|
Email Reaction
The following messages were received by email, thanks to those who took the time to respond.
Home | Guestbook Entries | Newsgroup Postings |
Look-a-Like suggestions
My comments are in red
Date: Wed, 25 Mar 1998 15:33:09 +1100
From: Robert Oertel
Subject: Your website
I appreciate the fact that you are bemused by the "televisual apparition"
and have posted in order to seek opinions and/or answers. Well I do not
have any answers but my opinion is that the image is far too clear and
"clinical" to be real.
Date: 26 Mar 98 10:56:19 EST
From: "Russell A. McAllister"
Subject: Screen
There is a clue in the "Screen" picture, that is, the wedge shaped black
area on the bottom left corner of the screen, which indicates to me that
this is a picture of a television image.
This blank area was most likely caused by the interaction between the frame
rate of the television and the camera shutter speed.
If you take a shot of a television picture with a shutter speed of higher
than 1/25 (1/30 in the US) the entire screen image will not appear on the
film.
This is because the television screen is scanned from top to bottom 25/(30)
times a second by a single scanning dot, in the same manner as one reads a
book, going across and dropping down for the next horizontal line.
You can see these lines if you look closely at a TV scraan
So, what you will get on film will be only the areas of the television
picture that is actually scanned while the shutter is open.
A shot taken at 1/100th, for example, would only show about 1/4 the
television image as a horizontal band somewhere on the screen. The rest of
the screen would appear black.
In the case of the your "Screen" picture, the shutter opened at just the
right instant as the TV scan started at the top of the screen, then closed
just before the scan came to the bottom.
If the shot had been taked at any other instant, the blank area would have
been elsewhere on the screen, showing as a horizontal black band.
Why is the blank area slanted? This is because the picture most likely was
taken with a "SLR" camera, which has a curtain shutter. When the shutter
opens or closes, it takes a certain amount of time for the curtain to slide
across the film (horizontally), so a little more scanning of the television
picture can take place during this time. The result is a slanting to the
edge of the film-recorded image
Thanks for your mail. You are the first to point out the triangular black
mark in the bottom left corner of the screen, I am not convinced that your
explanation of this is correct but we do need to have a closer look at
that area.
I have asked grant if he can bring the photograph back into work so I can
scan it again at even higher resolution. Another chap here has asked for
the negatives so he can enlarge the screen and look for raster lines.
Date: 27 Mar 98 12:19:00 EST
From: "Russell A. McAllister"
Subject: Re: Screen
Thanks for the reply. I doubt if you will see raster lines on the negative,
but it won't hurt to try.
There is another possible clue in the bright horizontal stripe at the top
right of the image.
As you notice, the scanning on the bottom right of the image has gone below
the edge of the screen,and has restarted at the top, giving a small
wedge-shaped section that has been scanned twice while the shutter was open,
making it a bit brighter.
Russ
Could be, but that looks like reflections off the glass to me.
Date: Fri, 27 Mar 1998 13:58:48 -0500
From: Dougmander
Subject: Re: A ghostly photo
Did you get a look at that guy's tonsorial configuration? Attention! The
afterlife needs barbers!
Judging from your photo, it looks like the most popular show in the Other
World is Ken Burns' History of the Civil War. Was there creaky fiddle
music playing in the room at the time, by chance?
To exorcise this spirit, I recommend renting Burns' History of Baseball
and playing it through your VCR. When the ghost falls asleep, it may
safely be carried out to the trashbin.
Doug
Date: Fri, 27 Mar 1998 20:32:29 +0100
From: bartjack
Subject: Odp: A ghostly photo
Hi Simon
Your photo is quite good.
That's all.
PS
If you wonna korespond with me, write:
JACK
Date: Sat, 28 Mar 1998 17:26:11 +0000
From: stephen.walsh1
Subject: TV Ghost Photograph
Hi, I have quite a bit of experience of these kind of claims. To be
honest the photo looks like nothing more than a still from some old
black and white movie, or archive footage. Hence we would be foolish to
assume it is anything else. I would conclude that someone is engaging in
a little bit of leg-pulling.
