April 4, 2009 at 9:06 pm |
Good point, it indeed is not exactly the same shape – the same with the little box directly beside it. Her left arm, as you pointed out.. the shadow being cast on the window, which is covering part of that vase – that would be her left arm, correct? Is that another deception of our eyes?
April 5, 2009 at 10:11 pm |
that woman looks like my PE teacher… shes not dead, but the resembalance is uncanny
April 6, 2009 at 2:41 pm |
if this was not our assembly is a real appearance, I have doubts about this phenomenon is really like a person with a photo
April 6, 2009 at 5:00 pm |
nossa muito irado 😦
April 12, 2009 at 12:46 pm |
mirror reflection!
April 13, 2009 at 3:40 pm |
TOTALLY PHOTOSHOPPED. gutted. next!
April 16, 2009 at 8:03 pm |
Top photo is definately darker. Whose a naughty boy and tampered with the photo?
April 17, 2009 at 8:24 pm |
Hi guys
For the last time, this is not photoshopped. It’s not a reflection, because we have no idea who the hell this is. I can’t prove it either way, you’ll just have to take my word for it. I’ve nothing to gain by faking this.
Ben
May 12, 2009 at 2:34 am |
Sure you do. Look! You’ve got everybody’s attention!
But really, it’s a reflection of someone. Maybe you knew her, maybe you didn’t and she was just passing by… but it’s not a ghost.
If you WANT to believe, then have at it. Enjoy. You got your answer, though, and you don’t seem to want to accept the logical choice… You’d rather it be something paranormal so you can continue to have a great story to go with that creepy photo, and maybe a little something to make it easier to fall asleep at night, secure in the knowledge that we “go on” after we die, when you know (as do we all) deep down that we don’t. We just die.
Ghost pictures say something about the people who insist they’re ghost pictures. Who was it that died and traumatized you so much that you’re simply unwilling to accept that this is NOT proof of an afterlife?
It’s a reflection. It’s JUST a reflection. Sorry if you don’t know the person being reflected, but it’s a lot more plausible that you had a LIVING stranger in your neighborhood than a dead one.
June 17, 2009 at 4:53 pm
Zero, Many people defend their photos, when they “know” it wasnt tampered so give him a break. Are you an expert?
June 17, 2009 at 4:51 pm |
Hi Ben, I have a question (didnt read all the comments). Does that glass go to a public hallway, where people go to their apartments etc or into a hallway in a private place? Thanks
July 6, 2009 at 12:59 am |
enough to make you question it anyways. pretty cool. in both photos there is a pic of a ship on the ocean that seems to have a face in it as well, is it a part of the actual painting or just matrixing? has anyone else noticed this?
July 19, 2009 at 12:14 am |
Switching quickly between the two photos while zoomed in on the window area convinces me that one of them has obviously been modified, despite “ben’s” protests.
The light levels in parts of the window change dramatically, whilst in other parts of the photo the light level stays pretty much identical. The light reflected on the brown ceramic dog/cat/thing, for instance. Plus that thing’s head appears to change shape.
Here is an animated GIF which should make it clear:
In other words: FAKE!
July 19, 2009 at 4:43 pm |
Oh dear, like old ketchup, the plot thickens… I’ve noticed another reflection in the photo that weakens my theory that the photo is a fake, in the glass vase in the far right if the window, here’s another GIF…
I feel like Deckard from that scene in Blade Runner…
“Enhance 5719
Track 45 left, Stop
Enhance 15 to 23
Give me a hard copy right there.”
July 19, 2009 at 6:15 pm |
August 14, 2009 at 9:43 pm |
Hey,
Interesting to see the debate still raging here. In answer to Bystander’s question, the hallway is private, it’s a house. I never noticed the second reflection provided by Tomato Ketchup, so that’s odd.
August 20, 2009 at 7:02 pm |
Not photoshopped, not a ghost, it’s just a woman, either behind the window or reflected in it. Sorry to say, but obviously the the only thing that makes this picture extraordinary is the testimony of the father-in-law. It’s basically a ghost *story*, not a ghost picture.
