Can somebody analyze this picture, are these ghost in the picture or a fraud?

[photomike19]

I got this image from somebody and they tell me that there are pink ghosts in the image

Can this be or is it just a light defraction or anomaly, or it was even photoshopeed?

THe image seems very old to me

What do you think?

https://www.dropbox.com/s/8fve70qeet3cg26/11.JPG

 

[tecboy]

Kinda creepy. Could be double exposures or long exposure.

 

[Derrel]

NOT ghosts.

 

[vintagesnaps]

Pink ghosts? doing what, hanging around after Valentine's Day? All I see are magenta toned streaks. And a not so great exposure. Not very sharp image either.

 

[pez1]

What is that, a low-res scan of an old Polaroid? Ghosts, definitely.

 

[tecboy]

Probably shot in film. The negative might be blent inside the canister while developing.

 

[71M]

Nah, I just consulted my spirit guide - "Babu" - via table-tilting; he say no ghosts in the photo.

 

[photomike19]

No, I am serious, somebody posted this lying her ass off that these pink deformities are in fact ghosts, really no bs, I dont belive it so I ask here where I think many people are experts in photography and will explain the real reason for this.

 

[71M]

No, I am serious, somebody posted this lying her ass off that these pink deformities are in fact ghosts, really no bs, I dont belive it so I ask here where I think many people are experts in photography and will explain the real reason for this.

Well, that looks like nothing much: JPEG compression, bad colour from a tiny sensor, and maybe enlarged from a smaller, low quality image.

 

[sm4him]

No, I am serious, somebody posted this lying her ass off that these pink deformities are in fact ghosts, really no bs, I dont belive it so I ask here where I think many people are experts in photography and will explain the real reason for this.

You *have* actually gotten some plausible explanations as to the "real" reason for these streaks--see tecboy and pez's posts specifically. The problem is, that there are quite a few things that could have caused this "effect" so I doubt anyone can pin it down to the ONE thing that actually DID cause it. But we can certainly pin it down to this--it ain't ghosts.
Maybe the picture was TAKEN by ghosts, though. That could explain it; they're terrible photographers, can never hold a camera steady.

Why does it matter to you anyway? So she's lying. Who cares? Anybody unintelligent or naive enough to BELIEVE that anything in that photo is a ghost deserves to be led astray. I mean, that's not even a remotely convincing "ghost" image. I've seen some really WEIRD photos of "spirits"--ones that are MUCH harder to explain possible reasons for, and ones where it actually LOOKS like ghosts or spirits. This one just looks like ugly pink streaks from chemicals fading.

 

[snowbear114 46]

^This.

Tell her the ghosts are nothing to worry about, but watch out for that blobsquatch to the left.

 

[table1349]

I think that this explains it perfectly. http://media-cache-cd0.pinimg.com/236x/a8/55/ab/a855abea499bdb4c42184f0ad5af6398.jpg

 

[astroNikon]

those images are so simple to recreate .... just give me a scene, a person to walk through that scene, and a camera that I can control the shutter.

 

[Braineack]

it captured ghosts. cause ghosts are real.

 

[480sparky38 37]

.......Maybe the picture was TAKEN by ghosts, though. That could explain it; they're terrible photographers, can never hold a camera steady. .......

I thought ghosts couldn't take photos because when they put their eye up to the viewfinder, it just goes right through their metaphysical eyeball and out the back of their esoteric head.