Ghost at the Stanley?

Nope.

Firstly, it's a hotel with guests in (yes, the Stanley is currently open and you can book a room). So potentially, this could just be a guest standing in the bedroom window.

Secondly, the 'witness' took two shots, from different angles (as obvious from the flag's location in relation to the window) - one at 9:03 and the other at 9:04. That is a whole minute apart. It takes, literally, seconds for someone to step away from a window.

Lastly, there is an issue with the image to suggest (and that is all it is, a possibility through observation) that the image has been tampered with. There is a spot in the image to suggest that it has been 'shopped' and someone did a poor job at blending it in. This may not actually be the case, but there is no other explanation for what I am seeing in the photo - it just should not be the way it is at this particular spot. It makes no photographic sense.......

I'm not going to post my findings yet - I will leave it open for a while to see what others say on it, but this is questionable evidence from my point of view.
 
Nope.

Firstly, it's a hotel with guests in (yes, the Stanley is currently open and you can book a room). So potentially, this could just be a guest standing in the bedroom window.

Secondly, the 'witness' took two shots, from different angles (as obvious from the flag's location in relation to the window) - one at 9:03 and the other at 9:04. That is a whole minute apart. It takes, literally, seconds for someone to step away from a window.

Lastly, there is an issue with the image to suggest (and that is all it is, a possibility through observation) that the image has been tampered with. There is a spot in the image to suggest that it has been 'shopped' and someone did a poor job at blending it in. This may not actually be the case, but there is no other explanation for what I am seeing in the photo - it just should not be the way it is at this particular spot. It makes no photographic sense.......

I'm not going to post my findings yet - I will leave it open for a while to see what others say on it, but this is questionable evidence from my point of view.
I questioned it immediately. I've had several apparition experiences. NONE of them were as solid as that showed. I believe it to be a living person in that pic.
 
Agreed.

Thinly disguised marketing hoax or just a random pic of a living person.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Debi
So, just to follow up on my original post, these points are noted on the photo, which I have analysed and blown up. Unfortunately, some of the definition has been lost on the upload:

Untitled-3.jpg


Firstly, it was noted that where the figure is, the flag rope (lower) is intersected by the image of the figure and does not run through as expected. It appears to hit, what we will presume as, the hair of the figure, runs up in a wide black band, before curving around on the sash window lower rail. This blackened area to the right (as viewing) of the figure, in comparison to the rest of the photo's area, seems out of place as it is darker than any other region on the picture. Again, not very clear on the uploaded image, but much clearer on the raw file. It just disappears when it hits the figure.

Okay, for the sceptical, you could state that it just gets lost on the image of the figure (it doesn't - analysis through Fiji shows this - but let's say that it does), there is another issue on the image.

The fall of the upper 'flesh' of the figure does not make sense. The upper pane of the sash is a 10 pane (5 upper and 5 lower) window. The lower rail spans across the entire pane. This can be substantiated by comparing to the opposite window, shown in full, to the left of the figure in the window. So how is it that the 'flesh' breaks the line of the rail, just below the dark curvature line seen on the rail? This should run white, as the other part of the rail prior, especially considering the direction of the light thrown.

It's just not right.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Debi
So, just to follow up on my original post, these points are noted on the photo, which I have analysed and blown up. Unfortunately, some of the definition has been lost on the upload:

View attachment 33017

Firstly, it was noted that where the figure is, the flag rope (lower) is intersected by the image of the figure and does not run through as expected. It appears to hit, what we will presume as, the hair of the figure, runs up in a wide black band, before curving around on the sash window lower rail. This blackened area to the right (as viewing) of the figure, in comparison to the rest of the photo's area, seems out of place as it is darker than any other region on the picture. Again, not very clear on the uploaded image, but much clearer on the raw file. It just disappears when it hits the figure.

Okay, for the sceptical, you could state that it just gets lost on the image of the figure (it doesn't - analysis through Fiji shows this - but let's say that it does), there is another issue on the image.

The fall of the upper 'flesh' of the figure does not make sense. The upper pane of the sash is a 10 pane (5 upper and 5 lower) window. The lower rail spans across the entire pane. This can be substantiated by comparing to the opposite window, shown in full, to the left of the figure in the window. So how is it that the 'flesh' breaks the line of the rail, just below the dark curvature line seen on the rail? This should run white, as the other part of the rail prior, especially considering the direction of the light thrown.

It's just not right.
Well done, Titch!