August 21, 2009 at 1:59 pm |
This id obviously a fake. The wooden post is still there in the second one, but the second pic (theone with the figure) was lightened up before the image was superimposed. If this was a reflection or someone behind the glass you would still see the wooden pole. It disappears in the second pic because the image was superimposed OVER it.
as i saw it as well!
October 8, 2009 at 11:33 pm |
No. This photo is very easily faked.
For a start- I find it interesting that there are 2 almost identical copies of the image, which tells me that a tripod was used. Not so unusual I know, but when you’re making an image to ‘mask’ you always make 2, so that you can make changes to the original picture or ADD detail. All they had to do was mask the image and then turn down the opacity of the shot where the girl had entered.
Secondly, the comment I noticed about the blue curtain. When you look at the side of the blue curtain you can see what looks like a human arm… a much more solid human arm, which says to me yes- there was a girl waiting behind the blue curtain.
October 9, 2009 at 12:32 pm |
Fake.
November 6, 2009 at 12:56 am |
when i look at this 1 i though it was odd .. but i had a close look and i shaw thats my mum who past away 2009!! i pulled up pic of my mum and and it to close for comfot even the coat that she wore. but the thing is this was taken 10 year ago……. i would love to know were this pic was taken
January 27, 2010 at 11:15 pm |
Hi I don’t think this is real sorry. A ghost can appear clear but no so clear that you can see if its caucaseon african american Asian or whatever.
This is definately a reflection..someone is pulling your leg…sorry x
April 12, 2010 at 3:48 am |
This is a very simple, PHOTOSHOP!
Take the photo and place another ‘person’ using the SOFT LIGHT mode. -.-‘
April 12, 2010 at 7:10 am |
Poor picture editing indeed
April 28, 2010 at 3:16 am |
Pfft. Oh, please.
Notice? The kids are in the exact same position in both pictures! EXACTLY, there is no difference in their position whatsoever.
Notice? The camera is in the exact same position, all the same stuff is cut out, the same exact picture is shown, except for the woman.
Notice? You can even tell they were TRYING to make it look like a different picture! They moved the white circles covering the kids’ faces a little up and to the side, to make it look like their heads were in a different position and to make you think they placed the spots different in a different picture.
Some of you have pointed out the blue curtain. While it may appear that it’s gone, if you look closely, you can see that it’s still there, it’s just faded out and a different color, behind the woman. Which doesn’t make sense, by the way. If she was standing outside the window, she wouldn’t be in FRONT of the curtain.
Really, NOTHING is different about this photo, except for the woman, and the spots. The woman was edited in, and the spots were shifted.
Fake.
April 28, 2010 at 5:53 am |
I agree fully with Kaitlyn, who gives the most rational explanation of these pictures. Fake indeed!
May 16, 2010 at 8:59 am |
Maybe it’s a thief.
May 19, 2010 at 12:38 pm |
sorry Kaitlyn, but its two separate pictures just look at the younger boys hands. in the second photo his fists are fully clenched. as for the woman,i don’t know, shes certainly stood in the room with the boys and being reflected from the glass window, could be a ghost.
June 15, 2010 at 7:32 pm |
This picture has totally shocked me. I recently got my hair cut and I look exactly like her! I put my website link up to page with my picture on it. Picture my hair shorter now and not pulled back.
July 11, 2010 at 4:13 pm |
looks like what me and my kids do with a logitech webcam filter called “i see a ghost”
July 12, 2010 at 5:21 pm |
the person who put these pics up said they ae 2 diff pics just taken close together. the blue curtin hasnt moved it just looks that way cause the ghosts reflection is infront of it. i believe in ghosts so i think its real.
July 15, 2010 at 3:11 pm |
Where did the wooden bar to the right of the blue curtain go? My guess is that this curtain is part of a glass door that is open in the first picture. It is closed in the second picture, revealing the “ghost” that just went through the door.