Stephen '4TN' Walsh
Date: Sat, 28 Mar 1998 20:03:36 -0500
From: Jeff Breuer
Subject: ghost image
just because the image is on the photo neg doesn't mean there wasn't
some tom-foolery by the processing lab.
jeff
Date: Sun, 29 Mar 1998 00:37:44 +0000
From: LLazu
Subject: this is great!
this is great, much fun, but King Ludwig has his hair parted in the middle
while TV Ghost has his parted on the side;
anyhow, it just ain't what it is implied to be...
nan
click on link below to view my pages designed to load quickly... let me
know how it went
http://www.mindspring.com/~maregaudere/nanenquirer.html
nannzz
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1998 20:16:14 +0100
From: WSHMCC
Subject: the tv spook
Hi.
Being a sceptic in the true sense, I accept there are infinite
possibilities,
but in the case of the TV screen image, even allowing for pixelation in
conversion to a JPEGimage,
my feeling is that there is not a sufficient level of randomness when the
pixels in the hair line are compared with the background.
The overall highlights on the face also lead me to believe that this is a
doctored image. This is possible with any Adobe photoshop-style program
Thanks for taking the time to pass on your opinions of our ghost photo.
You are wrong when you say the image has been doctored electronically,
although I do agree that this would be easy to do, I give you my word
that I have not done so. The photograph exists and the image of the
face is also on the negative. If this is a fake then either it has been
doctored at the developers, which I doubt, or the TV has to be on.
Slim.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
SLIM HAINES, E-mailer to the Weird!
Laugh and the World Laughs with you,
Limp and you walk alone.
E-MAIL ADDRESSES
Main weirds@globalnet.co.uk
2nd koyaanisqatsi@freeyellow.com
3rd ararapikva@geocities.com
WEB SITES
SLIM'S WEIRD WORLD.
www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~weirds
SLIM'S WEIRD SHIT HAPPENS M.C.C.
www.geocities.com/capecanaveral/2516
SLIM'S SNIFFIN' ABOUT AND LURKIN' LINKER.
www.freeyellow.com/members2/koyaanisqatsi/index.html
SLIM'S SRPKE RESEARCH SITE(under construction Jan '98)
www.geocities.com/area51/rampart/7303
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 04:57:24 EDT
From: ENS510
Subject: ghost....
it looks real, and i belive in ghosts....but u never know with todays tech.
people can do jus about anything....nice page...
ens510
Subject: Ghost Picture
Date: Sun, 10 May 1998 12:36:20 -0700
From: obiwan
Interesting picture. It *does* look like the TV is on, although
from the position of the flash it seems like there should be a
bigger part of the screen blacked out if that were the case.
I'll have to drag out some of my "inadvertantly caught the tube"
shots and compare them to yours.
I'd say it was a fake (sorry). The image on the screen looks
like an old photo circa early 1900s. I'm not saying YOU faked
it, but it just doesn't look real to me.
BTW, I've put a link to your site on my page.
http://www.ghosts.org/
Date: Wed, 11 Feb 1998 01:09:45 -0600
From: David Cotton
Subject: Ghostly goings on...
Heres the problem, a TV's CRT refreshes 25 times a second, but a
camera's time frame is mere hundreths of a second. Unless professional
low speed film was used (also a steardy tirpod) then it's impossible for
it to have been faked by means of a video image etc, with normal film
you'd usually get nothing from the screen.
My only other rational theory is a transparent over the TV screen.
Personally I'm thinking I'll hedge my bets towards the paranormal...
spooky
Dave
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 18:16:57 -0500
From: Daniel Allan
Subject: ghosts
I think your spook does exist,very good site.I saw my fist ghost when I was
4 it's convincing man!!
