Top 10 Best Ghost Photographs


While trying to decide which ghost photos are the “best” is largely an exercise in subjectivity, it’s difficult to know which ones are the best with any degree of objectivity. These are the photos I consider the most authentic “captures” of ghosts ever caught on film, but I leave it to you to decide for yourself how real they may be. Of course, I realize that almost any photo can be hoaxed, but many of these were taken many years or even decades before digital cameras and the advent of Photoshop and other photo manipulation software came on the scene, making them somewhat more difficult to fake than it would be today.

10. The Queensland Photo, 1946

Image result for Queensland Ghost Photo, 1946

Taken in 1946 in Queensland, Australia by a mother who was taking a picture of her teenage daughter’s grave. Nobody was in sight at the time, but when the picture was processed the image of a child appeared, apparently sitting on the grave. The mother does not recognize the child, thereby reducing (though not entirely eliminating) the possibility that it’s a double exposure.

9. The S.S. Watertown Faces, 1924

The SS Watertown Ghosts

This famous photo taken in 1924 apparently shows the faces of two recently deceased crewmen appearing in the waves alongside the merchant ship S.S. Watertown. Normally I’m not a big fan of faces appearing in grainy photos due to the brain’s tendency to make order out of chaos (known as “matrixing”) but this case is different in that the faces were seen by numerous members of the crew for several days beforehand and were positively identified as those of two crewmen who suffocated while cleaning out an oil tank a few days earlier. The Burns Detective Agency analyzed the negative for fakery and found none.

8. The Wem Fire Apparition, 1995

This famous photo of a young girl looking out from a raging fire was taken during a 1995 structure fire at Wem town hall in Shropshire, England. Shot from across the street by a local photographer, nothing unusual was seen at the time but once the negative was developed he noticed what appeared to be a young girl standing in the doorway of the burning building. Firemen found the photo so disturbing that they sifted through the ashes afterwards searching for the remains of a body but found nothing, leaving everyone wondering who the girl may have been. Not surprisingly, there is a bit of local folklore which claims that a young girl named Jane Churm accidentally burned the town hall to the ground in 1677 when she dropped a candle, and her ghost has been reputed to haunt Wem town hall ever since. Once a firebug, always a firebug I guess.

7. Bachelor’s Grove Cemetery, 1991

One of those “too-good-to-be-true” photos, this one actually has a pretty good pedigree because it was shot by a professional paranormal investigator (and notice it was also taken in broad daylight, as opposed to most cemetery investigations which are almost always shot at night). The picture was taken at the Bachelor’s Grove Cemetery in Illinois by the Ghost Research Society on August 10, 1991. Photographer Mari Huff was using high-speed monochromatic film in the area where their equipment had detected several electromagnetic anomalies, and captured this image of a woman in period costume—complete in a burial shroud of the era—sitting on a gravestone. Note that parts of her lower legs appear to be transparent. Looks staged, I know, but then what’s a real ghost supposed to look like?

6. The Corroboree Rock Spirit, 1959


Taken by Reverend R.S. Blance at Corroboree Rock near Alice Springs, Australia in 1959, this famous photo has been around for many years and defies explanation to this day. It wouldn’t be difficult to fake this photo with modern photo manipulation software (i.e. Photoshop) but it would have been nearly impossible to do in 1959.

5. HMS Daedalus Photo, 1919

Image result for HMS Daedalus Photo, 1919

Another classic and one of the better captures, this photograph from 1919, taken by retired RAF officer Sir Victor Goddard, shows his squadron from the Royal Navy vessel HMS Daedalus. Notice the transparent face peering around the man in the upper left corner of the photo. Several men from this squadron identified the face as belonging to mechanic Freddy Jackson, who had been killed two days earlier when he accidentally walked into a spinning propeller blade. His funeral had taken place earlier that day. Apparently, Freddy didn’t want to miss all the fun.

