Sunday, November 05, 2006

The 'hedge' thing solved.

Here's a new infrared photo of that house, from roughly the same location and at approximately the same time of day. This time I concentrated on the wall in front of the house.



The image is darker because I used a different camera. No central 'blob' with this one.
What's clear here is that there is no 'hedge'. The wall is clear, the gap in the wall contains nothing, and the plants within the garden are not obscured.

So, if I'm right in what I think caused that previous image, can I reproduce it?

I took this one from the other side of the house. If I'm right, the 'hedge' will appear in the same place.

Blogger shrinks these images to a dreadful degree. Here's a close-up:

It's dark, but shows the top of the 'hedge' running at the same height as previously. Foliage behind it is hidden.

So how did I reproduce it?

The cameras used here had no filter ring. I had to concentrate on holding the filter over the lens. The filter, as it is opaque, slows the shutter speed of the camera considerably.

What I had not noticed in that earlier picture, and what I waited for in this one, was a passing car.

Becuase it was moving it did not register on the film as a car. It passed while the shutter was open, the light reflecting from its roof formed the light 'top' of the 'hedge', and the rest of the car blurred what it passed in front of.

Since hedges at that height were a common feature of the town in the past, I considered it possible that this was some sort of 'recording' apparition, but could not bring myself to believe I was looking at the ghost of a plant. So I considered alternatives. Lens flare was ruled out because the image runs parallel to the house and has a 'semi-solid' darker area below it. Lens flares don't do that.

I checked the filter and lens for marks: both were clean.

A passing car sounded possible and was easy to check. Well, easy once the random British weather allowed it.

The car produced the same image, in the same place, so I put this one down to entirely natural phenomena. Disappointing in one way, but fortunate in another.

I wouldn't want to think all those dried-out houseplants might still be following me around.

4 comments:

Anonymous said...

Okay, so that's solved. Now, what's inside the house?

Anonymous said...

If you do ever show me a photo of something you believe to be a true ghost, I will tend to believe you Rom, because you are so very through in your investigations. You don't scoff, but you don't just believe without a thorough investigation.

Romulus Crowe said...

Inside, it's a storage area for the office block behind. It's a risky place to spend the night because it's a target for window-smashing vandals. I assume they think it's abandoned. Their small brains obviously can't understand why someone keeps replacing the windows.

I'll try getting in there, but with no reported odd happenings it might prove impossible.

Romulus Crowe said...

That's my aim, Lola. I'm looking for absolute proof. If I can find a flaw in any evidence, you can bet the sceptics will find it too.

Even though no sceptic pointed out what the hedge might be before I found it (do they even look at potential evidence?) you can bet someone would have spotted it if I'd made any claims.

That's why I'm so careful.

opinions powered by SendLove.to