Post up scary story,picture's,Video's

[CJ]

God damn there are some lunatics out there. If this is all you have to do with your time you really need some real hobbies.

[LS WHAT ??]

I dont believe but what the fuck its just to have fun with it.

[LS WHAT ??]

[71chevellejohn]

I frequently fail to take into account common sense? Hmm..Well, this was my reply way back on post#134. Looks like common sense to me. You know, debunking ghost pictures. In fact, it looks like you took the point and shoot comment right out of my mouth, after the fact.↓

Logical? In a thread about ghosts and apparitions. OK.

The commons sense comment was more of a broad generalization about how you post. And yes, I see your comment about it being a cheap camera. Then I also see you go out of your way to prove to 91cavgt that the one picture has been "tampered with".

I'm not arguing that it is a ghost picture. All I asked was for you to give me a good reason as to why this one picture is so obviously a photoshop versus just a bad picture. You can't. So I guess it is best you are done with it.

[Badass2000GT]

Man some of you no life fags have nothing better to do then argue and try to point out people mistakes. Who gives a fuck if the pics are real or not. If you actually believe in ghost stories and dumbass shit like that then maybe you don't have any common sense.

[LS1Goat]

I'm looking at it on an 18.4" screen - full screen, not a phone. And I can see the pixelation across the whole pic. It's just a bad pic taken by a cheap camera. Probably just some point and shoot that is made for taking bad vacation pictures.

You frequently fail to take into account common sense.

I frequently fail to take into account common sense? Hmm..Well, this was my reply way back on post#134. Looks like common sense to me. You know, debunking ghost pictures. In fact, it looks like you took the point and shoot comment right out of my mouth, after the fact.↓

That's all double exposure, dude. Not ghosts. Camera settings are too sensitive for flash in low ambient light. You'll see this a lot on point and shoots or even higher end cameras with the wrong aperture or shutter speed, especially on film cameras with the wrong speed film.

Try to remember that people see what they want to see. When you are dealing with ghosts/paranormal phenomenon, trying applying Occam's razor to the situation before jumping to conclusions.

Provide me one logical reason why this guy's computer-illiterate-mother would photoshop a ghost flame into their vacation pictures and send them to him. Does that really make sense to you? If it does, you've more issues than I thought.

Logical? In a thread about ghosts and apparitions. OK.

The picture I posted as an example was by removing all the color channels, except one, then magnifying it just roughly 25%. You can see the artifacting and how it's in contrast to the rest of the picture, namely the forearm. Yet, the elbow inside this flame is nothing but big pixel boxes. Find a random picture that you know is not altered. Magnify it. Go up to 200-300%. It will be distorted uniformly, regardless of degree. This, especially when your source is an already compressed image file.

Oh well, enough time wasted on this topic. I'm out.

[redrocket5.0]

<--Laughs and shakes head. I love this place.

[71chevellejohn]

I'm looking at it on an 18.4" screen - full screen, not a phone. And I can see the pixelation across the whole pic. It's just a bad pic taken by a cheap camera. Probably just some point and shoot that is made for taking bad vacation pictures.

You frequently fail to take into account common sense. Provide me one logical reason why this guy's computer-illiterate-mother would photoshop a ghost flame into their vacation pictures and send them to him. Does that really make sense to you? If it does, you've more issues than I thought.

[LS1Goat]

I think Doc Google is reading too much into the pic. When magnifying the original pic, I see the pixelation across the whole pic, not just on the flame. It's not a chop.

take your foot out of your mouth and reproduce exactly what i did. save the original picture. open PS. exclude one channel at a time. magnify each color channel. pick any at random. the only thing that pix-elates in the picture is the flame and flame edges. everything else remains normal with moderate enhancement. if you do that to a whole picture. either all will artifact from too much magnification, or all of it won't. it's all uniform, either way. this picture is not. i didn't make a big enough screen shot and that's problem why it's not jumping out at you, especially if you're looking at it on a phone. look at the picture on a laptop.

[LANTIRN]

When we were young my younger sister and I shared a room; we had bunk beds and I slept on the top bunk. We were around 6 and 8 years old (give or take) and one night I am lying in bed and can't sleep, and I am thirsty and trying to decide if I really want to get out of bed and get a drink. Well I roll over on my side where I can see the door, still thinking about getting up, and I see my sister get out of bed and walk towards it.

I said "Heather, get me some water", but she kept walking. "Hey, get me a glass of water", I said again, louder.

Well she ignored me, opened the door, and went down the hall. Kind of pissed, I jumped off the top bunk and found myself staring at my sister still sleeping in her bed. We have no other siblings. I run to the door and look down the hall; nothing. I know I saw her leave the room as sure a I see my computer screen right now. It scared the fuck out of me and when when I went back to the room she was still there in bed, sound asleep, and I don't think I slept at all that night. I asked her about it the next day and she said she had no memories of anything the last night. Still kind of creeps me out when I think about it. Some time after that I learned about out of body experiences. I guess that is what it was, and I know it shouldn't be scary since it wasn't really a ghost, but it scared me like a little bitch.

[71chevellejohn]

Ok. That's weird. My mom barely knows how to download the pics to her computer and send them to people via email. She is VERY computer illiterate. Most of the time her computer is just an expensive deck of cards.

I think Doc Google is reading too much into the pic. When magnifying the original pic, I see the pixelation across the whole pic, not just on the flame. It's not a chop.

[91cavgt]

See how her forearm skin and shirt is normal in appearance, but everything in and around the flame is heavily pix-elated (artifacts)? In other words, everything that's real in the picture, is not showing heavy distortion under a single magnified color channel. That's often tell-tale signs of composite layering via PS or similar software.

Ok. That's weird. My mom barely knows how to download the pics to her computer and send them to people via email. She is VERY computer illiterate. Most of the time her computer is just an expensive deck of cards.

[LS1Goat]

How do you mean tampered with? Like someone put it in there with something like photoshop of some sorts?

See how her forearm skin and shirt is normal in appearance, but everything in and around the flame is heavily pix-elated (artifacts)? In other words, everything that's real in the picture, is not showing heavy distortion under a single magnified color channel. That's often tell-tale signs of composite layering via PS or similar software.

[91cavgt]

OK. Here you go.

I removed all channels, except for the blue channel. And I then magnified it. Notice the compression artifacts around the "flame", but the lady's forearm remains normal in appearance? This picture has been tampered with. Hope this helps you understand a little better. The others were simple double exposure using flash in low ambient lighting.

How do you mean tampered with? Like someone put it in there with something like photoshop of some sorts?

[LS1Goat]

You bring up a very valid point. Do the "flame" pictures come from the same problem with the camera or are they something else?

So besides the double exposure picture, what about the rest? What logical explanation is there for the other things I posted. I have an open mind and am waiting for a logical explanation from you.

OK. Here you go.

I removed all channels, except for the blue channel. And I then magnified it. Notice the compression artifacts around the "flame", but the lady's forearm remains normal in appearance? This picture has been tampered with. Hope this helps you understand a little better. The others were simple double exposure using flash in low ambient lighting.