4. Toys-R-Us, 1978

Image result for Toys-R-Us ghost photo

This shot has one of the best pedigrees among spirit photos because it was shot under carefully controlled circumstances with numerous witnesses present, making fakery especially difficult. Taken in 1978 at a Sunnyvale, California Toys-R-Us store known for an inordinate amount of paranormal activity, the picture was shot by the crew from the TV program That’s Incredible! The infra-red film image of the young man leaning against the wall was NOT seen by any of the people present at the time, nor does he appear in the high speed footage shot from the same vantage point at the same time. There’s a story that in 1869 a young man died at the location where the store now stands from a accidentally self-inflicted axe wound, which might explain his unusual clothing.

3. The Lord Combermere Photo, 1891

Image result for Lord Combermere Photo, 1891

This well known photo—and perhaps one of the oldest examples of a bonifide spirit photo—was taken in the Combermere Abbey Library in 1891 by Sybell Corbet. The exposure length was approximately one hour, and the figure of a man appears to be sitting in the armchair located in the foreground (it’s difficult to make out, but a head and arm can just be made out sitting in the chair).

Image result for Lord Combermere Photo, 1891

At the time this photograph was being taken, Lord Combermere (a top British cavalry commander) was being buried four miles away and the house was said to have been locked and empty at the time. Additionally, those who knew Lord Combermere claim the figure looks exactly like the man, so we have to wonder if the old gentleman wasn’t simply just visiting his old “haunt” one last time.

2. The Chinnery Photo, 1959

Image result for Chinnery Photo, 1959

When visiting her mother’s grave in 1959, Mrs. Mabel Chinnery decided to finish off the roll of film by taking a picture of her husband seated in the car. When the roll was developed, a female figure appeared, sitting in the back seat. Mrs. Chinnery and several family members insist that the female figure is that of her mother, who appears to have taken her customary place in the back seat and is patiently waiting to be driven home. A photographic expert examined the print and declared it to be neither a reflection nor a double exposure. Notice that “mom” appears to be a pretty solid ghost, with no hint of transparency or light from the rear windows shining through her. Even her glasses appear to reflect light!

1. The Brown Lady of Raynham Hall, 1936

Perhaps the most famous of all ghost photos, this highly controversial shot was taken in1936 by photographers sent by the London magazine Country Living to take some interior shots of Raynham Hall in Norfolk, England. What’s also interesting about this shot is that in contrast to most photos in which the figure is not seen until after the film is developed, the spectral figure of a woman descending the stairway was seen seconds before the gshutter was snapped. The negatives on this photo have been scrutinized by literally hundreds of experts (and no small number of skeptics) who can find no evidence of it being either a hoax or a double exposure. Still considered by many to be the best “capture” ever taken.

Other Articles you Might Like
Liked it? Take a second to support on Patreon!


  1. All but the Brown Lady (#1) are very questionable and some have been proven fake.

  2. I think that most of the photo’s are just transfer from photo’s previously taken, either by previous or current longer exposure, I guess. One should have a full examination report on each one of them to know.

  3. some of you say that thare is no gost but thare is I have sean thim for my self I sean one going in and out of A fireplace I was abut 20ft Away and it did not hert me this whos abut wen I was 15y old and after that I started seeing things and feling things I thot that I was going nuts I realyed that wen Iem In right place I can reach out and tuch thim and it is cold but thay do not try to hert me Ithink wen I ask thim to move something like A ball some times thay can A fuw of my frends have seen me work whith thim I like being A rond thim ? I have A recorder and I have pick up that will amaze you but wen you hear A lot of nois that is staic but wen you can hear A voice that makes it the best thing of ALL. I know I lived oh for12ys ago I told thim that I wood go in to cheack things out and I did thay seed that A man dyd in the bldg from A rope back in the 40s I sead ok wen I took in A evp meatr and A recoder and A nitevison I started asking thim to come forth and wen Idid I herd 8 difaret sonds comeing in side the bldg I now thay were trying to get my atenchin I hade the hare stanup on my arms thats wen I now that thay where close to me I like that fealing thay are trying to cotack some one so wen you see some thing that you can knot explane stop look some one mite be trying to get in tuch whith you.??!.

