81 replies to this topic

[robertbreyes]

http://s1289.beta.ph...cc9c53.jpg.htmli took this pic with my  digital camera near a residential rental in Hidden Hills Ca. this was a chance photo. I took picture because i thought the vegetation looked eerie. this is what appeared. when i viewed picture. eventhough i believe in the existence of ghosts, I still found myself scrutinizing the photo, trying to find some logical explanation for what i saw. I didn't believe the color would be so vibrant there are also a few other anomolies that appear a floating head and some type of old west  mountain man,  Yeah like i was saying when i looked back at the vegetation there were no red and blue or bright white that i could have mistaken for the clothing. I welcome your comments and opinions regarding this pic or contact me if you have any questions pertaining to picture thank you.(if you use the head of the ghost as center clock for reference, at the 8:00 clock position you'll see that mountain man. and above his head almost to the top slightly left is a floating head of an old man

Here is a brightened and enhanced  copyhttp://s1289.beta.ph...cdcd53.jpg.html

Edited by robertbreyes, 02 March 2013 - 12:27 PM.

[bree2981]

it seems to me it was a child sitting in a tree and u might caught some orbs. I'm far from a professional but .did the boy run?

[Snowlord]

I brightened the picture up a bit, but I don't see any reason in the picture itself to think this is anything other than someone standing on a bridge or elevated walkway of some kind. There is nothing else in the image other than a dust or moisture orb at the top, and possible pareidolia elsewhere caused by branches and background details.








.

[Vlawde]

All those branches and vegetation are like clouds...your mind will look for patterns .  Personally I don't see anything

[robertbreyes]

Snowlord, on 05 January 2013 - 07:39 AM, said:

I brightened the picture up a bit, but I don't see any reason in the picture itself to think this is anything other than someone standing on a bridge or elevated walkway of some kind. There is nothing else in the image other than a dust or moisture orb at the top, and possible pareidolia elsewhere caused by branches and background details.








.

thats a ten foot fence there was no one there and if you zoom in you can see the physical attributes are misproportioned i also drew arrows on the photo you brightend pointing to the other anomolies

[robertbreyes]

bree2981, on 05 January 2013 - 02:04 AM, said:

it seems to me it was a child sitting in a tree and u might caught some orbs. I'm far from a professional but .did the boy run?

thank you

Edited by robertbreyes, 05 March 2013 - 05:47 PM.

[robertbreyes]

Snowlord, on 05 January 2013 - 07:39 AM, said:

I brightened the picture up a bit, but I don't see any reason in the picture itself to think this is anything other than someone standing on a bridge or elevated walkway of some kind. There is nothing else in the image other than a dust or moisture orb at the top, and possible pareidolia elsewhere caused by branches and background details.








.

did you even read what i wrote? that some one was not there. when viewing a photo, if you dont see what that person sees well thats understandable. but if you see the same thing i do and i tell you there was no one there you could say something like " well if no one was there well my friend you got a ghost. the detail is almost to good to be true you gonna have a hard time cnnvinceing skeptics"  No lyou wont say this you'd rather imply that i'm lying. good luck to you sir

Snowlord, on 05 January 2013 - 07:39 AM, said:

I brightened the picture up a bit, but I don't see any reason in the picture itself to think this is anything other than someone standing on a bridge or elevated walkway of some kind. There is nothing else in the image other than a dust or moisture orb at the top, and possible pareidolia elsewhere caused by branches and background details.








.

did you even read what i wrote? that some one was not there. when viewing a photo, if you dont see what that person sees well thats understandable. but if you see the same thing i do and i tell you there was no one there you could say something like " well if no one was there well my friend you got a ghost. the detail is almost to good to be true you gonna have a hard time cnnvinceing skeptics"  No lyou wont say this you'd rather imply that i'm lying. good luck to you sir

[Snowlord]

I'm only here to analyze photographs. As far as the photograph is concerned, on it's own merits, it shows an image of a person or child on a fence or whatever it is. That is all I care about. I don't care if you're lying, or not lying, or even just mistaken somehow. I have no interest in commenting in that area.

[Clarina1980]

To me, this looks like a living person.  I'm not saying you're lying but maybe you just didn't notice them at the time you took the picture.   If it is a ghost, It's one of the best pictures I've ever seen.

[PumpkinWraith]

When you submit a photograph for analysis you have to be prepared to read comments you may not agree with.  

In your first post you said that you welcome comments and opinions and then you said ..."well you could say something like...."  That the defeats the object of asking for opinions surely...

you may be convinced that it is a ghost.  My opinion is that it is either a boy standing on the bridge or a life size dummy. I see what you see but I'm not convinced its anything paranormal. Are you now going to tell me I should be convinced I'm seeing a ghost? I definitely believe the existence of the paranormal but I just don't see a ghost in this photo.....  Does that then make me a liar?

We are here to discuss the photo not to tell others what they should and shouldn't be seeing or saying.

The face does look a bit strange but that's all that looks a bit iffy to me. It could be the tree branches causing peridolia.

Again, I'm no expert and most of us trust Snowlord as a photography analyst as that is his subject In this field.  Nobody is saying you are lying, you want opinions on your photo but you have to be prepared to see comments from skeptics and believers.  Until we prove what we can see is a ghost. All we have is your word and a photograph. Snowlord is an expert on photography and we trust his judgement.


I don't agree with things I see sometimes but then that's my opinion ... You have your opinion and I respect that.

