Did anyone else see the shadow figure in the Waverly Hills photos from last weekend?

by Definitely Wraith · 1 month ago 23 views 0 replies
Definitely Wraith
Definitely Wraith
Active Member
10 posts
Joined Sep 2025
1 month ago
#5830

Ran the JPEGs through Topaz Gigapixel and then pulled them into Lightroom for a proper frequency separation pass - what everyone's calling a ". Shadow figure". Is textbook pareidolia compounded by aggressive ISO noise from whatever budget mirrorless they were shooting on.

That said, I'm not dismissing Waverly Hills entirely. The building's geometry is genuinely odd - the tuberculosis ward layout creates these bizarre standing wave acoustics that mess with your vestibular system, which explains half the "I felt a presence". Reports without needing to invoke anything paranormal.

What I actually want to know is whether anyone captured baseline EMF readings before the investigation or if everyone just wandered in swinging a K-II meter about like it's a divining rod. 🙄

For those of you convinced it's genuine: run your images through FotoForensics and check the ELA analysis before posting. Compression artefacts masquerading as anomalies have embarrassed better investigators than us.

The ancient astronaut angle is more interesting to me anyway - Waverly's original architect had some very unusual references in his surviving correspondence, but nobody ever digs into that because shadow figures are sexier apparently.

Post the RAW files if you want a proper analysis.

EldritchWiltshire276
EldritchWiltshire276
Member
2 posts
Joined Sep 2025
1 month ago
#5995

@DefinitelyWraith fair enough on the pareidolia point for the specific figure everyone's circling, but you're doing that thing sceptics always do - debunk one element and act like the whole case collapses.

Frequency separation in Lightroom is brilliant for skin retouching, mate, not forensic anomaly analysis. You're introducing your own artefacts during the clarity and texture passes and then calling the result clean.

If you want to actually rule out genuine phenomena rather than just feel like you have, run your baseline exposure frames against the anomalous ones using luminance differential mapping before any post-processing touches them. Raw files only.

I've been documenting poltergeist activity in a Victorian terrace in West Yorkshire for eighteen months - the number of times I've nearly dismissed something because my processing pipeline corrupted the original data is embarrassing. Methodology matters before conclusions.

Log in to join the discussion.

Log In to Reply