Ghost on the Thames photo, lamenting 2013

Meh. Color me tired of these same kinds of photographs. There is no reason to think this is a ghost.

Photographer captures ‘ghost’ on camera – BT.

Possible evidence of paranormal activity near the Houses of Parliament on New Year’s Eve has baffled experts after a ‘ghost’ appeared in a photo.

Stunned photographer Jules Anna only noticed the spooky sight of a transparent figure looking over the River Thames near Westminster Bridge, London, when he got home.

“Nothing like this has ever happened to me before. I can’t explain it,” he said.

“There was no one there when I took the photographs and it is not a double exposure or a long exposure. I have shown it to five or six other people and they cannot explain it either.”

It’s very easy to investigate such a claim. Get the original photo and look at the metadata to see if it’s been tampered with. And, check the exposure to see if this could have been a real person who wandered in and out. No paranormal activity required. It’s nuts and bolts. These stories should not be posted as “paranormal activity” until some form of examination is done. But, they get hits, so, they are delivered, credulously.


Photo Credit: Jules Anna

You can see close-ups at the Mirror site. They show the person wearing a red letterman’s jacket, jeans, furry boots and a yarmulke (?). He does look sad.

  12 comments for “Ghost on the Thames photo, lamenting 2013

  1. January 4, 2014 at 12:11 PM

    Voted false along with another 78% on site, despite associating with the para peeps on Farcebook. Just too staged looking, & very like the “unstaged candid street photos” seen from many pro & amateur photographers. Mind you state of British politics, anyone would be depressed & want to throw themselves in the Thames. Can say same for here too, but i’ve only got the canalised Escaut (Scheld for rest of Europe) to chuck meself in.

  2. January 4, 2014 at 12:51 PM

    Look at all the ghostly cars on the bridge! And the ghostly ripples on the water! It’s almost as if it’s a low ambient light long-exposure shot and some things crossed the field of view while the shutter was open…

  3. January 4, 2014 at 12:53 PM

    Look at the ghostly cars on the bridge! And the ghostly ripples on the water! It’s almost as if it was a long-exposure shot in low ambient light and a few things crossed the field while the shutter was open.

    Or ghosts. Because obviously nothing like this has ever happened before.

  4. A. Smith
    January 4, 2014 at 2:21 PM

    This “ghost” is a high school kid looking down at his/her cell phone. You can tell that by the position of the arms, and the angle of the angle (which is looking almost straight down). Has the paranormal gone mobile?

  5. A. Smith
    January 4, 2014 at 2:23 PM

    Heck, I’ll even go one better and say with pretty much 100% certainty that the “ghost” is a girl. I absolutely mean no offense with this next comment, and how people understand it and take it in context — she has a girl butt. Men typically do not get the butt curves at the hip like that.

  6. January 4, 2014 at 2:28 PM

    That’s the Thame old ghost story we always get from these people. It’s a classic double exposure.

  7. Lagaya1
    January 4, 2014 at 2:31 PM

    Come on! Ghosts only wear Victorian clothing.

  8. A. Smith
    January 4, 2014 at 2:31 PM

    *Rimshot* He’ll be here all week ladies and gentlemen! 🙂

  9. January 4, 2014 at 4:21 PM

    Double exposure/colour seperation overlay call it what you want but as already said photo of adolescent/20 something girl on her moby (refrained from admitting the curvature of the behind obviously female, due to belovéd being nearby & the dog is psychic & tells her everything i look at online).The only thing haunting is the repetition of this sort of photo & the “shock/surprise” of the photographer to see it in the prints/memory chip.

  10. Chris Howard
    January 5, 2014 at 8:51 AM

    Why do ghosts wear clothes in the first place?

    I can understand the evolution, though.

    First they’re in white sheets because they were interred in shrouds, then clothes of the subsequent times that they died in. So it does follow that we should see ghastly visions in Louis Vuitton, and Levis…

    Wait. No it doesn’t. Why are ghosts not naked, again?

  11. vondrax
    January 5, 2014 at 12:52 PM

    This reminds me of a photo my dad shot decades ago of a large industrial canning machine in the manufacturing plant. His goal was to get just the machine in the shot, but as it was in the middle of a busy plant with people moving back and forth all the time, and not ideal light for the detail he wanted, he took a long exposure. People were walking throught the shot the whole time, but not a single person shows up, because they werent standing still for the shot. If someone had paused a little longer in the shot, it would have looked a lot like this.

  12. Ian
    January 6, 2014 at 4:51 AM

    Photographer has admitted he got exposure wrong:

Comments are closed.