“I read an article in the Daily Telegraph about your ghost picture studies and immediately remembered two pictures that were taken on Hallowe’en in 2004 in our garden. There was a Hallowe’en party going on, yet no one was walking down the garden (my sister was taking a picture of the house in both instances). Also, no one was wearing outfits similar to those – they almost look like Victorian dress, and I don’t know if it’s my imagination but I think you can almost make out a moustache on his face in picture 5. It’s also strange since it was a childrens’ Hallowe’en party, hence no one would be that tall.”
What do you think? Comment and vote now!
Ghostly photographs from Hauntings 
April 3, 2009 at 2:15 am |
It’s obviously a long exposure photo.
September 15, 2009 at 3:06 pm |
I tend to agree
What I find particularly strange is that the branches of the tree and the small tree on the right are not blurred
I’m not an expert in photography but shouldn’t they also be blurry due to wind etc?
Unless it was a completely windless night?
April 3, 2009 at 4:40 am |
There are so many reasons this isn’t a ghost photo…
First it is as Max says a long exposure. That is why the figure in the second photo is blurry: they were walking past.
Second, just because person 1 said that person 2 who took the photo 4 1/2 years ago said no one was there doesn’t mean anything at all. Clearly someone was there. (most of these photos heavily rely on people saying “but no one was there” as if that makes it true, and the figure in the picture is therefore a ghost.)
Third, you can’t tell the height of someone from this photo. You need a comparison photo in the day time. If the person who took the photos was crouched down to steady her elbows on her knees to steady the shot, then the figure would look taller. Or in the day with clear surroundings, the person could actually be obviously short.
Fourth, what is all this about a victorian costume? I don’t see anything victorian about it at all. It is a person wearing black pants with a black cape or sleeveless robe that comes down just below the knees. The person is wearing a white shirt. It also looks like the person has on a red full head mask or else red hair wig. Were there any mexican wrestlers or badly done Darth Mauls there that halloween? Maybe a scot?
I would want to see pictures of the party guests. I am sure that who ever it was would be easy enough to find in the crowd if you didn’t insist it was a person in a specific costume and instead looked for the shape of it and dark material with white sleves.
January 28, 2011 at 5:40 pm |
Completely agree
February 24, 2011 at 10:32 am
Spot on Ali – can’t fault your explanation one bit.
April 3, 2009 at 8:17 am |
Hi,
Where is the ghost?
April 3, 2009 at 9:36 am |
Agree with Ali and Max. Your sister went down the bottom of the garden, what makes anyone think someone else wouldn’t have had a quick wander down the garden.. in fact, it could have been someone from the party who was following her… now that’s SCARY 🙂
It is also a common event for people to start seeing ghosts on Halloween – for obvious reasons….
April 3, 2009 at 1:10 pm |
I agree with the posts already up, it’s a person in a long coat, possibly a mac of some description, taken on a long exposure. The lack of camera movement suggests that it was on a tripod or some other solid object. I don’t understand what the fact that it’s a kids party has to do with it. I’m assuming there were ‘some’ adults there to ensure that the kids didn’t end up either setting the house alight or roaming all around the place. Someone could have seen your sister going outside and taken it as an opportunity to go out for a cigarette or some fresh air without having to be in the big spooky garden on their own! The Victorian Dress and Moustache are just suggestive, if I look at it, all I can see is what looks like a red balaclava on their head which I think is glare from the light on the house.
April 3, 2009 at 4:21 pm |
Lol, I was thinking it was someone that had gone out for a cigarette the first time I looked at it too. (but that would mess with the argument that only kids were there so I kept it to myself)
April 3, 2009 at 8:43 pm
I worked on the assumption that if they were small enough not to be confused with adults then there must have been at least one adult there to look after them all.
April 4, 2009 at 5:41 am |
The thing about digital cameras is that you don’t even have to set the exposure time when it is dark. Most cameras on auto will automatically adjust the shutter speed, so those people who say they don’t even know how to do it don’t realize the camera’s doing it for them. It makes me laugh to see so many photos on here where this is the case. The slightest shake when a camera is in darkness mode will create all sorts of light streaks, blurry figures and even what looks like double exposures. It’s just the camera overcompensating for the lack of light by leaving the shutter open for slightly longer than normal.
April 8, 2009 at 1:43 am |
The photo obviously looks like double exposure, the shutter was opened for too long. And I have to commend Ali M, Dave amd Suzi for giving very interesting insight on their reasons behind the blurred figure in the photo.
April 13, 2009 at 3:33 pm |
slow shutter. NEXT!
April 13, 2009 at 5:32 pm |
I really like this image. Not as a ghost pic, but just as a photograph.
April 22, 2009 at 5:39 pm |
Excellent long exposure. Terrible “ghost” pic.
May 13, 2009 at 1:02 pm |
..Hallowe’en….Really?
June 2, 2009 at 9:13 am |
Nice pic…but the image is clearly a flaw in the camera or over-exposure. Interesting that the “orb” on the right of the picture appears to move at the same “speed” of the spectre. Non-conclusive. And definitely not a ghost photo.
June 29, 2009 at 3:15 pm |
why the hell would anyone take a photo like that if it weren’t for some purpose? i say it was to “make” a supposed ghost photo.
October 9, 2009 at 12:18 pm |
Looks like an edited picture of some guy walking past.
November 4, 2009 at 8:53 pm |
Hate to say it, but this is someone from your halloween party. I bet someone decided to step out for some air and you didn’t realize. Maybe they put on a coat before they went out and that’s why the clothing doesn’t look familar? It looks like an overcoat.
November 4, 2009 at 8:54 pm |
It also kind of looks like the guy in the first picture is wearing a mask…which would make sense at a Halloween party.
October 30, 2010 at 9:22 pm |
What!!!….No other adults, (except you, Of course…)You’d better get back in there then, They’ll be running amok!!!
December 30, 2010 at 4:52 am |
Staged. Why would you leave your house while there is a halloween party in session to go outside and take a picture of your garden?
July 7, 2011 at 2:59 pm |
I think its fake becuz it looks like a person shadow i think its completely fake
August 30, 2011 at 1:40 am |
I don’t believe this… its the same picture but different dark figures.. I noticed everything was in the same spots in both pictures, leafs didn’t change, the person inb the bottom left window is in the same position… but there’s been crazier things!
December 15, 2011 at 7:38 pm |
Yep, I remember those Halloween parties back in the day. They were about as smoke-filled and hazy as these photos. Nice house.
February 4, 2012 at 10:24 pm |
this is NOT a real ghost U can’t fool me with that trick
September 23, 2012 at 4:17 pm |
Nothing here but an overactive imagination i think. Next!……
October 23, 2013 at 12:44 pm |
Long exposure, someone walking in front of the camera
January 30, 2014 at 4:53 pm |
Vector Magic