Ghost photobombs

Randwolf said:
You seriously can't see that's a mirror?
Click to expand...
Disagree. A mirror makes no sense for several reasons.

- there are no mirrored objects anywhere in the picture, no couch, no dining table, etc.

- the apparition cannot be a reflection of the photographer. A mirror is perpendicular to the line of sight of a subject viewing itself. So the geometry around the apparition would converge on a single point perspective.
 
back_seat_ghost_lg-56a6eb663df78cf77290e952.jpg



Mrs. Mabel Chinnery was visiting the grave of her mother one day in 1959. She had brought along her camera to take photographs of the gravesite. After snapping a few shots of her mother's gravestone, she took an impromptu photo of her husband, who was waiting alone in the car. At least the Chinnerys thought he was alone.

When the film was developed, the couple was more than surprised to see a figure wearing glasses sitting in the back seat of the car. Mrs. Chinnery immediately recognized the image of her mother – the woman whose grave they had visited on that day. A photographic expert who examined the print determined that the image of the woman was neither a reflection nor a double exposure. "I stake my reputation on the fact that the picture is genuine," he testified.

https://www.thoughtco.com/best-ghos...4126828?_ga=1.265794703.1270223455.1488935330
 
granny_lg-56a6ebb75f9b58b7d0e57cf5.jpg


"This photo was received from Denise Russell. "The lady in the color photo is my granny," she says. "She lived on her own until age 94, when her mind started to weaken and had to be moved to an assisted living home for her own safety. At the end of the first week, there was a picnic for the residents and their families. My mother and sister attended. My sister took two pictures that day, and this is one of them. It was taken on Sunday, 8/17/97, and we think the man behind her is my grandpa who passed away on Sunday, 8/14/84.

We did not notice the man in the picture until Christmas Day, 2000 (granny had since passed away), while browsing through some loose family photos at my parents' house. My sister thought it was such a nice picture of granny that she even made a copy for mom, but still, nobody noticed the man behind her for over three years! When I arrived at my parents' house that Christmas day, my sister handed me the picture and said, "Who do you think this man behind granny looks like?" It took a few seconds for it to sink in. I was absolutely speechless. The black and white photos show that it really looks like him."

https://www.thoughtco.com/best-ghos...4126828?_ga=1.265794703.1270223455.1488935330
 
Magical Realist said:
5818d628e57b9.jpg

This image, uploaded to Imgur, shows a little girl in her living room. Her mother had taken the photo, but the thing is, no one else was home. It was just the girl and her mom... so who is that watching them from the dining room?

http://www.virascoop.com/lists/lists/10-freaky-ghost-photobombs-that-will-make-you-a-believer/178
Click to expand...

Critical analysis of this one could be done in one's sleep. Still, let's slog through it. It's short.

What is the mystery supposed to be here? That no one was home? Who says no one was home? The author of the article says so, that's who. Anyone else? Nope.
If the author could quote someone, you can bet he would.


This account is a vacuous as 'Only 2% of people can get this!' Facebook Quizzes.
 
Last edited:
Once you recognize that part of the supposed figure here is actually the edge of the back seat, it becomes fairly apparent that two light splotches and a dark slash below it are really just another good example of pareidolia.
ghostly.jpg

Some critical analysis:

This is yet another example where the people at the event (the only ones who could possibly substantiate the event) are not quoted. It is simply the author's say-so.

But wait! There is a quote - from a photographer, who declares that this photo is genuine.

Well ... granted. The authenticity of the photo is not in question. There's no reason to suspect this photo has been tampered with. It's just a photo.


See, quoting the photographer about authenticity of the photo makes it appear - to someone not used to critical analysis - that there is some authenticity to the story. Kind of a bait & switch, if you're not paying attention.
 
DaveC426913 said:
Sorry, I see a reflection of the window off the seat of chair. Looks normal to me.
Click to expand...
If not a mirror...maybe a sheet of hard plastic???
I'm kind of new to a MR spook thread, is this all people are suppose to do? That is, be amazed at MR's cut and paste of pictures? And to think Paddo use to get it in the neck for this kind of thing.
MR the cut and paste king... Or is it queen? The thread is a laugh though, for the wrong reasons.
 
Last edited:
lunch-ghost-anim-56a6ec403df78cf77290f3dc.gif

Vacation Party Ghost. Source: The Society for Psychical Research
"These two photos were taken in 1988 at the Hotel Vierjahreszeiten in Maurach, Austria. Several vacationers gathered for a farewell party at the hotel and decided to take a group photo. One of the party, Mr. Todd, set up is Canon film camera on a nearby table and pointed it at the group. (The table is the white band at the bottom of the photos.) He set the self-timer on the camera and hurried back to the table. The shutter clicked and the film wound forward, but the flash did not fire. So Todd set the camera for a second shot. This time the flash fired.

The film was later developed, and it wasn't until one of party members was viewing the photos that it was noticed that the first (non-flash) photo showed a somewhat blurry extra head! (In the sequence above, the second (flash) photo is actually shown first for the sake of comparison.) No one recognized the ghostly woman, and they could not imagine how her image appeared in the picture. Besides being a bit out of focus, the woman's head is also too large compared to the other vacationers, unless she is sitting closer to the camera, which would put her in the middle of the table.

The photo was examined by the Royal Photographic Society, the photographic department of Leicester University, and the Society for Psychical Research, all of which ruled out a double exposure as the cause."---https://www.thoughtco.com/paranormal-photo-galleries-2595900
 
sweetpea said:
If not a mirror...maybe a sheet of hard plastic???
I'm kind of new to a MR spook thread, is this all people are suppose to do? That is, be amazed at MR's cut and paste of pictures? And to think Paddo use to get it in the neck for this kind of thing.
MR the cut and paste king... Or is it queen? The thread is a laugh though, for the wrong reasons.
Click to expand...

If you were being honest, one could tell 'paddo' willingly engaged MR and seemed to enjoy the sarcastic and sometimes funny banter back and forth. It's obvious that if someone spends time in these sections, then if not even taken seriously, they find it amusing or curious even if not admitted, otherwise they wouldn't spend much time, would they?
 
birch said:
If you were being honest, one could tell 'paddo' willingly engaged MR and seemed to enjoy the sarcastic and sometimes funny banter back and forth. It's obvious that if someone spends time in these sections, then if not even taken seriously, they find it amusing or curious even if not admitted, otherwise they wouldn't spend much time, would they?
Click to expand...

I'm of the same mind. There is a chance here to at least enjoy an amazing "what if" scenario for those committed to a rather boring and mundane physicalist ontology. It's an escape into an alternative universe. The ones who persistently troll and whine about everything in the thread are just venting their frustration that they can't debunk paranormal phenomena. It's a typical defense mechanism against accepting something they are determined not to believe in. But it makes you wonder why they keep coming back to this thread to subject themselves to such aggravation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top