What kind of building is this and where??

[Gadget]

And another thing 

I just can't see how the monkey/ET in the glass case, middle right, can posibly not fall off at that angle. It's defying gravity.

Is it a paper mock up - various bits photgraphed and montaged and re-photographed. Even then it was possible to do some canny touching up of joins.

Gadget

[d.weaving]

Hi Gadget...I'm glad you noticed the monkey come Et too and the mirror...the 'negative' also shows the 'stretcher bars' in the ceiling as being black in colour...surely if they were plaster they would show up white..perhaps they are some kind of metal...whatever the outcome..this pic may look simple but that is a very clever arrangement.

Derek.

Ps. I thought the tilt was me...one of the arms on me glasses as broke

[patrish]

The figure  could be an Automaton in which case it could lean forward at that angle but where is the mechanism stored? I also noticed that the case is also leaning forward whilst the table appears level.

[Gadget]

This tilt has been worrying me for a while - also the vagueness of the left foreground.

Anyone who has tried to join multiple photos together will know that however hard you try, they often just don't match up and something has to go. In this case, the ceiling bars and pillars would have to look 'true' so the poorold monkey got skewed!

Another thing Derek, if this was wide angle (as one would expect), why are the outer edge pieces not obviously bigger because of the distortion that wide angles always have?

I think this is artifice by the photographer. Either montage, sandwich printing or a mixture. I've done it many times for effect, so why should I believe it is just one view?

Gadget

PS - yes Patrish that table and case just don't look true!

[chinakay]

Maybe the square "monkey" cage doesn't fit quite right on the round table, and the front legs are off the edge...tilting it forward. Maybe?

China

[wheeldon]

I can't seem to make out which angle the shot has been taken from.

Is the photographer taking the photo slightly from the right?  Even so, the wall connecting the pillar behind 'our ghost' and the door just doesn't ring right with my eyes 

Also the black strips down the right hand wall, surely too dark for shadows???

Has anyone wrked out if the floor in the front bit of the room is wood or stone?  That might rule a stage out.

Sorry, if this has already been posted, I am trying to keep up, honest 

[Gadget]

I've done a very quick change to the photo. I'm on my laptop so it's had to be done with a heavy hand.

Gadget

[Maggie.]

Surely the reflection in the mirror shows part of the ceiling, which would be the case if the mirror was angled upwards slightly.  There are 2 black horizontal lines and on magnifying the photo the top one appears to split and could be the reflection of the metal ribs in the ceiling where two overlap and are bolted.

I've just been playing around with my dressing table mirror and by tilting it it is possible to get my head appearing on the ceiling      .  Could that black blob with a white centre possibly be a face?

Hope I am not repeating anybody - I am also trying my best to keep up 

Maggie

[martianuk]

OK, Kirsty and I have been chatting (constantly) about this photo...Kirsty doesn't think it looks 'lived in'. She is intrigued by the symetry of the doors and chairs and that the room has a lack of personal items (except the photos) and no visible wardrobe, which would have been a necessity for the long coats or gowns of the time. However, if this is staged photo, then you don't have beds hanging around and if this is either an attic or cellar, you aren't going to drag beds up/down stairs for the photo.
My feeling is that it could be an amature photographer who just wanted to photograph the nearest thing to hand, so he set his (or her...) room up. I know that when I get a new camera I just start taking photos of the closest thing! This could explain why the room doesn't quite look genuine - it's been quickly re-arranged and tidied for the photo.

Kirsty raised another point when we looked at the photo: in the room, there are 5 identical chairs (2 in the foreground on either side of the room and 2 next to the dressing table, 1 on the left raised level - is the ghost sitting on the 6th?!?!?!). It seems unusual that you would have that many identical chairs in a bedsit.

Literally as I type this....my idea is that the table in the foreground with the photos on is in fact a dining table (presence of  candles too?). It would most likely have a table cloth and we can't see the legs or if it is a desk with drawers? I'm just thinking out loud here I guess...

I'm still not sure about the presence of a second bed. If you look at the opposite side, there is a just enough room for a chair and a chest of drawers, leaving access to the door (which makes me think the door is in use). So I don't tonk you could actually fit a bed in, not leaving access to the door anyway. Kirsty disagrees....

Sorry for yet another long post with lots ideas as I think of them...

Hadyn

______________________________


I reckon the chairs get pulled up to the table in this underground theatrical room and they all have a seance with the phantom 

Kirsty