  4. 10. Double-image obviously.
    9. Already discredited
    8. Smoke/ash, but admit it appears eerie. Freak shape like clouds.
    7., 6, 5. Meh, could be trick photog like old spirit photos
    4. Gimme a break, the dude’s wearing flared pants as they did in the late 1970’s.
    3. Exposure 1 hour?? Anyone could have sat for a spell and then gotten up. And a big tip off to these fakes is – why take such a picture of an empty chair?? Think about why the pic was taken.
    2. Look closer could be shade/shadows.
    1. Debunked. Immaculata statues of Madonna standing on globe popular then. Look at bottom of Brown Lady.

  5. #8 Wem fire. I found the web page with the ghost photo and an old Wem postcard photo side by side (the accompanying article suggest the girl in the postcard was used to fake the girl in the fire).

    I copied both image and brought them into photoshop, overlaying one on top of another.

    They are an exact match.

    The fakery became even more clear when I adjusted the contrast and brightness of the ghost photo.

  6. The only people who don’t believe is the ones who has not experience any thing or has not paid attention. I have saw and experience such.
    There are ghost or spirits….If you believe it or not.

  7. Double exposures have been around since the invention of cameras. So have cut outs pasted onto photos and re-photographed. Everything I saw could have been produced by accident easily. This collection of pictures does not convince that ghosts exist.

  8. There will always be argument about whether photos like these are genuine or not. That fact alone means some may be genuine. Consider the following too. What if number 10 was a double exposure that wasn’t deliberate? Seems even more beyond our comprehension and frightening. What if some of the photos are paraeidolia? Even if a pattern in something does look like something or somebody it’s inexplicable and beyond our comprehension. What if something is a trick of light or reflection? Still just as frightening if it’s not deliberate. Coincidence itself can be just as spooky. These are just some of my thoughts. I think that whether you want to prove something or disprove it, it’s the argument (and coincidence) that makes the paranormal topic so frightening.

  9. i can fake the brown lady with a modern camera no photo editing.All you have to do is take a clear peace of plastic like the plastic on the little paper DVD envelopes or the wrapper that you take off a new CD and take a marker of what ever color to draw a person on the little plastic peace.Take out your cell phone, put the plastic over the lens , adjust your ghost and take a picture.Now you have a creepy looking shadow ghost picture!

  10. The 5. HMS Daedalus Photo, 1919, is very easy to explain: The man in the background is not Freddy Jackson. Because there was no Freddy Jackson. The story was created after the photo was taken by a man who thought the “ghostly” face would make a good yarn.

    The photo is genuine, to be sure. But it’s a genuine photo of people who were all alive.

    Research it if you don’t believe me.

    • Interesting coincidence regarding photo number 5 re Sir Victor Goddard’s photo of Freddy Jackson.
      I have unearthed an old photo album which contains several original photos of Sir Victor Goddard on a sailing trip on the Norfolk Broads in England with 2 friends in September 1913,6 years before he took the famous Freddy Jackson photo.
      On one of the album pages there are 2 nearly identical photos of Victor sailing a yacht.The photo on the left has the top of his head cut off and the photo on the right is as it should be.His friend who took the photos must have realised that he had missed the top of Victor’s head and took the other photo seconds after.There is a gap between the photos in the album page where Victor has written.. ‘advt.Try ‘Killum Kwik’ for the hair.Gives a luxuriant growth after 1st application.Mr R Victor Goddard the World’s great Adonis writes.I was bald(in photo 1)and had tried all remedies but with no success.3 minutes after the first application of your wonderful ointment I became(as in photo 2)with parting complete!
      I believe Sir Victor was 16 years old when writing the entry in the album in 1913.
      I am in no way suggesting that the Freddy Jackson photo could be fake but only dislosing that Sir Victor Goddard had a connection with an interesting photo of a head in the past and in this particular case it was his own!Ijust think it’s a strange coincidence.

