Free Skins
© Fisana

Jump to content


Photo Making The Rounds On The Internet


  • Please log in to reply
50 replies to this topic

#1 Vlawde

Vlawde

    Seance

  • GS Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,754 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fair Oaks Ca
  • Interests:Music, games, movies, the paranormal

Posted 08 October 2017 - 08:48 AM

A photograph taken at the Colorado hotel that helped to inspire Stephen King’s bestselling novel “The Shining” shows what appears to be two “ghosts.”

The Mausling family of Aurora, Colorado, participated in a “spirit tour” at the 108-year-old Stanley Hotel in Estes Park last month. After returning home, they noticed a photo taken by John “Jay” Mausling that seemed to show a young girl walking down the stairs.

John Mausling and his wife, Jessica Martinez-Mausling, told HuffPost via email that there were no young girls in their 11-member party or on the tour.

“At first we tried to be logical and think we somehow missed her so we asked our kids, their girlfriends and our friend if they remembered seeing a little girl,” they wrote. “Nobody did. We do not remember seeing anything on the stairs when we took the picture.”


Hansen said he assumed this figure was just another person walking up the stairs with the same motion blur seen around some of the other people in the image. Then he noticed something else.

“Through the stair railing posts you should see the lower half of this person like you do the tour guide and the shoes of the person on the stairs... but I can’t make out any lower half,” he said.


Hansen added there was no litmus test for a ghost photo so it’s impossible to know for sure just what was in the picture. The Mauslings, for their part, said they don’t necessarily believe in ghosts, but were “open-minded” and didn’t discount that they could exist.


Ben Hansen, former FBI agent and host of “Fact or Faked: Paranormal Files,” said a careful analysis of the photo turned up no obvious signs of trickery.

“I really like this photo,” Hansen said. “Assuming that it’s not doctored, it ranks up there as one of the best photos of possible paranormal evidence I’ve seen. If it is faked, I’ve got to hand it to them for their level of detail and creativity because there’s usually enough easy signs to suggest hoaxing.”

While the ghostly girl stood out the most, the photo may also feature a second apparition.

The Mauslings said that at the time the photo was taken, there were just two people on the stairs: the tour guide and someone else on the tour with a cellphone. However, the image shows what could be a third figure, who appears to be walking up the stairs and away from the tour group:


Posted Image
Posted Image

#2 Jim@GhostStudy

Jim@GhostStudy

    Forum Owner

  • Root Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,717 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Sacramento
  • Interests:Enjoy good people and wholesome activities.

Posted 08 October 2017 - 09:09 AM

Cool capture!
Posted Image
Check out the GhostStudy.com "YouTube Channel!" Click here

#3 beammeup

beammeup

    Cold Spot

  • GS Member
  • 15 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Kentucky

Posted 08 October 2017 - 10:26 AM

A lot of things going on in the pic. The two ladies  sitting in the corner appear to be looking at the 'girl' on the stairs and smiling.

The next thing I noticed, the big mirrow. In the reflection you see the back of the guy, the back of lady wearing the white jacket but not the man and woman sitting in front of the window. White jacket has a boy on her left, sitting. In the mirrow, it appears to be a woman. Am I seeing this right, maybe I'm confused be the reverse image. :confused:

The little girl on the stairs reminds me of Carol Ann from the movie Poltergiest.

#4 lorac61469

lorac61469

    Demon

  • GS Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 643 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling

Posted 08 October 2017 - 12:42 PM

So much motion blur.


#5 Vlawde

Vlawde

    Seance

  • GS Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,754 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fair Oaks Ca
  • Interests:Music, games, movies, the paranormal

Posted 08 October 2017 - 02:11 PM

Yup. Because of the darker overall scene, and then the glaring lights the camera shutter was open longer than normal, thus the motion blur. The 2 'ghosts' could well be the same person, although I'm not sure about that
Posted Image

#6 siguie

siguie

    Earthbound Spirit

  • GS Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,028 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 08 October 2017 - 02:50 PM

I wish there was some EXIF data to use, I would like to know more about the shot because it just seems odd. Clearly there is motion blur BUT other people are very clear so the exposure time was not THAT long. Also "why" was the shutter speed long? Those lights are obliviously quite bright ... most cameras would have under exposed the rest of the scene because of them. There is also no depth of field issues so does that mean the aperture was relatively small?

The ghost girl is also wearing shoes that appear fairly distinct and to me not a childs shoe :no: I'm wondering if there were any other group shots? maybe the girl is an older person leaning over to go up the last step.

What I would like to know is if anyone was wearing light clothing AND if there was possibly a fill in flash used in the scene :yes:

Oh and from the shoes and motion blur ghost ghurl looks like she is stepping up ... imo :yes:
- siguie -

#7 MortimerGraves

MortimerGraves

    Incubus

  • GS Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 851 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Blue Ridge Mountains

Posted 08 October 2017 - 03:14 PM

Blur from movement. The woman in the white jacket moved during the photo, so I would postulate that a child has run for the stairs. The long streaks of light tell me a long shutter-time was used. The rest is motion blur. In the mirror is the back of the guy in front of the mirror's head, the woman beside the man on the bench, and the woman in the white jacket. From this position. there is a lot of forced perspective with the reflections in the mirror. There is either another room beyond the window, or the table must be a reflection of something on the ceiling.That's what I believe.

