Actually, I believe this photo is more legit that you all claim, and I find the would-be professional photography opinions very humerus and unfounded. Allow me to provide more detailed analysis from someone who does this professionally.
Let us... have... a... look...
INITIAL FILTERING:
(By Hierarchy Top-Down Layers)
LEVELS: Output Levels | 30, 240
BRIGHTNESS/CONTRAST | 50/-35
#Background
This was employed to better see the anomalies and color overlays in the photo. Without these stats provided - I automatically debunk my own evidence
(a *ahem* directed to the above user and many would-be evidence gathering youtubers).
FIGURE 1 - CODENAME: The Obvious
FIGURE 1 DETAILS:
For starters, I went straight for the obvious - Anomalies and Producer Edits. In this image, I identify the LOSS OF QUALITY of the LENS with RED (at %20 Opacity), and the FLASH TRIGGER with GREEN (at %20 Opacity). GREEN also identifies the edge of what's called a VIGNETTE on the outer edge of the photo - now adays purposefully implemented for professional edits (assuming you own a $1K+ lens, as professionals do, most of these lenses are so good rarely catch clear vignettes unless you digitally edit them in or purposefully enhance them) - the lens in the image clearly has a dated vignette limitation as most do dating prior to 1990's without serious investments. Please know that I do understand that this is in-fact a JPG rendition of an original photo likely scanned with a rudimentary piece of hardware... not to mention potentially further encoded by plugins available, such those that come with WordPress or similarly to how encoding works on Facebook to reduce image filesizes. This was taken into account while working regions of the photo.
MY ANALYSIS:
This image was cropped to include the hangman figure in the sense of "Thirds" - if you don't know what "Thirds" are, you missed an important day in "Photography 101". The right side of the image is missing by est. %15-%25. This may have been on purpose to enhance the illusion, or an aesthetic choice after the ghost was discovered - and is further supported by the flashes reflections in the glass on the table. I can't speak for the taste of the photographer, and the quality of his gear (such as the ability to turret modern $400+ flashes), but it's likely directly towards the intended subjects. The original image may have even been cut/scissored physically before scanning. Knowing little about the family, I can tell you even less about the photographer - rich couples pay more than poor couples for professional shots (could have even been a family member or friend), and the gear of the professional reflects in his clientele.
FIGURE 2 - CODENAME: Candles, And Chairs, And Lighting "Oh My"
FIGURE 2 DETAILS:
Based on anomalies found in the photo from the hangman in BLUE (at %20 Opacity) - he is NOT far enough behind the candles to cast a shadow - or so close to the candles that any shadow/light cast would be hidden behind the character or only vaguely seen in the left (technically right) arm. Flash lighting on the clothing is highlighted in YELLOW (at %20 Opacity). The fact that this was missed actually guided me to do these edits to begin with, and the conclusion he was far enough behind the candles and casting an "incorrect shadow". He is either directly "on top" or in front of these candles based on the anomalies found around the character - partially interacting the the candles and the chair. This does open reasoning for debunk via image overlay.
MY ANALYSIS:
Had the hangman been closer to the camera, body slightly facing the center of the image (reference GREEN in FIGURE 1) his ARM would have been just within the radius of the flash itself - thus illuminated as it is - as is the curvature of the chest of the figure as it fades into the vignette with the shimmer line on the left (technically right) arm. Additionally - the hangman is larger than the woman on the Left (center frame) suggesting he is closer to the camera. But there's a realm of spook that enters my next observation -- only the clothing of the figure is lit. Nothing about the figures actual physical being gives hint that it was lit by either the candles - or the flash. I will explain this further in...
FIGURE 3 - CODENAME: Extra Extra Ghost Goods
FIGURE 3 DETAILS:
The hangman body parts, as displayed in PURPLE (at %20 Opacity), is either invisible or black - still leaving traces of the background image - or potentially grain gained. I've highlighted objects in the background that can be identified through the figure in CYAN (at %20 Opacity). Now, albeit, this could be anomalies created in photography through movement during a photograph with a slower shutter speed. If you don't understand how traces of a subject can be left behind while in movement (or in the dark gaining light) with a photograph taken at a lower shutter speed - you missed more than one day of "Photography 101".
MY ANALYSIS:
The right arm (technically left) of the hangman has the least amount of motion blur (assuming motion blur from lower shutter speeds can explain this) - yet it yields the most evidence of objects appearing behind/through the hangman. This is helped greatly thanks to the Cutain behind the subjects in the photo. Additionally, plaster can been seen through the hangman's head - but this could be explained away with grain (*shrug*).
FIGURE 4 - Gravity Works. Period.
FIGURE 4 DETAILS:
Now it's to my reading you guys believe that what's on the hangman's shirt is a necklace -- and a necklace it could very well may be. But using various colors (at %20 opacity) - I've managed to identify very very very slight outlines of what could be the most identifiable features of "The Hangman", including head, eyes & mouth region, arms, and what could be a button, pendant, bone, or feather of some kind. Bone and feathers quite common amongst, lets say, African Americans.
MY ANALYSIS:
Gravity is indeed pulling that object downwards based on how it's anchored and dangling from the subject hangman. I don't believe for a moment that is a necklace defying gravity, but a clothing attachment popular in the mid to late 1800's - and I'd be willing to bet one could find a similar image of a man hanging by his feat with an identifying marker as such on his chest that was of little to no value to the guards -- such an image is popular in hollywood movies. I don't understand why hours of efforts would be invested into the image just to be fooled by gravity, I don't buy that and I haven't seen evidence to fully support the necklace theory - show me skills.
BONUS CONTENT
The best part? I've attached the PSD used to create these images - as any good evidence finder should.
FIGURES + BONUS DATA PSD (Created in CS6, Compatible with All)
FINAL THOUGHTS:
I personally don't think the technology existed at the time the photo was taken to pull off such great edits (such as the opacity from the low shutter speed, which can be done today with photoshop), and if done during the time the photo was taken - DAYS, not HOURS, was invested into the creation. It could be an elaborate hoax of a modern user (ref. earliest 2009 when photoshop did exist), who may have in-fact edited in a figure in motion swinging upsidedown (causing an elongated head of motion), made a few editing mistakes and hid them well with a great deal of white balancing, vignetting, and extreme encoding which is very apparent in this photo.
It is impossible to debunk, nor prove, due to the quality of this image - no matter how many filters you use that employ mathematical absolutes to better suite your personal desired results, including tools that de-artifact.
I reserve the right to delete my images at any time (as they are hosted on my server) to avoid wasted bandwidth. I highly suggest all users collect the original files if they are interested in referring to this in the future. I will ignore and even go to lengths to delete my account to be left alone, but I will honor good evidence and arguments on this thread with a reply.
Get it while it's valid. Enjoy.