  11. # 10 is the most unbelievable photo!!! how dare you use this child freak everyone! it’s obvious..

  12. In my opinion, some photos from this article are fake. The only one which I think is authentic is The Brown lady.

  13. I think that “Brown Lady” is the most authentic photo of ghosts. Others are great too but I’m not so sure about some of them. Some look like fakes for me, I don’t know. But they surely look more real than most of “real ghost photos” taken with digital cameras and photoshoped. Nice list and nice article.

  14. Iv seen many things in this life most i can’t explain and even more so when I was younger I and died just for a bit but even though I can see I still prefer to keep whats left of my sanity

  15. 10-fake-you can clearly see the arm of an adult around the baby.
    8-fake-admitted by the photographer.
    3-false positive. The exposure on this photo was an hour long.

  16. Hi, I am always suspicious of modern photos, as they can always be faked. But the old ones always intrigue me. No one at that time would know how to fake them. Amazing pictures, thanks

  17. i saw the pictures,well.. interesting ! but it’s more interesting when i saw people are hardly argueing about it.
    calm down my friends,just enjoy it,don’t make it hard for your self !!

  18. To the people that took the time to write out reasons why EVERY photo on this list is bogus, is it so difficult to believe that not everything can be a coincidence? If something is occurring and being witnessed by a lot of people in a lot of places, it can’t all be a hoax that people make up for a laugh. I’m not particularly spiritual, but I think if so many people have personally witnessed ghost activity, then it couldn’t all just be a coincidence. At least, it would be a very elaborate and unlikely coincidence.

    • By that argument Allah is the one true god, also Jehovah is the one true god, oh and Yahweh is the one true god, and L Ron Hubbard was right we’re all descended from alien thetans, aliens are watching us, time travellers are amongst us etc etc

      Argument Ad Populum is invalid. Rememebr people are witnessing different things and assuming they are all the same, there are many descirptions of ghosts many that contradict and also change over time- Victorians saw ghosts in white sheets, today we see ghosts in full clothes.

      A billion people can be wrong. One of the main reasons for rejecting ghost photos is ebcause it is assumed that ghost, if they exist, can be captured on film but strangley can’t be seen with the human eye.

      Rememebr, even if we can find NO natural rational answer for an occurence does not mean it is supernatural, it just means its unexplained.

  19. people who think they are so smart to say that nothing like this could happen, humans do not know everything that there is in existence. i believe in the paranormal, that there is something more than to just us. people who discredit these with “they could have made it up”, are truly “dumb”. i really don’t get people these days…

  20. Actually it’s realllllly easy to fake these photos now AND back then. Ever wonder why people didn’t used to smile in their photos? It’s because primitive cameras took a long time for film to register the light that creates a photo. People didn’t smile because it was hard to hold it for the minute or two while their photo was taken. If you DID move in one of these photos it would create a blur or a shadow or faint image or a person. Search how to make a coffee can camera and you can EASILY do this yourself. You can create really cool images (with the right tools, you will need access to a dark room) that look extremely ghosty.

    I want to believe in ghosts but until one kicks me in the face I’m not going to.

  21. In these times, with all the people carrying camera phones, you would think there would be more ufo and ghost pictures.
    Wonder why not.

  22. In number three, how could somebody take the photo if the house was empty? And why would somebody take a picture of an empty chair.

  23. i believe that theres something like a ghost, maybe just energy, but these pictures do not show me anything. specially because if you notice it, some of them are picture of stuff like a set of stairs. or a tree (not even a nice tree), it just seems like they were taken to be photoshopped.. or an old school version of photoshop.