The weird part is a curtain-like blur top left.

God Bless
Graves

Edited by MortimerGraves, 08 October 2017 - 03:19 PM.

Who you gonna call?

#8 Jim@GhostStudy

Jim@GhostStudy

    Forum Owner

  • Root Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,717 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Sacramento
  • Interests:Enjoy good people and wholesome activities.

Posted 08 October 2017 - 03:54 PM

I'm not convinced it's long exposure.

Vlawde... did this come from another forum you visit? Or a website? What are they saying in the comments there?
Posted Image
Check out the GhostStudy.com "YouTube Channel!" Click here

#9 jwc

jwc

    Orb

  • GS Member
  • 38 posts

Posted 08 October 2017 - 04:03 PM

That is really strange, i have always wanted to visit that hotel

#10 Vlawde

Vlawde

    Seance

  • GS Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,754 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fair Oaks Ca
  • Interests:Music, games, movies, the paranormal

Posted 08 October 2017 - 04:50 PM

It's been all over the internet, Facebook etc. The text in the post was copied and pasted from an article about it. There wasn't an option to comment in the article.
Posted Image

#11 EVP

EVP

    Earthbound Spirit

  • GS Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,383 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Connecticut
  • Interests:photography, anomalous audio recordings & enigmas.

Posted 08 October 2017 - 06:07 PM

View PostJim@GhostStudy, on 08 October 2017 - 03:54 PM, said:

I'm not convinced it's long exposure.

Vlawde... did this come from another forum you visit? Or a website? What are they saying in the comments there?

Chances are the image was taken with a small sensor cellphone that requires essentially outdoor light to properly expose without dragging the shutter unless the subject matter is close to a fired flash which it is not. 95% of all images are now captured with cellphones. BTW- EXIF data has preserved one piece of data suggesting the EXIF was formulated by Motorola. Thus definitely a cellphone.

Wikipedia defines long exposure as follows:

Long-exposure, time-exposure, or slow-shutter photography involves using a long-duration shutter speed to sharply capture the stationary elements of images while blurring, smearing, or obscuring the moving elements. Long-exposure photography captures one element that conventional photography does not: an extended period of time.

This image definitely qualifies as a long exposure.

I recently mentioned that people's memory for detail are exponentially affected as time passes.  I have no doubt with the amount of activity viewed clearly in this image, recall of details are compromised. Another fact that many courtroom testimonies are thrown out of court because of huge inaccuracies with detail and timelines.

Just because someone says there wasn't a little girl in the room at the time unfortunately doesn't make it fact. There are still plenty of people who believe the world is flat (flatliners) but it doesn't make it truth.

I conclude with a high level of certainty that a long shutter was required (camera basics) & memory of all participates was compromised because of excessive activity and a significant lapse of time without documentation.

Always use natural explanations first and once all are exhausted examine what might be left. There is far more in favor of camera function and lack of recall that the "white little girl" is a ghost IMO. There isn't any supportive evidence the image is spiritual in nature.

Jim this dissertation wasn't meant to appear directed at you but the "long exposure" correction was.

Edited by EVP, 08 October 2017 - 06:27 PM.

Posted Image
"Denial ain't just a river in Egypt" - Mark Twain

#12 Jim@GhostStudy

Jim@GhostStudy

    Forum Owner

  • Root Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,717 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Sacramento
  • Interests:Enjoy good people and wholesome activities.

Posted 08 October 2017 - 09:21 PM

Was that your short answer, EVP?  :huh:

Without definite proof I'm still on the fence with the whole slow shutter speed theory. But you build an excellent case... and you could very well be right.

And if I ever need help proving a case in court, I'll be calling on you for help! ^_^
Posted Image
Check out the GhostStudy.com "YouTube Channel!" Click here

#13 EVP

EVP

    Earthbound Spirit

  • GS Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,383 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Connecticut
  • Interests:photography, anomalous audio recordings & enigmas.

Posted 08 October 2017 - 10:09 PM

View PostJim@GhostStudy, on 08 October 2017 - 09:21 PM, said:

Was that your short answer, EVP?  :huh:

Without definite proof I'm still on the fence with the whole slow shutter speed theory. But you build an excellent case... and you could very well be right.

And if I ever need help proving a case in court, I'll be calling on you for help! ^_^


LOL don't call me on a court case, I'm on the Witness Sure To Fail Protection Program :)

I think this week, I'll be making some trips to some indoor locations with my cellphone. I'll extract the data with a half a dozen samples under various lighting conditions. I can say with confidence that without a flash you will get motion blurring from any human walking  within 10 feet. Don't think for a moment you will be able to freeze action with a flash at 10 feet. Light operates on the inverse square law and the power of a cellphones flash is only good at distances up close without much movement. I'll report back back but guaranteed I will provide something more definite in proof.
Posted Image
"Denial ain't just a river in Egypt" - Mark Twain

#14 Jim@GhostStudy

Jim@GhostStudy

    Forum Owner

  • Root Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,717 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Sacramento
  • Interests:Enjoy good people and wholesome activities.

