Mysterious Britain Forums

for the open discussion of all things paranormal.
 
HomeHome  Mysterious Britain mainpageMysterious Britain mainpage  Mailing ListMailing List  CalendarCalendar  FAQFAQ  MemberlistMemberlist  UsergroupsUsergroups  SearchSearch  RegisterRegister  Log inLog in  

Share | 
 

 Roman in Wakefield

Go down 
AuthorMessage
Ian
Admin
Admin
avatar

Number of posts : 771
Age : 45
Location : Carlisle, Cumbria
Registration date : 2007-08-24

PostSubject: Roman in Wakefield   Tue 22 Jan 2008, 11:21 am

Check out this link. The Outwwod Community Video Club think they have a Roman Solidier on film. There is a link to the footafe on the site. Any comments?

http://www.wakefieldexpress.co.uk/video-test/Roman-ghost-baffles-club.3373004.jp
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://www.mysteriousbritain.co.uk
mogg-y

avatar

Number of posts : 62
Age : 47
Location : N. Yorks
Registration date : 2007-12-29

PostSubject: Re: Roman in Wakefield   Tue 22 Jan 2008, 1:08 pm

Absolutely no offence intended but it looks to me like a blurred pic of a female jogger. Maybe i need to put my other glasses on? Smile
Back to top Go down
View user profile
LeeWat

avatar

Number of posts : 230
Age : 47
Location : Cheshire
Registration date : 2007-09-02

PostSubject: Re: Roman in Wakefield   Tue 22 Jan 2008, 4:03 pm

I've watched that about 10 times now. It just doesnt feel right if you know what i mean.... I dont think its an insect on the lens but i do think its something on the lens, maybe a bit of water slowly moving and then drying ?? Looks a bit blustery and there are all sorts of things flying past the lens.
Viewed it again, if you look at the "romans" head it looks like there is a trail of some sort going up about 3mm and then going upwards at an angle to the left.
Also it seems the picture flickers when the image becomes sharper, creative lens blur editing maybe ?

Still quite good though.

Lee.

Watched it again, by the gods im a saddo Smile look to the left of the head, there is a small white (dare i say it) Orb that only appears after the camera is moved and sharpens up as the figure sharpens up. I am now convinced there is something on the lens. Bloody digital cameras....
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://www.mysteriousbritain.co.uk
Ian
Admin
Admin
avatar

Number of posts : 771
Age : 45
Location : Carlisle, Cumbria
Registration date : 2007-08-24

PostSubject: Re: Roman in Wakefield   Wed 23 Jan 2008, 6:04 am

I'm not convinced it is really a ghost, I'm not really sure what it is but something about it screams FAKE to me.
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://www.mysteriousbritain.co.uk
Stephen Evans



Number of posts : 6
Age : 56
Location : Malta, G.C.
Registration date : 2007-11-07

PostSubject: Re: Roman in Wakefield   Tue 29 Jan 2008, 1:57 pm

Hi All, I'm interested to know George Gunns's Outwood Community members in the photograph and why they all on close inspection look sheepish . Can't think why,but was George filming the cross country race and its contestants, why should one want to film an Avenue of trees in the wind with noone around , what interest has Mr Gunn have in Country Running? Still want to know about Belgrave Hall I think a possible close case to the Unexplained!?
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Tris

avatar

Number of posts : 17
Age : 25
Location : Sydney, AUS
Registration date : 2007-10-02

PostSubject: Re: Roman in Wakefield   Tue 29 Jul 2008, 1:00 am

Amazing that ghosts are so often making themselves visible only to digital cameras. Hmm.

Looks fake to me, possibly manipulated, a drop of water that looked kind of Roman and was changed a bit?
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Sparkle-

avatar

Number of posts : 133
Age : 50
Location : Scotland
Registration date : 2008-05-23

PostSubject: Re: Roman in Wakefield   Tue 29 Jul 2008, 2:05 am

Yip I think it's a fake....if you watch it closely when the ghost appears the actual picture changes.....watch the end of the path at the faraway end....the gap is very wide....but when the ghost appears the picture changes and the gap at the end of the path closes in....the picture is at a different angle altogether from what it was at the start....you can actually see the picture change if you don't concentrate on the ghost... No
Back to top Go down
View user profile
mysteryshopper



Number of posts : 141
Registration date : 2008-02-05

PostSubject: Re: Roman in Wakefield   Tue 29 Jul 2008, 4:37 am

It's lens flare! If you notice, the brightness of the figure matches the brightness of the sunlight. The figure is absolutely still because the camera is stationary - on a tripod, I assume. Everything surrounding the figure is in motion, because of the wind. None of the joggers notices the figure because it is only visible in the camera. This is all exactly what you would expect with lens flare caused by the sun just out of view above the frame.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
agricola



Number of posts : 97
Age : 39
Location : Edinburgh
Registration date : 2008-02-26

PostSubject: Re: Roman in Wakefield   Tue 29 Jul 2008, 8:57 am

You tell them MS.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Ian
Admin
Admin
avatar

Number of posts : 771
Age : 45
Location : Carlisle, Cumbria
Registration date : 2007-08-24

PostSubject: Re: Roman in Wakefield   Tue 29 Jul 2008, 9:13 am

I really must learn more about photograph analysis Very Happy .

