Paranormal Photo?

[lopix]

Without getting into the story surrounding this shot, I would love to hear ideas as to just how this could happen. I have done nothing to the shots simply decreased the contrast in trhe RAW file and exported to JPEG, then resized to post here. This is exactly what I saw on the LCD after the shot, though NOT what I saw through the viewfinder.

Image Details:
Camera: Canon 20D
Lens: Sigma 18-50mm
Focal Length: 18mm
Shutter: 1 second
Aperture: f/8
ISO: 100
Taken Sunday June 5, 2005

If you have the bandwidth and want a hi-res version (5mb), email me and I can send it over.

[EOSAddict]

So what DID you see thru the viewfinder compared to wahts posted????

[Jon, The Elder]

Iopix- Had a similar effect soon after buying my 20D. It was a horizontal blending of shots I took at the zoo last fall. before and after shots were fine.
Firmware was ver. 1.0.0 factory installed
However - I used a Lexar 1Gb 4X (not 40X) that I had been using in my 300D. Reformatted twice in camera (20D).
Firmware upgrade 1.01 supposedly fixed a compatibility problem with "some" CF cards. So did ver. 1.03

No problems since then - but the computer still takes a little longer reading this card. I use it exclusively on my wifes "new" 300D.

Of course the PARANORMAL theory is more fun.

[Andy_T]

I thought you need a PARANORMALIC tripod head to take true PARANORMAL pictures.

Or am I confusing this :wink:

Best regards,
Andy

[lopix]

I saw all of the guy, nothing funny, him standing there as the 2 of them were horsing around. Looked totally normal... until I saw the image on the LCD.

Firmware is the one just back of the 2.0 they just released, newer it sounds than yours. I have taken around 1,500 shots with this camera and never seen this before. I have been shooting film and digital for 13 years and never seen this. It is a Sandisk Extreme 1gb card in the camera, reformatted about a month ago, maybe less. Never shot these guys until Sunday, no way they could been on the card before. And no other shot had the right setup to enable the overlap.

And it was a tripod shot, so it wasn't camera movement or anything. You can see the reclining guy has moved a bit, if you zoom in. But the other guy is sharp, he did not move.

My initial thought was that it was an exposure thing, that the light overpowered him and washed him out. But, the line is way too sharp, and you can see him between the panes of glass, so that is not the answer. That is where it gets so weird for me, you can see him between the panes, the glass blocks him out, but not the wood. And the other guy is covering the window properly, so it is a good comparison - why one and not the other?

Lastly, you want the paranormal? This was taken in a burned out area of a 90-year-old abandoned mental institution. The guy who is cut off didn't even want to go in that room, he got creeped out big time. When he finally did, this is the only shot of him in that room. It was also colder in that room than anywhere else, which is odd. And, to top it all off, right after I took the shot, my wife and their manager asked each other if they felt someting. Apparently, 2 feet behind me, they felt a strong and cold gust of wind go past their legs. I felt nothing 2 feet from them. Most windows and all doors board up, no wind that day to speak of and it was a good 30 degrees celsius.

I have sent it to Canon to see what they say, but it just freaks me right the f**k out...

[BlueTit]

Weird, not sure how the memory card can be responsible for that unless two shots were taken in close succession and they have some how merged. How could the LCD "see" something behind someone, in this case the bottom right of the window. I have no explanation.

[lopix]

Exactly, how did the window behind him show up, when I could not see it through the viewfinder?

[lopix]

Okay, been talking to Canon tech rep via email and all they could come up with was:

"The most obvious is the line of the window light. This is caused because a sensor or film is only able to receive so much image information in one specific area until the value reaches white. Although the sensor received the image of the guy standing up the window through the course of the one second exposure overpowered this image information and basically blew through this part of the image."

Sorry, that does not work for me. That is what I thought, the light from the window overpowered the guy standing in front of it. If so, why can you see parts of him between the window panes? Also, the image is nowhere near overexposed, so it does not make sense. And, if that were the case, then why is there detail in the window pane? Why can you see the pattern of the glass and the dirt on it? If the light overpowered the guy, how could it leave the dirt and texture? And the guy on the left is also in front of the window, yet he is not overpowered - how could that be? And wouldn't it be a fuzzy line through him, the glow of the window gradually lessening, rather than the sharp and defined line? Even if the "one second exposure overpowered this image information and basically blew through this part of the image" were true, how could the camera see right through the guy to expose what was behind him?