Posted 08 October 2017 - 10:49 PM

Sounds good, EVP... looking forward to the results. I might have to give it a try myself.  ;)
Posted Image
Check out the GhostStudy.com "YouTube Channel!" Click here

#15 Essiepessie

Essiepessie

    Apport

  • GS Member
  • 54 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Netherlands

Posted 09 October 2017 - 12:28 AM

Yes, the shutter speed causes motion blur
But,the two figures looks Victorian to me. Both are walking upstairs in my view.
The girl in white with her hair down in her Victorian sleeping dress... ^_^
And than the other is the "mother" walking up the stairs with her head down ( to look at the steps)  and holding up her amber/red looking dress.
Ow.. and i can see her black hair in a bun. That is what i see in this picture.
And another thing that i was wondering: what if it was a real person ( the mother) than she would't have bumped into the lady on the stairs because they are on the same place of walking.
And for the rest.. i don't see anything odd in the mirror or with the other persons. I also don't agree that the two lady's in the corner are looking at the "girl in PJ". I think they're both looking at something else. :)
Sometimes I pretend to be normal...but it gets boring..so I go back to being me.Posted Image

#16 EVP

EVP

    Earthbound Spirit

  • GS Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,383 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Connecticut
  • Interests:photography, anomalous audio recordings & enigmas.

Posted 09 October 2017 - 01:43 AM

For now I'm going to upload a 300% enlargement of this image partially cropped. I did not perform any other post processing whatsoever to retain the motion blur. I did this to allow others to examine this image more thoroughly. In my opinion, the women has three blonde haired children with her. I believe the mothers hair is blonde as well. I'll be testing motion blur as mentioned above this week with some sample images along with intact EXIF data. I count 9 people +1 in this image motion blurred because of a dragged shutter. I also suspect there is another child wearing glasses to the blonde women's left on the upper landing that I left unmarked. It also appears the women in the corner is looiking at the one child beside the mother. If you are wondering why the kids to be the most blurred, I suspect they are the ones most in motion. What kid doesn't like to race up and down stairs with an abundance of energy that never seems to quit.
Posted Image.

Edited by EVP, 09 October 2017 - 01:53 AM.

Posted Image
"Denial ain't just a river in Egypt" - Mark Twain

#17 Essiepessie

Essiepessie

    Apport

  • GS Member
  • 54 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Netherlands

Posted 09 October 2017 - 02:39 AM

hmmmm... EVP.. i like your enhancement of the picture.
And your thoughts about it sounds reasonable as well..
but that would't mean that the people are lying about the story, that there were no little children.
Sometimes I pretend to be normal...but it gets boring..so I go back to being me.Posted Image

#18 lorac61469

lorac61469

    Demon

  • GS Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 643 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling

Posted 09 October 2017 - 03:41 AM

View PostEssiepessie, on 09 October 2017 - 02:39 AM, said:

hmmmm... EVP.. i like your enhancement of the picture.
And your thoughts about it sounds reasonable as well..
but that would't mean that the people are lying about the story, that there were no little children.

Clearly they're wrong about no children, I can see two sitting on the bench under the window. I also want add that I've seen slightly different versions of the story, some say "no young girl" and some say "no young children".  

Another thing, the Stanley is a fully functioning hotel so there will be guests milling around. There may not have been a girl with their group but she could have been a guest.  It's also a wedding venue so perhaps this girl was in a wedding party, that could account for a long dress.

Edited by lorac61469, 09 October 2017 - 03:44 AM.


#19 Vlawde

Vlawde

    Seance

  • GS Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,754 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fair Oaks Ca
  • Interests:Music, games, movies, the paranormal

Posted 09 October 2017 - 07:50 AM

I don't think anyone is lying about no kids, they either forgot or didn't notice. So many times we see photos where the photographer says no one else was in the shot, but they are so focused on what they are taking a pic of they don't notice someone in the far background
Posted Image

#20 MacCionoadha BeanSidhe

MacCionoadha BeanSidhe

    Apparition

  • GS Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,884 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Location:Underworld
  • Interests:Meat Loaf(Actor/Singer not the food), Paranormal, Reading, Beading, Baking, Barbecuing, Cooking, Container Gardening and Music.

Posted 09 October 2017 - 10:28 AM

View PostVlawdeGStudy, on 09 October 2017 - 07:50 AM, said:

I don't think anyone is lying about no kids, they either forgot or didn't notice. So many times we see photos where the photographer says no one else was in the shot, but they are so focused on what they are taking a pic of they don't notice someone in the far background
Heck, when I'm engrossed in watching a movie or TV show, you can walk right in front of me and I'll never see you.

Edited by MacCionoadha BeanSidhe, 09 October 2017 - 10:29 AM.

Aquène kah nahonnushagk(Peace and farewell),
WaûtuckquesSóchepo (SnowRabbit)

The Unofficial GhostStudy Easter Bunny


Posted Image


My Shop





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users