Share with us your own ghost / spirit sightings!

First, was it a digital or traditional camera?

Second, what you say about the image being an image may be a big clue. What if you have this backwards? You are assuming that it was the ghost of the woman you saw, but you describe her in terms of an image and she was only visible when looking through a camera. What if the ghost is not the subject of the photograph, but the photographer, or perhaps even an echo of the action of a photograph being taken? By looking through the camera lens at that spot you were both recreating the taking of a photograph from long ago and some resonance with that caused you to see what that long ago (perhaps now ghostly) photographer saw. It may have been an important and emotional moment for him/her which either became imprinted on the building or else he or she was showing a memory to you based on an affinity for cameras. Perhaps somewhere out there is a print of the original photograph!

Hey Benway,

It was a traditional camera with lens and such.

I totally love your idea too. It’s like so very exact to the situation. I find it plausible.

As for the possibility of a like original photo out there - maybe. Unlikely I’ll ever find it because after all these years I have even forgotten the name of the bed and breakfast inn. If I could recall it, I’d be inserting into Debi’s new thread about haunted travel.

Thanks for posting those inputs Benway.
 
Your theory of how people see themselves is one I've thought about myself. I still "see" myself as that 20 yr. old of long ago in my head. It would be perfectly natural for a spirit to project that when manifesting. And it would take energy to "move" within this plane, so a spirit holding one pose could make sense.
I know why the the spirit stayed still! ....she was posing for a photo! :D Cheese :p
 
I'm glad you are able to see how I framed my hypothesis Debi and can make some sense of it. I'm not inferring that you or anyone necessarily does or should agree with it. My Mom once told me - probably at the age of about 65 - that she had always perceived herself as her 17 year old self regardless of how she had aged.

So, let me share my (presently) final sequential step in that hypothesis.

I don't believe for a second that ghosts/spirits are only visible to those of us with demonstrated psychic skills. However, compared to the average "Joe Muggle", I can believe that it is easier and more likely for a psychic to see a ghost/spirit in clearly human form. Just like a psychic medium can “talk” with spirits in a way non-psychics do not.

And, it seems to me that statistically speaking most people who report sightings are generally reporting ghosts/spirits seen in their mist or orbs or shadows forms.

What I want to offer is that maybe those who see ghosts/spirits in clearly human form are not really "seeing" the spirit's form with their eyeballs; instead they are tapping into that spirit's own perception/recollection of their body's form. And, this is happening via psychic means or some other means of out-of-body-spirit-to-in-body-spirit communications. In short, the living human is "seeing" mentally a body that the ghost/spirit is portraying and then that mental image is often (not necessarily always) being wrongfully perceived as an actual physical, visual (related to mechanics of the eyes) experience.

This hypothesis does not intend to explain NOR refute all of the spirit world including how ghosts/spirits manipulate the environment around them like in poltergeist cases. It is just one humble psychic's musing about how it could be that many persons "see" ghosts/spirits in a human form which most of us (up to this point in time) will admit they do not happen to continue to live inside of. As always, I am 100+% open to continued discussions and musing about supporting, alternate, and conflicting ideas about this world.
I really like the theory of what I call seeing with the minds eye. My father has some abilities and that is how he describes it. Very good thoughts on this Wands
 
First, was it a digital or traditional camera?

Second, what you say about the image being an image may be a big clue. What if you have this backwards? You are assuming that it was the ghost of the woman you saw, but you describe her in terms of an image and she was only visible when looking through a camera. What if the ghost is not the subject of the photograph, but the photographer, or perhaps even an echo of the action of a photograph being taken? By looking through the camera lens at that spot you were both recreating the taking of a photograph from long ago and some resonance with that caused you to see what that long ago (perhaps now ghostly) photographer saw. It may have been an important and emotional moment for him/her which either became imprinted on the building or else he or she was showing a memory to you based on an affinity for cameras. Perhaps somewhere out there is a print of the original photograph!
Excellent thinking Ben!
 
  • Like
Reactions: WitchAndShaman
Wands those were great accounts , I loved reading them. You have a way with writing.

As a technology instructor I strive for accuracy and detail that can make my intent as complete and intelligible - and colorful - as possible for my audience.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 7Critter and Lynne
Every now and then I might see something that will make me doubt whether I actually saw it or not. The most notable thing is when I get the impression that I saw someone go through someplace, only to ask the only person or people whom it could have logically been for them to tell me that they never passed through where i thought I saw them (or at least someone).
 
Every now and then I might see something that will make me doubt whether I actually saw it or not. The most notable thing is when I get the impression that I saw someone go through someplace, only to ask the only person or people whom it could have logically been for them to tell me that they never passed through where i thought I saw them (or at least someone).

That’s interesting Edge because that is similar to my known prejudice. I am resistant to think of things I see out of the corner of my eye as being exactly as I perceive them.

Here is just one example of why. I where trifocal glasses and I’ve had brilliant flashes of lime green light completely fill my vision...just at the moment I happen to pass under a ceiling mounted smoke detector. Backing up and looking up, I can see a similarly colored soft green battery/operating light embedded in the smoke detector. I have then been able to recreate the same quick and brilliant flash by walking under the exact same spot again.

I’ve had other random images projected, from the extreme edges of my glasses, into my eyes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lynne and Debi