This implies that she is standing behind the window, in the hallway. You don’t see the blue curtains shining through the ghost. Those folds are the actual reflection. Notice the purple curtains on the extreme right of the pictures. I would expect a second set of those curtains even further to the right. Just compare the purple curtains on the right with the curtains that appear to be behind the ghost.
July 18, 2010 at 12:59 pm |
I like that the original explanation says “square glass aperture”
window is a useful term to describe those. :op
August 4, 2010 at 12:38 pm |
She looks very scary
October 17, 2010 at 3:03 pm |
Photoshop or reflecton.
January 16, 2011 at 11:00 pm |
I honestly can’t believe someone would waste the space on this website to post something like this, it’s obvious that is just a woman standing on the other side of the opening,
January 20, 2011 at 1:06 am |
relax
January 28, 2011 at 6:20 pm |
it seems to me like its a mirror set up to look like a window and she is reflected.
February 13, 2011 at 11:28 am |
that very funny you-know because the two boys are in the exact position its obviously been photo shopped
June 23, 2011 at 7:29 am |
i would be inclined to think it is just an incidence of someone in the other room – my attention being drawing to the more solid indication of a shape through the shadow of the vase which blocks the reflection that is confusing the postion of what is where – however if the person who posted this is telling the truth that no one knows who this woman in their house is then this would be difficult to explain away and may indeed be the remnant shade of someone deceased possibly – -it has that disconcerting expressionless look of a ghost
June 29, 2011 at 1:22 am |
It’s quite obviously a picture with a woman who has opened the curtain and they are either lying about not knowing the woman or they simply don’t remember.
I think the people who say ‘quite obviously photoshopped’ make themselves sound a bit silly. Although ‘photoshop’ is a better explanation than ‘ghost’, it being a woman standing there is the best one.
Also, you can see her shoulder behind the curtain. She is standing behind the window in both shots, but only moves the curtain for the second. The external window to the right is reflected onto the window she is looking out of.
August 30, 2011 at 2:24 am |
this is the same picture though. So how can anyone believe in it if its the same picture? U can tell cause the boys clothes don’t move/shift… but who am I to judge.
September 30, 2011 at 1:19 pm |
colour, colours, free colours, color mixer…
[…]Ghost in next room « Ghostly photographs from Hauntings[…]…
October 6, 2011 at 1:12 am |
These were taken within seconds of each other right? The top picture is slightly darker than the one below – therefore it has been tampered with, most probably a fake; boo yeah I’m good!
November 23, 2011 at 1:28 pm |
Do the kids always appear with white circles in photos? I’m guessing they are older now, so have the white circles aged as well?
December 15, 2011 at 7:05 pm |
I would tell these two boy as well that this was a picture of a ghost that lives here to keep them in line from acting up.Great Job!!
August 9, 2013 at 9:54 pm |
If this is where i think it is i can tell u exactly who the ghost. Is iknow when and how. Please reply just confirm the town.
November 16, 2013 at 3:20 pm |
Grimsby
April 30, 2014 at 12:47 am |
This is totally photoshopped because that is MY mother’s face/picture and she is still living *laughing * .I even recognize the plaid shirt she was wearing …this is a definite fake …someone stole my mom’s pic from facebook or something ..and photoshopped it in this picture
May 25, 2015 at 7:34 am |
It could have been someone reflection
February 10, 2018 at 1:35 pm |
I know that these seems completely nuts but I was flicking through some of these ghost pictures and came across this one. I am extremely curious as to what area this was snapped in. This is the nutty part, i swear that is an image of me! Don’t know how how to download a picture of me to show you what I mean but have shown this image to friends and family and they also are convinced. The weird thing is that some people that I know have said that they have seen me in their houses when I wasn’t there. I am not whimsical in any way and am a registered nurse so have to be sensible but the resemblance to me in this image is uncanny!