[Paranormal_RN]

I don't see any of the other anomalies, however I disagree with previous posters on the boy.  I've never seen a "fleshy" that has a see through head, and see through legs.  If you say there was no one there, I have no reason not to believe you.  I say you caught the ghost of a child.  That's my opinion.

[robertbreyes]

SilentWalkerGStudy, on 05 January 2013 - 01:57 PM, said:

Unfortunately no one was there when the photo was taken, therefore we can only provide opinions on the evidence provided and one photo showing what does look like a living person on a fence will provide this opinion from 99% of people either here on these boards or not. In this field, the job is to provide unequivocal evidence to prove otherwise or else it will be seen as non paranormal, that is the nature of the beast. No one can say if it is paranormal but they can cast opinions on what they feel it may be. That is not calling you a liar or judging you.
These boards are frequented by all walks of life and opinions are one thing that makes these boards a great place to be. I am sorry if you expected everyone to tell you that it was 100% paranormal but that is not how we work. We always look for every conceivable reason for debunking evidence first, only when all reasons are exhausted can we start to consider anything paranormal.

Granted a picture is worth a thousand words and every mind is it's own world. i don't expect everyone to see what i see in the picture no one sees the anomolies that i see and that's fine but when we all agree thaat there definetly  a being there  and i explain the details and "bree2981"  writes "did the boy run?"  that sarcastically implies i'm lying it was noted to be respectful and courteous to others. Forgive me if it seems like i'm taking this out on you.  You were very polite. but truthfully if you would just zoom in and take a closer look you'll see that this child is not normal, you can see through parts of him, face is   odd kind of cartoonish. there used to be a gas station there in the 50's i saw an old sign i could give directions maybe someone near the area can take a look i feel the spiret is lost and i dont know how to help but it's heavy on me to get someone with experience to  check it out that's all.
thank you

Edited by robertbreyes, 05 January 2013 - 03:55 PM.

[Safire973]

robertbreyes, on 05 January 2013 - 10:58 AM, said:

thats a ten foot fence there was no one there and if you zoom in you can see the physical attributes are misproportioned i also drew arrows on the photo you brightend pointing to the other anomolies

If you zoom in far enough on any picture, everything will look distorted/misproportioned.  Also, I do not see any arrows pointing to other things you see.

robertbreyes, on 05 January 2013 - 11:43 AM, said:

did you even read what i wrote? that some one was not there. when viewing a photo, if you dont see what that person sees well thats understandable. but if you see the same thing i do and i tell you there was no one there you could say something like " well if no one was there well my friend you got a ghost. the detail is almost to good to be true you gonna have a hard time cnnvinceing skeptics"  No lyou wont say this you'd rather imply that i'm lying. good luck to you sir

Not one person here has implied, in any fashion, that you're lying.  Take it down a notch.  Just because others don't happen to agree with what you say you see doesn't mean they're calling shenanigans.

Paranormal_RN, on 05 January 2013 - 02:34 PM, said:

I don't see any of the other anomalies, however I disagree with previous posters on the boy.  I've never seen a "fleshy" that has a see through head, and see through legs.  If you say there was no one there, I have no reason not to believe you.  I say you caught the ghost of a child.  That's my opinion.

You haven't perused many "ghost" photos then.  Many of these types of pictures exist, only to be proven it was an actual person.

Now, I'm not saying anyone is absolutely right or wrong.  But you do need to respect that other people may have a different opinion.

[Paranormal_RN]

Safire, I absolutely do respect others opinions, without question!  I just gave my opinion - which didn't agree with theirs.  I have been perusing ghost photos for years, on this site and many others.  IMO, this boy could be a ghostly capture.  That is my opinion.  I didn't say others were wrong, I just stated that I didn't agree with their opinion.  Nuff said.  Thank you for pointing out my rudeness, yet again.  Have a wonderful evening.

[Snowlord]

In my opinion ... any transparency and oddness attributed to this figure is just an illusion caused by blurred, low resolution, foreground detail. I have most definitely zoomed in on it, and that just makes things worse. The pixels are so blocky and distorted that they are useless for determining the truth of any fine detail such as facial characteristics.

[robertbreyes]

Vlawde, on 05 January 2013 - 10:33 AM, said:

All those branches and vegetation are like clouds...your mind will look for patterns .  Personally I don't see anything

all that vegetation looks like some giant spider web. That's what caught my attention. and if you look closely you'll see that it meshes through the boy  as if he is weaved through it as well. he even disapeers in some places as if not to disrupt physical matter

[PumpkinWraith]

I tried to zoom in and it does get a bit distorted.  I do agree it looks transparent though but then it could just be the branches of the tree causing the effect. The background is also dark and so is the some of the face.  It could be giving the illusion of being transparent and seeing the background through the face.  And then I wonder 'if' ...not saying it is a person... If I could possibly be someone wearing camouflage makeup.  But to me also, even though it meshes through the boy the rest looks like it has substance.

The mountain man .. I can see it but again I think it's just an image created by the branches and leaves etc... And what you can see as a mountain man... I see the image of an angel.  I Honestly can't see the third one.

[Snowlord]

robertbreyes, on 05 January 2013 - 04:31 PM, said:

...  if you look closely you'll see that it meshes through the boy  as if he is weaved through it as well. he even disapeers in some places as if not to disrupt physical matter ...

The same effect is visible in the thick branch to the right .. just past where it makes an X. It's just an illusion caused by the foreground detail and low resolution. The branch that curves from bottom left to upper right seems to disappear in places as it gets foreground branches in front of it.









What looks like holes in the boy is just branches in front of him with bad pixel distortion around them. Look at it around this branch. It blocks out the background behind it.







.