Submitted for you approval or critique

This was taken with a Canon SLR camera, ISO 200 or 400 film. No other picture on the roll has this mist on it. There was no one smoking, nothing burning, and it was not damp in the house on this day.

My dd Moon, when she was about 9 years old, or 10, next to a weird mist. Some people say it looks like an angel, I am not sure what it is.

It is very odd.

Our family always seems to get weird pictures around the Holidays. I am not a huge beleiver in Orbs, but my dh seems to always have them around him, and I rarely do. (You can only see them on film.) This mist is unusual, as it is not the usual variety of "Orbs" one sees in digital pictures, and it was taken with an SLR camera with regular film.

 

The child's face would be washed out, and you would not be able to see the detail on the clock behind her. I've developed my own B&W film and prints, this is not overexposed. Look at the color in the child's face and clothes. I've not seen a photo where only a small portion of the middle was over exposed. (Unless someone hand developed it, and used a Blocker to only overexpose the middle during print making. Don't think Walgreens does this.) Overexposure results in the entire print being washed out.


But, thank you for your opinion.

 

It's a silver alloy photo, if you blow it up enough, you'll see graininess. It was converted to digital, via our scanner. I don't see a line, though.

 

Yeah.

It's over-exposure or a smudge. Sorry Mags. I wish I could tell you otherwise but Usually when "mist" appears from the bottom of the photo up or from the top, it's a film issue not paranormal. Now if the entire misty smudge was in the center of the photo away from the edges, or completely surrounding the girl and no where else...then I would definitely look into it further.

When I was a manager at Walgreens, I often had to run the photo lab(due to my phototech continously calling off) I have had more than a few pictures come out the exact same way. *looks around*

Sometimes it isn't just light that can the film, tiny drops of condensation while developing can muss the film too.

 

Do you still have the negatives?

 

it does look like a printing error to me, not unlike some stuff my photo prof showed our class for when the paper itself wasn't handled properly. Maybe try getting another print of it done if you still ahve the negatives, see if it's that. could be that chemicals sat slightly too long on that part of the film too (the negative itself) and have damaged it, colour film is super persnickity about timing and all that.

 

I don't think I have the negs. This pic is about 10 years old.
It may well be a printing or light error, I don't know. The rest of the roll was undamaged and it was in the middle, and it was printed on an automatic machine, so sitting in the chemicals too long isn't really an issue.

I've had cameras open before, and film become damaged, and the effects were very different. Very obvious blasts of light, orange or red "streaks." Complete erasure of details. But, of course, overexposure of only part of a picture, which was processed in a professional lab, by machine, in only one area of one print IS a statistical probabilty, no matter how small.

<Shrug> the ladies on the paranormal site I go to loved it. LOL!