Hi DPI enthusiasts,
I have been looking at the photos of the tent quite intensively and stumbled
across one particularity that puzzles me. Below, I show you two photos of the
tent taken by V. Brusnitsin; these versions of the photos are taken from the gallery
). They show Karelin and Koptelov at the tent, and
the gallery states that at least one of these photos is from the archive of A. Koskin.
What strikes me in the upper photo is a somewhat ghostly apparition in the upper left part of
the image, which does not appear to be present in the second photo. I have here marked the
corresponding section of the photo by a red ellipse for clarity. I hope you see what I mean.
What I distinguish there is quite reminiscent of two nostrils, a long snout, and two eyes with
maybe partly open lids. Frankly, the face of an animal like a bear or maybe a dog, which is looking at me.
So how did it get there?
One possibility I can imagine is a double exposure. The search team came without cameras and
used those they found in the tent. Possibly, a member of the Dyatlov group did take another photo in the
mysterious night, but did not take the necessary action to expose the next frame of the film before
being forced to neglect the camera. Then, the first photo taken by the search team with
that camera (or rather film) could be blurred with the last taken by the Dyatlov group. Whether
such a scenario is really plausible with the cameras being used is not entirely clear to me.
If so, it would have interesting implications.
For this scenario to be plausible, the photo in question must be the first one taken by the search team with
one of the cameras. Unfortunately, I am currently unable to verify this.
A double exposure would be consistent with the second photo not showing the same apparition.
Because the photos are highly similar but show a different section, with the first capturing
more of the scenery, it might be thought that these are two sections of the same photo (negative).
As the second one is considerably sharper though, I doubt this is the case, and we have two
distinct negatives here, which is consistent with a double exposure.
What also concerns me is that when looking at what appears to be versions of the same photos, posted
here in the forum (Materials from 1959, photography; http://forum.dyatlovpass.com/index.php?topic=38.0
I cannot make out the same apparition. I think one might see some remnants, but not enough to be sure. These
version posted in the forum appears to me a photo of the photo, which raises the question how the
other images were digitized. Depending on the technical details, it would be possible to (a) highlight
structure not easily seen when the image is developed in the conventional way or (b) imprint any
structure totally unrelated to the image, e.g., by using some inappropriate background in the scanning
process. This is another question mark, which I am currently unable to resolve.
I have not seen any discussion on this anywhere so far.
So, I am looking forward to hearing what you think.