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1999 03:58:48 EST
From: PPV122LHFE
Subject: ABout
Is so strange the picture if was taken as you say was taken. First of all
the 24 lines per second in the screen DO NOT APPEAR, it is like 100 lines
per second. Believe me, that guy could be a real devil or ? well I just
don't know, I am sure that is not me
Date: Thu, 11 Feb 1999 22:25:46 -0800
From: Steven Tseng
Subject: about the ghost in the TV
I really think it is fake.....why would anyone take a picture of
their TV (when it's off)? It's not like it's a very nice TV or
something.
Date: Thu, 8 Apr 1999 02:07:31 EDT
From: Wakeaawa
Subject: picture on tv
im positive your picture is real, because i have seen it before, while
working the night shift in a convienant store, this face was in the
vedio game that was on the othere side of store, the eyes would follow
you, the game was unplugged at the time, i saw it for three days ,and
finaly i guit that job, i thought it was a oman or a warning . melbourne
florida
Date: Sun, 2 May 1999 12:20:30 -0700
From: michelle m ballou
hello. I do believe in ghosts. When i was a child i lived in a (haunted
house) Saw some unbeleivable things. I am in the u.s. Small state of New
Hampshire. The picture gave me chills!! Michelle
Date: Sun, 2 May 1999 17:41:03 +0100
From: Aled Roberts
Subject: GHOST
WELL THIS IS PROBABLY ON THE TELLY AND THEY TOOK A PICCIE AND THEN GOT IT
DEVELOPED AND LIED ABOUT IT! ITS A FAKE AND YES I HAVE SEEN A GHOST!
Date: Sun, 13 Jun 1999 22:04:51 EDT
From: Geist
Subject: your tv ghost
I DONT THINK THE PICTURE ON THE TV IS A FAKE. LOOK AT THE HAIR STYLE, NOTICE
THAT THERE IS NO NECK OR BODY BELOW THE HEAD. THE GHOST ALSO SEEMS NOT TO
TAKE NOTICE OF THE PHOTO BEING TAKEN OF THE TV AND ITS SURRONDINGS. IF THE
THE GHOST WAS A LIVING PERSON YOU WOULD THINK IT WOULD HAVE A SMILE ON ITS
FACE, WHEN THE PICTURE WAS SNAPPED, AND BE LOOKING AT THE CAMERA. TVS THROW
OFF ALOT OF STATIC ELECTRICITY AFTER THEY ARE SHUT OFF, SO MAYBE THE GHOST
NEEDED A RECHARGE OF ELECTROMAGNETIC ENERGY. IT MOVED TO THE TV, FOR POWER,
THE PICTURE WAS SNAPPED,CATCHING THE GHOST AROUND THE TV, THE RESULT THE
SCREEN ON THE TV ACTED AS A TRANSMITTER THUS ALLOWING THE GHOSTS IMAGE TO BE
CAUGHT BY THE CAMERA. ANYWAYS NICE PHOTO, I DONT THINK ITS FAKE AT ALL, WHY
WOULD ANYONE GO TO THAT MUCH TROUBLE.
Date: Thu, 8 Jul 1999 00:53:18 -0700
From: Scott Heubach
Subject: Photo
Outstanding,
However, I think a few points need to be addressed.
1) If it is a ghost, what the hell is it looking at?
2) Modern TV's do not have to be on to project images. It is quite easy to
"bounce" projected images off of a flat screen. (See Hollywood for details)
This is how I think you did it.
I noted that below the TV, the picture loses color and continuity. I believe
that is for a reason. I believe you taped an image of a friend's face, stilled
the image, grained it for a "spooky" quality, then ran through the VCR. A four
headed job would do nicely, even in the troublesome corners.
While projecting the image (the VCR probably ran for maybe 10 seconds) you
snapped the photo. As far as the TV being "off", is this just because we see
no power lights? Electricians' tape does wonders. If you had flashed this
with TV off, the power light would have still reflected a small portion of the
light.
Very well done. I may not be entirely correct, but I bet I'm close.
Please do not use these images without our permission.
© Simon Hart & Grant Wilson
March 1998
|