Creepy things caught in photos

Ha! Nelson de la Rosa. A bit of trivia - in that role Nelson was the inspiration for Mini Me in the Austin Powers movies.

A friend and I for several years (maybe longer than want to admit) had a weird penchant for little people trivia. I have promised several people I will not mention Colin Farrell quotes concerning little people in the film In Bruges. I really need to check and see if that's still in effect.
De la Rosa's greatest role, imho, was as Mousey in Giuliano Carnimeo's Ratman. Little people, while long neglected in the film industry (and, probably, most industries), have managed to create some of the greatest and most memorable film/tv characters ever--from Todd Browning's Freaks to Werner Herzog's Even Dwarves Started Small to Angelo Muscat's unnamed butler character in The Prisoner. Even Michael Dunn's Dr Loveless, in Wild Wild West, was a fantastic character.

I never understood why Peter Jackson didn't cast little people as hobbits in The Lord of the Rings and The Hobbit. That was a disappointment.
 
"The revolution will not be televised."
Maybe not, but now there's armies of folks all over the world with hi-def cameras in their phones and easy access to any number of online social media sites to upload their content. This is very troubling news for Believers who can only go on pretending so long with outdated grainy photos.
 
Sadly, they're not pretending in many case, they actually SEE the shit they claim are in those pictures.

My third wife was into serial killers. I was on a full ride at Purdue so I took several abnormal pysch classes to help her with that schtick. The "inaccurate interpretation of visual images" class was fun. The prof would put up a picture and we'd try to guess WTF we were SUPPOSED TO BE SEEING there.
 
The Gothic Arch IS a vagina. Class dismissed.


De la Rosa's greatest role, imho, was as Mousey in Giuliano Carnimeo's Ratman. Little people, while long neglected in the film industry (and, probably, most industries), have managed to create some of the greatest and most memorable film/tv characters ever--from Todd Browning's Freaks to Werner Herzog's Even Dwarves Started Small to Angelo Muscat's unnamed butler character in The Prisoner. Even Michael Dunn's Dr Loveless, in Wild Wild West, was a fantastic character.

The neglect is hard - I know David Rappaport struggled with depression and ended up taking his own life. Am sure many are happy to see the remarkable ascent of Peter Dinklage. And there's Michael J. Anderson, who was not only the dwarf in Twin Peaks but also played a man of average height in Mulholland Drive, using a prosthetic body. A towering performance. (damn it, really trying not to go down that road...)
 
"A gran was stunned after a family christening photo seemed to show the ghostly image of her late husband.

Heather Sewell, 50, spotted the spooky black-and-white face hovering over the font.

She said: “I couldn’t believe the likeness to my Terry and was completely amazed to see him at the christening.

“It knocked me back when I saw the picture. It looks so much like him. It was actually a bit upsetting to see his face.


“I tried to convince myself it was not Terry but it is so convincing that I believe it is.”

Heather was at the christening of granddaughter Mia-Bella when the baby’s uncle, Jamie Sewell, 29, snapped the phantom face on his mobile.

It was not until later, when the family was in the pub looking at the day’s pictures on Facebook, that Heather, spotted her late husband’s likeness.

The taxi driver from Petham, Kent, said: “Terry had a long face and so does the ghost.

"It has the same hairstyle and is the same height – about 5ft 8 in.

“I am quite a superstitious person but not over the top.

“I do believe there is something out there – there are too many things in the world we cannot explain.

"I know there has been no photo trickery so it is all very spooky and perhaps not what you want to see at a christening.

“When we first saw the Facebook page everyone was stunned because the image is so clear.”

Heather’s labourer husband killed himself 17 years ago. He was 41."

2cJTGlD.jpeg


 
Last edited:
Photo of a half-formed apparition at the now abandoned Pennhurst State Asylum notable for being haunted. I have no information on the photo other than it was taken by a paranormal investigation crew.

"Pennhurst Asylum was once known as the Pennhurst State School or the Eastern Pennsylvania State Institution for the Feeble-Minded and Epileptic — a name that truly shows its age. It was built to house people with physical and mental disabilities in Southeastern Pennsylvania. After 79 years of pure controversy, it finally closed its doors on December 9th, 1987...

Today, the building has bore witness to more than a few ghost-hunting crews searching for answers and to communicate with the patients who never left the walls of the asylum. The sprawling network of buildings and tunnels was left abandoned, and tortured spirits grew restless within the confines of Pennhurst. Staff and caretakers of the property say that the buildings, as well as the underground tunnel network, are severely haunted by the spirits of the patients who suffered and died there. Reports of slamming doors, disembodied footsteps and voices, and sounds of vomiting and crying are heard from seemingly empty rooms.

Some witnesses have even reported the apparition of a little girl roaming around the campus, looking perplexed and a bit lost. The sound of children playing and crying is also a common occurrence.

