Cowboy Ghost Video
Cowboy Ghost Video
The video is from an 8 night investigation the P.I.T crew did at an Industrial Facility.
I haven’t done this before, but hopefully it works, below is a playlist of all the videos relating to the investigation, I haven’t watched them all, but I will after I post this.
Hey Rand,
Check out this link http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/article2229774.ece
It’s caused a bit of a stir here in the UK. Could of course very easily be a fake. Interested to know your thoughts.
dg1884
Excellent capture. Thia is an amazing video. Good job P.I.T. Crew!
[...] to dg1884 for pointing out this video. The video was shot by 12 year old Reece Pitman, while randomly filming [...]
I ran into a site that totally denounces these 2 videos as hoaxes and prove it.
http://www.ghosttheory.com/paranormal/full-body-apparition-or-sloppy-hoax/
http://www.ghosttheory.com/paranormal/another-cellphone-ghost-hoax-makes-news/
I think these guys nailed it!
Cheers Servant, great analysis, it’s sites like that that make me need to step up my game. I agree with their cellphone analysis, seemed like something fishy going on with the lights. I don’t know about the cowboy one though, hoaxing is an end to paranormal investigators, mistaking yourself for a ghost can’t be to good either. Looking at the video again I can see what they’re on about, the hat though, it’s to pronounced, the only way I can see a baseball cap looking like a cowboy hat in this video is if they were shaking their head from side to side while walking, crappy frame rate it could be possible.
Oh snap Friday the 13th: Jason takes Manhattan’s on.
There was no discussion regarding trasparency or shadows that should have been on the back wall. I don’t fully understand how one can be so quick to disprove. There was absolutely no mention of the actual “cowboy” figure in this. The only thing he discussed was the image prior to the “cowboy” figure. I would like to see what how he disproves that image as well. This analysis is incomplete.
I looked these guys up and they are non-profit. What would they have to gain by faking something and damaging their credibility? No, this isn’t setting well with me. I need more.
I remain true to my original belief. Excellent job P.I.T. Crew!!
I agree Princess210, they did a detailed analysis, but far from complete. I can only speak for myself, but time is an issue when it comes to analysis, just not enough of it. I would love to spend hours on analysis, but as it stands I’d probably only post once a week.
The transparency is one of the issues for me, it seems like the major thing that should have been discussed the most.
Rand, Servant, Princess.. instead of retyping I will just post my comments that I left at Javier’s site. His analysis is by no means convincing, nor does it reveal any professional experience. He merely approaches a video with a preconception, and attempts to support it with “what if” propositions.. “what if what you’re seeing is actually this..could it be? Then it must be.” My comments below refer to Reece’s video, not the PIT crew, but the same principles apply in terms of analysis.
–
I’ve been looking at this video for some time now…
I just did a couple of test shots with my blackberry and the stairway light, which is an exposed bulb, and shooting directly at the light, center frame, giving enough time for the camera to balance exposure, there is an identical halo like glow around the bulb. I believe it is lens flare and/or overexposure. Moving the shot around and playing with the relationship between the light and the camera, I get artifacts identical to what we see in Reece’s clip. There is no plastic film between my lens and the light.
I also do not observe the shadow and the artifact moving in unison except at the very beginning. As the shadow approaches the opposite side, it is actually converging with the light artifact, which I believe is the ceiling light that is just at the very top of the frame.
Also, I do not see any apparent distortion of the background of the scene except as the shadow passes, as you would expect to see if a sheet of plastic were being moved across the lens at close proximity. The background returns to normal immediately as the shadow clears. I observe what appears to be exposure being compensated throughout the crossing.
Lastly, the shadow has a relatively fluid movement, both horizontally and vertically. Consider the coordination necessary to keep the shot relatively well framed, and move a piece of painted plastic across the lens, while maintaining a stable shot and a fluid movement of the subject across it. Remember this is a 12 year old kid. Also your recreation of the event does not recreate the lighting conditions present in his clip. His scene is well lit throughout. Yours is dark except for some ambient light in the background, and would obscure any artifacts introduced by your plastic film.
Still might be fake in the end, but creating a forgery that resembles an effect in another video does not disprove that video’s authenticity. It merely offers one inconclusive explanation.
Tim
Excellent ideas here, have emailed my mum so expect a big reply!!