Free Skins
© Fisana

Jump to content


My Eerie Photo - I Have Always Been A Skeptic.


  • Please log in to reply
4 replies to this topic

#1 addiepearson

addiepearson

    False Positive

  • GS Member
  • 3 posts

Posted 22 October 2018 - 06:49 AM

We just moved from England, to the West Coast of Canada.
We went for a walk down by an old train station the other night, as a family, where there is a large hallow tree stump.
It's in an old logging area, so this tree stump is probably hundreds of years old.
My dad used to spend a lot of his life around this area, and he passed away in August 2018.
I do feel his presence around us.
My partner's mum died a couple of years ago, and he went to see a medium before we moved, who told him that he should look closely at photos because his mum was saying she would be around us.
So I'm not sure what to think.
The image has a definite shape to it, almost bat-like, as if there is a leg, bottom left, and ears and wings(?)
I've never taken a photo like this before, that I've ever noticed anyway... thoughts?

Thahks
#photospirit

Attached Files



#2 EVP

EVP

    Earthbound Spirit

  • GS Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,424 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Connecticut
  • Interests:Digital Stills / Auditory Enigmas

Posted 22 October 2018 - 05:51 PM

Addie, if you would like to send me the original image via email I could help you better. Unfortunately all of the image information (EXIF) has been removed and validation will be very limited AKA assumption. I'll PM you my email address if you wish further analysis.

From what I can gather from the file name, the image was originally created with a Nikon camera. Typically DSC files point to a Nikon Disc Identification file.

Here's my assumption from the viewing. Again, having the file properties fully intact and unaltered would offer a more definitive deduction.

If your camera was set to program or auto mode, the camera would have struggled using nothing but ambient light and would have dragged the shutter. It's fairly evident, the suns position in the sky would have shielded the camera and subsequently required more time for a proper exposure to be made. There doesn't appear to be a catchlight present in the eyes of either of the two girls. If an onboard flash would have been used, the action would be frozen as the flash essentially becomes the shutter speed. Flashes fire approximately from 1/400 second at full power to 1/8000 second at the lowest. That's more than enough to freeze action.

Creating a sharp shot with nothing but ambient light without blur is dependent on the size of the object, distance fromn the lens and focal length and speed of the movement. In general terms your shutter speed needs to be the reverse reciprocal of the focal length. Example 50 mm lens = 1/50 second minimum. If you are using a crop sensor camera with a 1.5x factor = 1/80 second minimum.

I don't know many kids that can sit still when they are shot. I've done my share of children photography to understand that.

With the conditions you have presented, motion blur is most likely the culprit of this enigma. In auto/program mode, the shutter would have been dragged. In those modes, the F-Stop, shutter speed and ISO would have been set by the camera. That doesn't always reflect the vision of the photographer. With a combination of camera movement by the photographer and your subject matter failing to sit still, blur would have been introduced into the image.

I'll PM you if you want the EXIF data verfied from my deductions.

Edited by EVP, 22 October 2018 - 06:23 PM.


#3 addiepearson

addiepearson

    False Positive

  • GS Member
  • 3 posts

Posted 22 October 2018 - 07:03 PM

I'll try to send you a better photo. It was taken on my phone, and at night.

#4 KlaineyGStudy

KlaineyGStudy

    Forum Manager

  • Root Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,763 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling

Posted 22 October 2018 - 11:52 PM

Hello and welcome to the boards addie. It is an interesting photo and I am sure our loved ones love to visit too.

EVP thanks for all your photo savvy stuff :) too
Posted Image


Visit us here: Facebook or Twitter

#5 EVP

EVP

    Earthbound Spirit

  • GS Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,424 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Connecticut
  • Interests:Digital Stills / Auditory Enigmas

Posted 23 October 2018 - 12:10 AM

View PostKlaineyGStudy, on 22 October 2018 - 11:52 PM, said:

EVP thanks for all your photo savvy stuff :) too

You are welcome Klainey, just trying to help out where I can.


View Postaddiepearson, on 22 October 2018 - 07:03 PM, said:

I'll try to send you a better photo. It was taken on my phone, and at night.

I'll need the original jpg addie. An email of the original will preserve the data. Anything less stands an exponential possibility of failure with EXIF data being absent.

If you don't feel comfortable sharing your email, you have validated your shutter was light starved (which I suspected) from shooting at night and succumbed to motion blur in the image. Additionally, cellphone sensor size aren't effective in low light situations.

Below is a sensor size comparison of recent digital cameras. The larger the sensor, the stronger in low light ability. Canon also produced 1.3x crop known as APS-H up until 2009 when they replaced it with a full frame sensor. in their pro bodies.  That isn't listed in the chart but it's situated between  the FF sensor and APS-C. It's still developed but for surveillance purposes only.

Posted Image

Edited by EVP, 23 October 2018 - 12:35 AM.