Most of the spirits at Pennhurst are believed to be friendly, just looking for someone living to communicate with, to tell their story. Reports of Satanic worship have come from the property, however."--- https://usghostadventures.com/haunt...unted-hospitals-and-asylums/pennhurst-asylum/



osuD35Q.png
 
Last edited:
Why are you impressed with this kind of picture when you can't prove they are the real deal? Your presentations PLONK because you have no provenance.
 
Photo of a half-formed apparition at the now abandoned Pennhurst State Asylum notable for being haunted.
It's a long-exposure photo. Clearly, the person in the photograph was in the process of moving, turning around or similar while the shutter was open.
I have no information on the photo other than it was taken by a paranormal investigation crew.
Clearly incompetent. The photographer (a) didn't check whether a fellow crew-member was farting around while the picture was being taken, and (b) didn't know how to control the settings on his/her camera.
 
When was this photo taken? Why is the image quality so appalling low? There are photo processing artifacts all over this image.

Ooh, look! The little girl looks demonic! That can't be an accident. Clearly, she is the devil incarnate.
The date of the Mirror article reporting it was Dec 2012. So probably taken that year. As for photo artifacts, what does that have to do with the apparition of her husband? Do artifacts often show up as translucent images of dead spouses?
 
It's a long-exposure photo. Clearly, the person in the photograph was in the process of moving, turning around or similar while the shutter was open.

Clearly incompetent. The photographer (a) didn't check whether a fellow crew-member was farting around while the picture was being taken, and (b) didn't know how to control the settings on his/her camera.

Well, it doesn't make sense that a ghost hunter in a haunted bldg would take a picture of someone physically there. Most pictures are taken of empty rooms in the hope of capturing something on camera. While your theory seems plausible, it suggests the typical dishonesty attributed to the picture taker by skeptics. And I don't buy that. People with the dedication and conviction to spend their weekends exploring haunted locations for ghosts wouldn't just fabricate some hoaxed evidence.
 
Last edited:
The date of the Mirror article reporting it was Dec 2012. So probably taken that year.
And probably photoshopped that year.

The Mirror? Seriously?
As for photo artifacts, what does that have to do with the apparition of her husband?
Brain on. Think it through.
Do artifacts often show up as translucent images of dead spouses?
Often? No. Sometimes? Maybe.

But how do you know that the photo contains a translucent image of a dead spouse?
 
But how do you know that the photo contains a translucent image of a dead spouse?

Read the linked article. The wife recognizes him, her second husband recognizes him, and there's a photo of him that clearly shows it is him.


Often? No. Sometimes? Maybe.

LOL Uh no...not likely.
 
Well, it doesn't make sense that a ghost hunter in a haunted bldg would take a picture of someone physically there. Most pictures are taken of empty rooms in the hope of capturing something on camera.
Why do you claim the room was empty? Clearly, there's a motion-blurred image of a person right there, along with the photographer. So, at least two people present.
While your theory seems plausible, it suggests the typical dishonesty attributed to the picture taker by skeptics.
Well, let's face it - people who make money out of participating in "paranormal" TV aren't always paragons of honesty. You're aware of that, right?

Also, it doesn't have be dishonesty. Plain stupidity, poor memory and/or lack of attention to what's happening in front of the camera might account for this.
And I don't buy that.
Why do you even bother telling me what you'll buy and what you won't buy? Your personal preferences on such things are entirely irrelevant. Also very boring and repetitive.

Please take it as read, going forward, that I understand that you'll "buy" anything with a whiff of the "paranormal" about it, no matter how shoddy, poorly evidenced or obviously dishonest it is, and that you will reject out of hand anything that requires a moment of rational thought, while tending to refute your paranormal beliefs/claims.

You should also take it as read that I don't "buy" that somebody could actually be as consistently stupid and gullible as you pretend to be. At least, not while also being able to string coherent sentences together. I "buy" that you're a clown.
People with the dedication and conviction to spend their weekends exploring haunted locations for ghosts wouldn't just fabricate some hoaxed evidence.
How do you know that the people who produced this photograph were dedicated, had "conviction" or spend their weekends exploring haunted locations?

Even if you somehow knew all that - which clearly you don't - your conclusion obviously doesn't follow. People can work dedicatedly at faking stuff, for instance. Some do.
 
Last edited:
The wife recognizes him, her second husband recognizes him, and there's a photo of him that clearly shows it is him.
Where's the photo of him? How does it clearly show that the "apparition" is him?

Also, why is impossible that the wife or her second husband could be mistaken about the image being him? How do you know they didn't make a mistake?
 
Where's the photo of him? How does it clearly show that the "apparition" is him?

In the article linked to. Do you know how to click?

Also, why is impossible that the wife or her second husband could be mistaken about the image being him? How do you know they didn't make a mistake?

LOL Because they knew him. That's why they wouldn't make a mistake. Why do you think they are making a mistake?
 
Last edited:
Back
Top