[Rob612]

Okay, been talking to Canon tech rep via email and all they could come up with was:

"The most obvious is the line of the window light. This is caused because a sensor or film is only able to receive so much image information in one specific area until the value reaches white. Although the sensor received the image of the guy standing up the window through the course of the one second exposure overpowered this image information and basically blew through this part of the image."

Altough I do not have an explanation, I fully agree with you, the canon explanation just does not work in this case, IMHO.

[rent]

could you see in the exif if the flash was fired?

if it was, then the explanation could be:

1) the guy was exposed properly when the flash fired, he then moved away after the flash.
2) but the long exposure (1 sec) subsequently exposed the window properly therefore the bright part of the window appears in front of the guy.

-alex

[rent]

looking at the picture again, it does look like a flash shadow behind the guy. -alex

[lopix]

Yup, fired the flash at -2exp for fill, side light can be seen to the extreme left. And I was watching, he did not move, he did not even know I was going to take the shot...

[ATI058]

Paranormal phenomenom or equipment anomaly? Certainly a mystery :confused:??: but the question remains, can this effect be intentionally repeated in another location?

[BrandonSi]

vampires. watch your neck ;)

[rent]

i think i can produce this easily if the guy moves after the flash. but if he's stationary for that entire 1 sec., i'd file it in the paranormal folder. :p

-alex

Paranormal phenomenom or equipment anomaly? Certainly a mystery :confused:??: but the question remains, can this effect be intentionally repeated in another location?

[montreal]

Looks to me like there were two exposures. You can sort of see it on the guy with the ball cap. His head moved between the two exposures.

[lopix]

Except that the shot before had the 2 of them sitting at the desk and the shot after was in another room. There isn't another shot to merge with it. This is the only one I took with them like that, because after this we left that room. No way for it to be 2 exposures. The guy on the desk moved, that's all, 1 sec exposure after all. If he is blurred due to the multiple exposure, then why is nothing else showing the same effect?

[clickit]

Smoke and mirrors? Maybe just mirrors.

[CyberDyneSystems]

Flash lit up the guy.. but after (or before) the flash the CMOS exposed the window because the guy moved after the flash (or before) out of the way... one second left plenty of time for him to move out of the way and expose the bright window light... the flash duration was like 1/10,000 of a second...

The miracle is that both the flash exposure and the backlite were proberly handeld by ETTL ;)

[lopix]

But he did not move, I saw him standing there when I pushed the button, he did not know I was going to take the shot and thus would not have been ready to move. If you look closely, you can see that the guy on the desk shifted during the 1 second exposure, as his hat and arms are slightly blurred, but the guy in front of the window has none of the blurring, he is sharp, because he did not move.

And there was no smoke or mirrors involved, trust me...

[PhotosGuy]

Canon may be right. I think I can see part of his arm between the lower window panes.

[lopix]

Exactly. If it was an overexposure of the window, how could you see his body between the panes? That is the main reason that wrecks their argument.

[Lamplight]

This would have been a lot cooler if you had never seen the "ghost" before in your life, until this shot. :lol:

[lopix]

Yeah really, if that guy had not been there at all when the shot was taken... Would've needed clean shorts that's for sure!

[jscotti]

Seems sort of obvious - during the 1 second exposure, after the flash fired, the guy moved or ducked out of the way allowing the background to appear. If you think he just stood there, you probably weren't watching him. It would be trivial to recreate this image without invoking any supernatural phenomena.

Jim.

[Candid Bandit]

This happenned to me before after I dropped my camera when it was on and the cf card popped out. I started getting shots that was either halfed moved up with the moved up half on the bottom. Looked exactly like this but instead I was shooting my wifes purses to sell on ebay. Its the CF card man.. I changed it and it never happenned again. I gave the card to my brother and he was getting the same problem.

[eljustino]

2 seconds with flash is the key clue here.

The only reasonable explanation is that the guy in black T-shirt moved away as soon as the flash had fired. That is a 100% plausible, highly probable explanation and would yield exactly what you see here. I know because I've seen this kind of thing before (done by mistake), taking slow sync flash photos.

I'd say that's what happened, and I'd bet money on it.

I've also seen things like this from memory card glitches etc - but the specific effect you see here could ONLY be the result of the subject moving after the flash fired, in my opinion.

Either that or you're playing a trick on us all! :-)

No ghosties and ghouls, sorry!

DEBUNK: you say "he can't have moved because he's too sharp". Not true. Because the right side of him is in darkness, only the flash would have effect. Even if he moved after a second or so, it would still be enough to have this effect. And of course, when were the lights outside the window turned on? During the shot?