So what’s the deal with this? The text says that the last two pictures show the boy “exiting the painting under threat”. The pics look to me like low-light closeups of an area of the painting - nothing weird about it at all.
About the only thing I can figure out is the last two pics make whatever it is in the girl’s hand look sort of like a gun, but if you look at the first couple of pics, the barrel of the “gun” is just part of the windowframe. Nothing weird at all. Or am I missing something?
I guess I’ll have to wait until midnight tonight to see if I become “repulsed”, “physically ill”, or “suffer from blackout/mind control experiences”.
“Each print sells for $350.00.”
It is a disturbing picture - looks like the cover art for a horror novel.
IMO, the original sellers worked up the story to jack up the price on Ebay; and there are nutcases out there who are suggestible enough to be flipped out by the picture and the story. The picture series does not look like something you would get if you set a camera on a picture overnight, i.e. they seem to be from different angles and different zooms.
Very spooky painting!
The boy looks a little bit like the quick pan across the “ghost boy” in 3 MEN AND A BABY (which Cecil has talked about in the past). Lordy, what an expression. The “girl” is obviously a doll or mannequin of some type.
God knows what the artist was thinking of when he painted it…probably about making a spooky painting.
The boy’s facial figures more resemble that of an adult.
That adds a bit of creepyness to it. Otherwise, an interesting ‘interior’ style painting. I like the ‘holes’ for the eyes of the doll. Composition is ok. Gives you a good left to right eye movement across the painting. Maybe they could hang it in that house in Amityville.
Yeah, but what about that whole bit about the last two pics somehow showing the boy leaving the picture? That’s what I don’t get.
I guess I was hoping that someone who went through the trouble of trying to make up a spooky story would at least have made the spooky part well, spooky.
They go out of their way to make up a spooky story, and finish up with the whole “ohhh… no… let’s forget we called it haunted… it was just a mistake… I am sure there are good explanations for it all” routine. I presume this is to give the whole thing more credence - they try to give the impression that the picture is haunted, but they wish they hadn’t mentioned it.
This is of course daft - if the whole thing was for real, and they regretted mentioning it, then surely they could have just deleted the whole hype?
The whole story seems daft anyway. Can anyone see what is meant to be strange about the bottom photos? They look just the same as the others to me. Am I being blind?
Just reread the thing, and realised that I have (once again) neatly demonstrated my stupidity for all.
The “spooky” bit was from the advert (supposedly, though there is no way of checking), and so of course it couldn’t be changed after the auction. D’oh!
But, to save some dignity, let me say that part of my post still stands: I just don’t get what we are meant to be seeing.
i think that “THE BOY SEEMINGLY EXITING THE PAINTING UNDER THREAT” is not really modifying “THE LAST TWO PICTURES SHOWN ARE FROM THAT ‘STAKEOUT’” rather, the owners saw the boy move out of the picture (but there are no photos of that)“under threat” (which is what the last two photos show).
translation, some weird light makes that thing in her hand look like a gun. the end.
Ahh, I see what you mean.
It’s a bloody horrible painting though. What’s with all those hands at the window?
Well, I looked at this yesterday, and last night I didn’t sleep well. I mean, I usually sleep like a log, but I went to bed early, slept for about 4 hours, woke up and couldn’t get back to sleep for a long time. It was weird.
DAVEW0071: I hate the phrase “sleep like a log”. “Log” to my caca brain suggests “stool” - you know, as in the brown and smelly floater/sinker variety.
As a result of my childish humour, your phrase turns into “sleep like a long, fat, steaming turd”.
Which is not pleasant.
OK. Back to the spooky stuff.
That’s a cool painting. I’d actually pick it up if I found it at a garage sale somewhere (not at $350 though–pfeh). Then again, I like disturbing art.
My take on it is that dim lighting makes certain painting elements stand out–since the boy and the hands at the window are mainly composed of light pigments, they’d stand out in an eery way in dim lighting conditions. Probably not a good thing to put up in a house where small children live…
Indeed it has a supernatural power…to jack up the price.
What I found disturbing was the close-up of the boy’s face. Is it me or does he look like Georege W. Bush???
I looked at the pictures yesterday, too. And I also was awakened in the dark of night…in my case, by severe gastro-intestinal distress.
Make of it what you will, but I am CONVINCED there are supernatural forces at work here.
I had to get up in the night to take a leak.
Does that count as spooky?
Wow, this is really weird.
Plus, the dog was making noise in the middle of the night, and it kind of woke me up. I wish I had never seen that painting.
Mermaid, I swear to God, I’m gonna send you a new keyboard. I have about 6 of them in my basement, and two or three here in my office. Yer drivin’ me nuts with that broken spacebar!
Mermaid, it doesn’t annoy me. It just makes me hear a staccato sort of William Shatner voice in my head when I read your posts.
IMHO, they should burn that painting. As my kids like to say, “It creeps me out.”