Ghostly looking skulls in window...

So last night it was snowing and I've been getting kind of interested in architectural photography. With no real locations in mind I just hopped in my four wheel drive Element and decided I'd shoot whatever popped out at me first. After driving around for 15-20 minutes I come across a mausoleum and it really sparked my interest and decided instantly I wanted a shot of it.
So I take said picture and I'll be the first to admit I know my way around photoshop but this is NOT a deliberate attempt to fool anyone.. I was editing this photo ( mostly just dodge and burn and localized contrast / sharpening adjustments ) when I noticed this first. I disregarded it the first time I saw it. Then it started to kind of bother me and I went back to the raw image, used unsharp mask @ near max and looked closer and to me I can make out 2 skulls. One that looks like it's staring dead at me and the other skull looks like it is looking at said skull and screaming out of fright. Not saying that is what this picture is of, you make your own judgement. I just found it kind of disturbing. I can provide the raw if it is of some interest to anyone..

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/png'

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/png'

Edit : I just remembered I took 3 shots, 1 of the same shot just different exposure, and another with portrait framing. The skulls are moving and the one on the right looks like it's dissipating in the last shot...

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/png'

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/png'

In the second photo, it's plain to see that that's Casper the Friendly Ghost (or maybe one of his friends) on the right.

Lol. I appreciate the humor. It kind of freaks me out so laughing at it is the next best thing.

If you're really curious about what's in the windows, go back when they're open, perhaps with a copy of the crops you've posted here, and ask if you can see for yourself what's in that room, and why it might appear as skulls or similar in your pics.

As we've all experienced, the brain tries to fill in the blanks for missing data, and since you were taking pics of a mausoleum, it would only make sense that the brain sees "skulls" for less than clear images.

I have no idea what it actually is, but it appears as if there's some kind of object in the center of the window, and the "skull" is part of that.

Then again, the light colored blob towards the right looks like a cat sitting just inside the glass to me - one pic, I see the ears, the other looks like one leg is in the air, and it's licking itself (as cats are wont to do).

If anything, go back with a lens with a decent reach and see if you can get a good shot of that window and anything visible within.

Sure provide the raw files, I need a better look.

Ha ha... Coool!

I love this stuff.

That is interesting .

I am going to try to drop by this place hopefully Saturday and see whether or not I can confirm there is indeed a room where I see objects and if it is accessible by foot. I might possibly try another shoot as well if I'm not thoroughly satisfied. I will upload my raw files to dropbox within the next day or so unless someone has a better idea of where to put a 30 meg file.. Shooting with a better lens is pretty much out of the question for the most part, I only have two and the 85 mm 1.8 is not what I would necessarily consider quality..

Well, you can upload a Raw file to YouSendIt.com. Put your email address as the recipient and they send you an email notification with a link you can post here.

Then, what lens did you use? Of course, if it was wider than the 85 you can use the 85 and get a close as you can -- it looks like you took the shot from across the street or some such thing. Indistinct details like this are fun to talk about but meaningless -- get close with your longest lens and shoot in a way that wil optimize sharpness for the scene and maybe we could make something of it!

get your settings straight. why where you shooting at such high iso? 1/2000th at 28mm? you could as low as 1/50th and still handhold the camera. drop the iso to 400, f/4 to f/8, see what shutter that needs (too lazy to do the math).

i don't see no skulls, just some reflections of something in the window.

kendon wrote in post #11683766
get your settings straight. why where you shooting at such high iso? 1/2000th at 28mm? you could as low as 1/50th and still handhold the camera. drop the iso to 400, f/4 to f/8, see what shutter that needs (too lazy to do the math).

i don't see no skulls, just some reflections of something in the window.

Where did you get 1/2000th from? The exposure time was 2 seconds as it was on a tripod. What's the point of having an iso up to 6400 if you don't use it? Asides from that I don't see an obvious exposure problem with my image other than the complete lack of any natural lighting whatsoever. At f/4 I do not believe this image would be nearly as sharp and the fence would have been even more underexposed than what it is with a lower iso due to the nonexistent light, at least in my opinion.

[Then, what lens did you use?]
28mm. EXIF is intact.

my bad, my exif addon shows the 2 seconds as 2.000, which got me confused i guess...
sure you can use iso6400, if you can deal with the loss of detail. take the same shot at iso 1/2/400 and compare at 100%, you'll see the difference. using f/4 would result in a valid exposure at lower iso without skyrocketing the shutter speed, but since i had a false information about the shutter you can skip that part.

if you change aperture and shutter accordingly (i.e. shutter three stops up, aperture three stops down) your overall exposure will NOT change. not sure what you mean with underexposing the fence, as long as you don't use a flash the distance to your objects is of no importance whatsoever (for the exposure). the exposure can only be changed for the whole image, again unless using a flash.

kendon wrote in post #11684466
if you change aperture and shutter accordingly (i.e. shutter three stops up, aperture three stops down) your overall exposure will NOT change.

No but my depth of field does and while f/13 was probably a touch overkill, (considering the field of view is so small) it achieved the look I was going for.

I fail to get all the commotion. It's a mausoleum, isn't it?

They were often built on a tight budget...