_________________
"Sometimes I just sit and think, and sometimes I just sit".
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://www.mysteriousbritain.co.uk
baroniveagh

avatar

Number of posts : 66
Age : 39
Location : Somewhere
Registration date : 2008-09-18

PostSubject: Re: Roman in Wakefield   Thu 18 Sep 2008, 3:28 am

I'm more inclined to give this one some credit, though I too am somewhat skeptical of the sudden jump in picture.

However, I do not belive that it is lens flare. Notice, as the joggers move through the picture, the image dissappears, however, it does not re-brighten afterwards, as light composition returns to the original levels it appeared in. It's also not something on the lens, notice it dosn't blow off, it fades out.

Water would produce a smearing ofthe image as it ran down the lens and changed color as the joggers move through the scene, and motion behind the 'subject' is consistent with it not being a simple digital manipulation (as typically, the pixels in a simple manip are either 'frozen' or 'blurry' and these are neither) This does not rule out some other manipulation (off camera lights producing a flare, more ''professional' manipulations using seperate layers to achive the effect, etc.)

But, once again, as it's not done under controlled circumstances, I can only rate it 'Interesting'
Back to top Go down
View user profile
mysteryshopper



Number of posts : 141
Registration date : 2008-02-05

PostSubject: Re: Roman in Wakefield   Thu 18 Sep 2008, 5:27 am

baroniveagh wrote:
However, I do not belive that it is lens flare. Notice, as the joggers move through the picture, the image dissappears, however, it does not re-brighten afterwards, as light composition returns to the original levels it appeared in. It's also not something on the lens, notice it dosn't blow off, it fades out.

The figure's intensity varies precisely with the shadow intensity of the bushes cast onto the right hand side of the path in the foreground. It is lens flare.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
baroniveagh

avatar

Number of posts : 66
Age : 39
Location : Somewhere
Registration date : 2008-09-18

PostSubject: Re: Roman in Wakefield   Thu 18 Sep 2008, 5:33 am

MS, I disagree, but, I'll grant you, I havn't done a direct digital analysis of the footage, I'm just going off what I see with the eyeball mk I.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
mysteryshopper



Number of posts : 141
Registration date : 2008-02-05

PostSubject: Re: Roman in Wakefield   Thu 18 Sep 2008, 5:38 am

I think eyes will serve perfectly well for such an open and shut case of lens flare.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
baroniveagh

avatar

Number of posts : 66
Age : 39
Location : Somewhere
Registration date : 2008-09-18

PostSubject: Re: Roman in Wakefield   Thu 18 Sep 2008, 5:41 am

Eh, as I said, I disagree, but I also point out that I said it's not proof of a ghost, there are too many unknowns. It only rates an 'Interesting'. Now, if we had this image taken under tightly controlled circumstances I'd say it was credible evidence.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
mysteryshopper



Number of posts : 141
Registration date : 2008-02-05

PostSubject: Re: Roman in Wakefield   Thu 18 Sep 2008, 5:58 am

I can't see why you have a problem with such an obvious case of lens flare. Your objection was "... the image dissappears, however, it does not re-brighten afterwards, as light composition returns to the original levels it appeared in."

However, neither does the shadow I mentioned return to its previous intensity. The shadow is an indicator of the intensity of the light source causing the flare ie. the sun. The overall light of the image may vary according to auto-exposure in the camera so it is not relevant. So where is the problem?
Back to top Go down
View user profile
baroniveagh

avatar

Number of posts : 66
Age : 39
Location : Somewhere
Registration date : 2008-09-18

PostSubject: Re: Roman in Wakefield   Fri 19 Sep 2008, 1:35 am

Eh, like I said, we disagree. Relax. I don't see it that way, but I respect your views. Even highly trained doctors can disagree on the same case. (Lucky for us, the patient is already dead. And may have been for a long time. Wink )
Back to top Go down
View user profile
mysteryshopper



Number of posts : 141
Registration date : 2008-02-05

PostSubject: Re: Roman in Wakefield   Fri 19 Sep 2008, 2:07 am

I have already summarised the very obvious evidence that this is lens flare and dealt with your apparent objection. If you still disagree, you must have some reason. Perhaps you could share it. Please get as technical as you like, I will understand.

I am perfectly relaxed, however, I see no point in perpetuating a mystery which has a clear and obvious solution.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Sponsored content




PostSubject: Re: Roman in Wakefield   

Back to top Go down
 
Roman in Wakefield
Back to top 
Page 1 of 1
 Similar topics
-
» Introducing Benji Roman
» Did the Roman Empire start to fail when it ceased to expand?
» Nietzsche: Greek or Roman?
» LAST ENTRY: Is The Final Emperor Here?--THE FINAL ROMAN EMPEROR, THE ISLAMIC ANTICHRIST, AND THE VATICAN'S LAST CRUSADE
» Hermann The German Denkmal

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
Mysterious Britain Forums :: Mysterious Britain :: Strange Photographs-
Jump to: