“For those who believe, no proof is necessary. For those who don’t believe, no proof is possible.” - Stuart Chase

A particulary interesting segment of ghost pictures truly intrigues me to no end. It is the capture of ‘partial’ ghosts in pictures, where even though no on claims to have seen anything, a partial spectre is caught staring at the camera. It’s rather creepy actually, considering the fact that many of these ghosts caught are clear as day. Of course, the question remains. Ghost, or pareidolia?

The first I’d like to look at was a wedding photo from the Scienceof ghosts site.

wedding1

wedding2

This photo is rather creepy to me since what you see is a nice wonderful photo at a wedding that looks rather normal. When blown up,  you can clearly see someone hiding behind  the man on the right! It is completely curious to me, the leg that you see appears to be of the posture of someone who is standing straight up, yet for the eye and the portion of the face peeking out, you would think the person would be standing on the front of their feet, their butt would be sticking out past the guy. Is this a ghost or a case of pareidolia? Could it be a child hiding behind the man, if so consider how big the foot behind the man is. It is close to the size of the man’s foot in the foreground, thus could it belong to a child if it is indeed a child hiding?

The second is a famous picture of Freddy Jackson, circa 1919. Freddy Jackson was an airplane mechanic who was killed by a propeller a few days earlier.

freddyjackson

Freddy appears behind the man at the top, fourth from the left. Curious how similar this is to the previous photo. The ghost is almost hiding yet aware and peeking out from behind someone. Source: Paranormal.About.com

Another photo from Scienceofghosts. This one is a random picture submitted to the site which shows picture of a head behind the mans knee.

matt

The head appears to be in the bookcase, judging by looking at it. I’d almost have to write this off as a hoax or a photoshop because of the ‘redeye’ effect, as the ghost clearly has it. But then again, who am I to say? I mean if a ghost can take on not only form but substance, why can’t it have redeyes?

Another trippy photo from Scienceofghosts.

lunch-ghost-anim

Hopefully everyone can see the two pictures appearing here. The photos appear to be of a group having dinner/lunch. In the second picture out of nowhere appears the bust of a lady. These two picture couldn’t have been taken very far appart (check the levels of beer in the glasses). The ghost seems to appear on the table! Notice she has shoulders and a head, and you can even see in the glass in front of her the relection of her shirt/sweater! This has got to be a bonfide photo of a ghost. It’s just curious the she appears in the middle of the table!

How strange these photos are. Why are the ghosts hiding? They first three are obviously aware of the camera, yet they got caught. The lady in the fourth isn’t paying attention to the camera (or so it appears), but appears in the middle of the table in front of people, in sitting position (presumably)? Even though these are but a few photos where a ghost is captured in and around a group of people, why not more? Are these lost souls bound to someone or something? Are these ghosts, fakes or pareidolia?

 

Feedback welcomed!

  • Gary,

    The Freddy Jackson Photograph is one that I’ve seen for years now. I have a lot of paranormal books that I’ve collected through out the years (for like 15 years almost) and I can guarantee you that you will find that photograph in almost all of them.

    So many people in the squadron in the pictured testified that the ghostly face was that of the recently deceased mechanic.

    Could it be someone peeking out through a back window? sure. That still does not explain why the rest of them say that it looked like Freddy Jackson. Unless you factor in pareidolia into the equation I guess.

    Great post!

  • Jules

    Very interesting ! I’ve also seen the Freddy picture many times over the years. I’m not very familiar with pareidolia but I intend to read up on it, thanks to you guys.

    The top picture, the wedding folks, looks like a dwarf or little person standing behind the man. I have no idea why he would be there or maybe he is a little person spirit ? but the proportions match an adult little person.

    This has fast become one of my favorite sites ! My thanks to everyone involved : )

  • Gary P

    Jules, I can buy into that with the wedding photo considering back in that day many of the little folk probably felt shunned. Why not appear in the picture then?

    Of course the description from the site I got it from has the testimony of a professional photographer taking the picture. The person who submitted the picture was in the picture at the time.

    It’s curious to say the least…

  • Michael Whitehouse

    These pictures are all very interesting.

    First Picture: I am not completely convinced that it is a face and eye peeking out between the man and woman. For me, it looks like it could be, but it also could be the man’s hand, wearing a watch (the eye), obscured mostly by his pocket.I’d love to know the cut of his suit, as the only way this could really work is if his shirt protrudes through the arm of the suit. The “foot” could just as easily be the man holding a woman’s shawl. It does look as if he could be holding something behind him.

    Second Picture:
    I find this picture far more interesting. I’d like to see proof of when it was taken, a picture of the “Dead man” while living as comparison, and whether there is another tier behind for someone to stand on.

    Third Picture:

    Photoshop, bust, or a ghost. Have you noticed that the face is slightly deformed? What’s the white material behind the head? I suspect this is a model head as it doesn’t look quite “real” to me.

    Fourth Picture:

    Very creepy, but whether it is a real object in three dimensional space, I’m not sure. It reminds me of the Necker cube, the more you look at it, the more it seems to switch in terms of perspective.

    All three very interesting.

  • BC

    That last picture was one of Maurice Grosse’s favorites. The camera (which was a film camera) was set on a tripod with a ten second timer and in the first picture the flash did not go off so the photographer reset it and took another one. The photograph was looked at by the photography department at Leicester University, the Society for Psychical Research, and the Royal Photographic Society- none of which felt it was a double exposure. I’m inclined to think something very strange is going on in that fourth photo.

  • alex

    CREEPY!!!!!!! My older sis and bro always get pics just like these.
    Its like a gift!

  • DrAllen77

    BC,

    You say the photographer noticed no flash on first pic and then set the flash for second pic. Are you positive the first pic was without the flash? It seems more like the “ghost” photo is without flash. This is why that pic is considerably darker and beneath the table is not visible. Also notice how the two women behind “ghost” are close together in the lighter photo and apart just enough so they can be seen on both sides of the “spirit” in the darker. I’m sorry, but I believe the mystery person is none other than the photographer. Any thoughts?

    I too have seen the Freddy photo numerous times. If it’s a hoax or pareidolia it’s damn good.

    Just one thought on the third picture. Notice how the hair line matches with the drunk guy in the chair? Maybe he knows someone in the biz, who could have made him a casting of his head. Again, if so, damn good casting. Looking more closely, even the eyebrows and nose are similar.

    First picture seems like a child to me. The shoe is not really as big as the foreground man’s. And the eye does look like a little boy’s, to me.

    Those are some hypothesis’. I have been wrong many of times.

  • Veran

    darn, i didnt notice the face peeking out behind the man in the first photo untill i read about the face being seen. sent chills down my spine!
    the freddy photo is, as everyone else have stated, an old classic.

  • Iwas walking to my room
    one sunday morning and we have 3 floors and my room
    is on the 3rd
    we have a mirror and i
    saw a shadow my sise run across into the
    mirror and i went to look and there was nothing
    there but an orb

  • chillie bite

    i have seen, heard and felt ghosts most of my life, but the other day was odd, i had this wierd dream of a fire and people shouting,… the on my way out there was a taxi accident the people was all traped and they burnt out… i feel so guilty could i have stoped this… or was it a warning to me…

  • Lindsay

    this is retarded

  • Brain Cell

    Wedding picture: that’s a kid standing behind the man, no question in my mind. Not ghostly.

    Picture of guy sitting with beer: I took that pic into photoshop and adjusted the levels so I could see it a lot better. Though there is something disturbing about the “head”‘s eyes, the whole thing looks like a bad cut and paste job. I say fake.

    Bust on the table: in photoshop with adjusted levels there appears to be the leg of the mystery woman visible below the table, much too large to match the women behind her. Which leads me to believe that the bust is simply another woman who got into the shot and is sitting close and low to the table while the women behind her are farther back against the wall. Not a ghost.

    And DrAllen is correct, it’s the FIRST picture that was taken with a flash, not the second one.

  • Valkyrie

    sigh…

  • Gracesailo

    Re. the first picture is, to me, not a ghost. It is that of a cheeky child. You can see him peeping out behind the man on his right side near his bum, this also explains why the man’s behind did not obstruct the person behind him as he’s only a child.

  • if you look at the proportions of the figure it cannot be a child, the feet ate too large and there would still be at least a bum showing on the other side.