  24. i’m not an expert on photos or anything, but some of them are interesting for sure. A photo that didn’t make the list that I always found intriguing was one taken by Harry Houdini at a lady’s funeral. He made a career out of debunking the “paranormal,” and apparently this was the only time he could offer no explanation. Supposedly they had ruled out the possibility of human/camera error for some reason.

  25. Just read a great investigative article on the Watertown photos. Upshot is that the faces are pasted in, and extra stanchions are pasted in over the cut lines. A little airbrushing to provide continuity with the waves, and there you have it. Instant ghost faces. By the way, the author of the article found the original specs for the tanker, and calculated that the faces would have each been as large as a full-grown person.

  26. I think it’s funny they mentioned these were taken before digital cameras and photshop but they can easily be achieved with a film camera. A long shutter speed can make these ghosted effects. If the subject does not stay in the frame the whole time, then they look transparent. I made some for a photogrpahy class.

    • I looked at that site and found it bogus. The pictures look nothing alike in the facial area. Maybe a combination of two pictures… But that reasoning does not work for that picture. So you may keep your belief in ghosts for now.

      • Number 8 was, in fact, proven. Look at the girl in the postcard and look at the picture. They are the EXACT same person. He probably did a bit to change the way she looked slightly to create a more convincing photograph but alas, it is not real. Honestly I was disappointed when I found out it was faked. If it were genuine it’d be one of the best apparition photos I’ve ever seen. I’ve been investigating for 6 years now.

        • If you cut and paste the girl from the photo and set her next to the fire photo, it is REALLY obvious.

        • Eh… The main problem is with the close ups. You can see the face of the girl in the picture, but not in the postcard. Maybe the other website has a crappy version, but from what I see… I can’t tell you that that is the same girl without a single doubt. I’m not a photographer so I don’t know if you can make the face look clearer without photoshop.

    • The photo of the girl on the postcard isn’t the same as the photo of the girl in the fire. U can’t see the face at all on the postcard. The clothes are similar but that’s about it

  27. I personally think photos number 6,5 and 3 are the most realistic photo of real ghost because in times like those people cant fake those photos with transparancy without light shining through out them. I think most of them were either hoax or images of objects made diffent because of human mind. As one unuasual objective can trigger a man’s mind and so as the lightest infraction of a hungry stomach etch. can change man’s perspective about things.

    • Because it’s easier for your eyes to play tricks on you when something is in black and white… makes it easier to see the “ghosts”. Not a lot of color ones because, for example, if number 2 were taken in color and you could see that whatever the lady is supposed to be is really part of the headrest or something… it suddenly wouldn’t be a ghost photo.

  28. Matthew McColl on

    I am no photographic expert so I have to trust where it says that the photos are authentic, but there are a few taken in the 1990’s and both are said to be done by expert photographers. My question is this: Why are they in black and white?

  29. nice compilation…. i want more…. can i have some links to find more of this photos….

  30. 10: Most likely a double exposure, though could also have been a problem with the developing.

    9: Pareidolia (the human mind’s ability to see patterns in random shapes)

    8: Pareidolia, albeit a fine example.

    7: Could be photographer blindness- the phenomenon where the photographer does not see everything in an image they take, only what they are focusing on.

    6: Pareidolia

    5: Pareidolia, double exposure, long exposure and the man moved his head. Someone else. Pick one.

    4: Light. Nothing more.

    3: Possible long exposure, gentleman sits in chair then quickly vacates when he realises a photograph is being taken, or he was sat there at the start. Couple with photographer blindness.

    2: Pareidolia

    1: Light getting into the film.

    Now these are only possible explanations, maybe they are ghosts (I don’t believe in ghosts), but when we have naturalistic explanations, even far fetched ones surely they are still more likely than a ghost?

