New development with Wem photo

New development with Wem photo

You may also like...

13 Responses

  1. Mysteryshopper says:

    Re: New development with Wem photo
    Easier to compare at http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/2977831/Blaze-ghost-mystery-over.html

  2. Ian Topham says:

    Re: New development with Wem photo
    The second link certainly highlights that the pictures are very similar.  Certainly looks like it could be a fake………though no doubt someone will say it is the ghost of this 1920’s child in the Wem picture.

  3. Mysteryshopper says:

    Re: New development with Wem photo
    [quote=Ian Topham]… though no doubt someone will say it is the ghost of this 1920’s child in the Wem picture.[/quote]

    I saw that in a blog yesterday – sadly I lost the link. If anyone has it, please post …

    Have a look here too http://www.kuxas.com/94/spooky-case-of-the-wem-ghost.html

    My fade doesn’t seem to make any difference at all so I’m not convinced it is working on my computer.

  4. Ian Topham says:

    Re: New development with Wem photo
    I can’t get the fade to work either.  Another good link though.

  5. Mauro says:

    Re: New development with Wem photo
    Fade works fine with my PC (Windows XP, Mozilla Firefox).
    Looks quite convincing .

  6. Ian Topham says:

    Re: New development with Wem photo
    Perhaps neither photos are fakes and they both show the same ghost 🙂  – I think this post will kill off an credibility I had left 🙂

  7. BaronIveagh says:

    Re: New development with Wem photo
    Um, MS, just to let you in on it: the ‘original’ image that The Sun is running is doctored.  The one that The Mail ran is the real postcard.  She’s out of focus in it.  There’s an original of this one at a local antique market I’ve seen.

    Is it the same girl?  Meh, could be.

    Summum Nec Metuam Diem Nec Optima

  8. Mysteryshopper says:

    Re: New development with Wem photo
    [quote=BaronIveagh]Um, MS, just to let you in on it: the ‘original’ image that The Sun is running is doctored.  The one that The Mail ran is the real postcard.  She’s out of focus in it.  There’s an original of this one at a local antique market I’ve seen[/quote]

    Do you have a copy of the postcard? If so, any chance you could scan it in and post it here?

  9. BaronIveagh says:

    Re: New development with Wem photo
    Unfortunetly no, I went over yesterday after I posted thinking to do just that  and someone had already bought it.

    If anyone else sees one, please scan.

    Summum Nec Metuam Diem Nec Optima

  10. cragrat09 says:

    Re: New development with Wem photo
    [quote=BaronIveagh]Um, MS, just to let you in on it: the ‘original’ image that The Sun is running is doctored.  The one that The Mail ran is the real postcard.  She’s out of focus in it. [/quote]

    Yeah, I noticed that as well. In The Mail postcard, you cannot see the girl’s face clearly. In The Sun Postcard, you can see the girl’s face, and it is exactly like the one in the original photo.

  11. Mysteryshopper says:

    Re: New development with Wem photo
    [quote=Mauro]Fade works fine with my PC (Windows XP, Mozilla Firefox).
    Looks quite convincing .
    [/quote]

    Also works with Chrome. In the postcard there is a boundary between two different bits of wall. There is a line in the other photo in precisely the same position!

  12. BaronIveagh says:

    Re: New development with Wem photo
    Here’s something to ponder: this image was taken in 1995. 

    While it’s easy enough to make it look realisitic now, could it have been done then?

    Note: the image really is on the negative.  This was taken with a film camera rather then a digital unit.

    So: is it a double exposure type spirit image?  If so, the girl is scaled up with remarkable skill.

    Summum Nec Metuam Diem Nec Optima

  13. Matt.H says:

    Re: New development with Wem photo
    Seems pretty convincing to me.

    In the interests of balance, it’s also worth pointing out that this puts paid to the theory that it was a case of paradoloa caused by falling timber or similar.

    In terms of explanations from a hoax point of view, a straightforward, if admittedly very skillful by the sounds of it, use of an existing always seemed the most likely to me.