friend sent me this pic...tell me what u think

Interesting...............

Contac Me

-Gabriel

that bloody iphone app .. graaaaaaa

I agree. The odd pixillation screams fraud.

Too Good To Be True.

So Excellent That It Defies Belief,As In She Loves All Her In-laws
That's To Good To Be True.This Term Expresses The Skeptical
View That Something So Seemingly Fine Must Have Something
Wrong With It. In This Case I Agree Its Fake.

tyrstag wrote: No, most decent digital cameras automatically attach metadata to the picture. Metadata is information attached to the file, but not visible in the picture, things like; the type of camera, resolution setting, F-Stop, shutter speed, whether flash was used, etc. Most cell phone cameras don't attach this info.

This picture doesn't contain any of that info. So, either it was taken with a cell phone or the metadata was removed, intentionally or not.

But, without that metadata, there's no way to tell what the original settings were and whether the picture was manipulated.

Thank you so much for the info. I am new to the whole ghost hunting thing, so I wasn't sure how to you go about proving photos haven't been tampered with. I want a good hard evidence not something that can be doubted.

Yeah, scary looking picture but definitely an app. Fun to use on friends!

We need to add that to the CM system. Original files and modified files need to be stored separately.

Well said tystag.

Also the comment I made about the size means that most al digital camera devices (including video) record images at a number of preset pixel sizes. Height/Width 320x240 320x200 640x400 640x480 720x480 1024x768 1280x1024 and on up. There are also some other sizes but they're all pretty standardized.

This image did not fall into any size category which is standard for digital devices. That indicates that the image was cropped and resized. With than in and of itself is not bad, I crop and resize all the time. BUT if you do so, you must keep the original so that the authenticity of the image can be verified.

Actually that brings on a good point. ALWAYS KEEP THE ORIGINAL with any medium Audio, Picture, Video. Because it will lend to the credibility of the media.

No, most decent digital cameras automatically attach metadata to the picture. Metadata is information attached to the file, but not visible in the picture, things like; the type of camera, resolution setting, F-Stop, shutter speed, whether flash was used, etc. Most cell phone cameras don't attach this info.

This picture doesn't contain any of that info. So, either it was taken with a cell phone or the metadata was removed, intentionally or not.

But, without that metadata, there's no way to tell what the original settings were and whether the picture was manipulated.

crystalcross wrote: Faked or not faked, from a purely technical standpoint there are some issues with the photo that prevent it from being used as evidence even if it were real.

#1 - its a non standard size, which indicates that its been resized and is not an original.

#2 - it has no EXIF data associated with the image. This data, if verifiable could lend to its credibility as a image that was photographed. This means it was likely an image taken with a phone and perhaps edited if for no other reason than to crop.

#3 - the uniform additive shading of the image lends to the theory that an image was overlayed or superimposed over another image with low alpha value. Alpha value being the property that makes the image less opaque.

Now I'm not going to say that anyone intentionally faked the image, simply because I can not definitively prove that. But at the same time the lack of verifiable aspects in this image precludes it from ever being used as evidence.

So does that mean you have to have the date and time on every image??