    • @Ash Pryce

      How on earth is #2 a case of pareidolia?! It’s quite clearly a human being. The family even identify it as their mother.
      As for #4, it can’t simply be “Nothing more than light”. What about the gentleman in the background? The people who were there say that he wasn’t present (and he wasn’t in the rest of the footage that was shot from the vantage point of the “man” in question).
      As for #5, can you read? The other members of the crew even identified the figure as their fellow crewmember.
      Again, how on earth is #8 pareidolia?! It’s quite clearly a girl. I’m very certain that it’s not my mind making random opaque shapes. As you can it see, the girl appears opaque, which means something is in the way of the light. If it’s not what it is claimed to be, then what is it?

      Indeed, we should be sceptical about photographs of ghosts, as we should with most things, but if you’re going to completely ignore witness accounts (and refuse to read the text) then you’re not making yourself look very “scientific” at all. Yes, witness accounts are not always reliable, but I find it ludicrous that particular groups of “secularists” and “atheists” tend to jump to that conclusion whenever a “spiritual” person claims something that is contrary to their beliefs, as if ALL religious and spiritual people are completely deluded.

      Besides, why do ghosts have to necessarily be “un-naturalistic”? Maybe they are part of nature. Obviously, you must believe that science has discovered everything, or enough to disregard “spiritual” beliefs, if you think the notion of the existence of ghosts is contrary to nature.

      • Jessica Blight on

        I’m a Atheist and fully believe in Ghosts. I fully and undoubtedly believe there is life after death. I’m very sensitive to spirits as I have seen them all my life, I can also feel there energy. I’m not being a b**** , but please don’t put all Atheists in that ” non-believing douchebag” section.. Atheism is the non-belief in god or gods. Not the non-belief in the supernatural..

    • @ AshPryce

      saying all those biased “Explanations” and following it up with “i dont believe in ghosts.” 100% discredits all of it. (not that anybody took you seriously)

  31. dum-da-dum-dum on

    @ joeblog

    ‘electromagnetic activity’ is better known as ‘light’ – Really? The only visible wavelength is at 400-700nm, a tiny, tiny portion of the full wavelength.

  32. Right off the bat your choice for #10 discredits your judgment on the subject of whether or not a photograph is doctored. It's obviously a double exposure. For one thing, the image of the baby looks like it was taken from a different angle than the image of the grave site.

    • also you can see through the gravestone. you can see the fencing on the top left corner of the stone.

  33. la 2 es falsa, por que el cuello de la camisa de la mujer en el asiento trasero se trasluce o confunde en el marco de la ventanilla.

    La primera est? incompleta, la foto completa se ven dos cuadros en la pared. Si uno ve las luz no coincide la fuente con la sombra reflejada por los marcos de esos cuadros.

  34. These are definitely creepy photos. I believe that there are many things we don't properly understand, but I have also double exposed photographs, which gives some strange effects.

  35. Marcelo Novaes on

    These supposed ghosts are nothing more than poor photographers committing mistakes (in exposure, mostly). This is why the big bulk of them is from a long time ago, where technique and technology left plenty of space for errors. Recently, aside from double-exposure, the main source of supposed ghosts is the use of low-quality optical accessories – as filters, for example – and the more common use of cell phones with cameras and the alike. But, nonetheless, it’s fun to see how people tend to believe and make up stories to support the myths…

  36. My mom used to work at that Toys R Us when she was a teenager. She told me it was definitely haunted, no doubt about it. What a CREEPY photo.

  37. Your #1 photo was thoroughly debunked a long time ago. And I can't understand how anyone could miss the obvious double-exposure artifacts (which I see you've carefully cropped out here).

  38. Number 8 is a certain hoax. The only image that is open to question is Number 5. Google the rest and see for yourselves. So far, there isn't a single image ever produced that shows a ghost. I believe in the possibility of ghosts (a lot of folk make the claim), but in reality there's no 'smoking gun' image, video or audio anywhere at all.

    • i have personally taken one of these photos. i was taking a picture of myself through a mirror and when pulled up in the computer there is a clear as day profile of my grandma standing behind me who died in a house fire 2 years prior.

    • lol @ Kandinsky “So far, there isnt a single image ever produced that shows a ghost”

      somebody thinks pretty highly of himself huh?

      which other life questions can you absolutely 100% without a doubt answer correctly?

      did the big bang happen?

      what about aliens?

      please give us insight to your omniscience!

  39. it amazes me that it occurs to nobody that either a film or digital camera captures nothing but light in the range VISIBLE TO HUMANS. so if there is something there giving out visible light that the camera catches, then a human would see it, no doubt at all. that is why i am always sceptical of photos in which the ghost is said to appear afterwards. also, you said that some of those areas had 'high levels of electromagnetic anomalies'- 'electromagnetic activity' is better known as 'light'- hardly surprising there was a bit of that around, and if there was an 'anomaly,' then all youre saying is that there was a particularly bright or dark area, and that woman doesnt look particularly bright or dark.

    also, have you ever seen a long exposure picture in which someone moves half way through? they look translucent, and dark areas look almost transparent, and as for the bearded guy, i could personally identify that as any number of people.

    ghosts would be pretty cool though….

    • I'm just playing some devil's advocate here, so don't get defensive. You say that cameras only light within the visible spectrum. Agreed. However, that does not address #4, which I think tears quite the hole in your argument. The photo was taken with infrared red film, in which case if the "ghost" were to appear through infrared light, then it would be captured by the film, not seen by anybody there, and not captured by conventional film, which would include the high speed film. Interestingly enough, the high speed did not capture the ghost. So, going based solely on what you have already addressed as "rules", we can assume that every photograph is not real, except for #4. Any response? Again, just playing devil's advocate…please don't hurt me. 😛

    • Also, a lot of the pictures had a very long exposure time, so if you’ve ever heard about when cameras were JUST made and people had to stand in front of them for an hour or longer for it to finish taking the picture… well that’s when these images come up. I’m sure if you looked in the same exact spot without blinking once and without your eyes going out of focus, you’d see these things too.It’s amazing to me that it doesn’t occur to you that these are paranormal situations. There is nothing normal about them.

  40. London Differently on

    I love these pictures! I came across this from a link posted on Twitter and am really glad I clicked through: they're fascinating! I'm always a bit cynical when I see ghost photographs, but the focus on images which pre-date current photo wizadry makes these particularly intriguing, and I really enjoyed your write up to introduce the background.

    Thanks for compiling this!

  41. Regarding number 2:

    I saw a documentary where at one point they were talking about this photo. It turns out that somehow it and another photo from the same film overlapped. Another significant thing is that, according to the experts, her head is disproportionally big .

      • You say most, I’m curious as to which ones you think are real?
        Personally I saw nothing to prove the existence of ghosts.

        • Joseph DeSantis on

          See a ghost and you wouldn’t be posting that, I used to be in a Paranormal research group. I had a lot of interesting times, nonetheless I am not even 30 yet but have stopped fully searching for the paranormal for self-preservation reasons!

        • “See a ghost and you wouldn’t be posting that,”

          I can’t speak for John but I’d still be saying that. I’ve experienced many things I can’t explain that people who believe in ghosts say is supernatural. I simply accept them as unexplained- unexaplined does not equal ghost.

          “I used to be in a Paranormal research group.”

          How did you go about research: Did you use Ouija Boards? Did you use EMF meters? Did you use psychics? Did you useVoice recording? Did you use thermometres? If the answer to any of these is “Yes” you were probably researching incorrectly as none of these items has been shown to be able to react to “ghosts” only people’s pre-conceived expectations.

        • Researching incorrectly? How would you call researching correctly? :/ That’s call documenting evidence in anyhow or methods…. It’s the documents captured being research to make possible conclusion and beliefs :p And yes the Ouija does affects reaction to ghost believe or not if you haven’t tried it in a well known haunted location, but be careful.

        • Well i saw only one ghost n i really didn’t believe that it actually exist.I know that ghosts aren’t real but they’re just demons.I also tried to zoom my camera next to it but it wasn’t there anymore….