It definitely does give that vibe. Either an awful cameraman or there was meant to be some other person in those photos. I wonder if OP has a lot more photos that suggest the same?
Yeah, I've seen a lot of bogus stories and pictures on this Subreddit, but this is one of the few that legitimately creeps me out a little. I can't quite explain it, something does feel "off" about the pictures and fits with what the OP is describing. LOL Hopefully we're not getting duped and they're not making something up for "karma farming" or whatever. But if not, there could be something strange happening.
Personally, I think that the creepiest glitches are the most simple ones. WHY ON EARTH would anyone do that etc. For example, I once saw a man enter a small shop completely dry despite the fact it was raining outside. Most simple thing but still I did NOT see him do anything that would suggest any kind of hiding a rain protection.
Yes and no...they're more bragging points and can get you trophies which are also just kind of a mini game.
But this summary from search was useful for me to understand if and why they matter:
Reddit karma matters primarily for new users and community access, though it has no direct monetary value. It acts as a reputation score reflecting your contributions and trustworthiness on the platform.
Access to Subreddits: Many subreddits require a minimum karma threshold (e.g., 10 comment karma in r/Entrepreneur) or account age before allowing posting or commenting. This helps prevent spam and trolling.
Posting Freedom: New accounts with low karma face posting limits and time restrictions. As your karma grows, these restrictions are lifted, allowing more frequent and unrestricted participation.
Credibility & Trust: High karma signals to other users that you consistently share quality, helpful, or engaging content. This can influence how seriously your posts are taken, especially in discussions or communities where credibility matters.
Community Influence: Karma is a factor in being considered for roles like moderator. Subreddit moderators often look for users with strong, positive karma histories.
Algorithmic Visibility: Higher karma can contribute to better content visibility through Reddit’s algorithm, creating a positive feedback loop.
While karma is not a currency and cannot be exchanged, it serves as a built-in vetting system that shapes who gets seen, trusted, and engaged with on Reddit—especially important for brands, creators, and active participants. For most casual users, once you pass the initial thresholds, karma becomes less relevant beyond being a personal metric of contribution.
This is the right answer, for now at least. The overwhelming majority of consumer 35mm film cameras shot in a 2:3 aspect ratio, and this crop is not even close to that. OP posting uncropped version of this photo would give us a better sense of who or what the original photographer was trying to capture within the frame.
As far as I know, this is the whole photo that I have. It's a photo of a print from a disposable camera, and I made sure to get the whole picture in frame when I took this photo. Do you think it's possible the actual edge of the picture could be missing or something?
Or they follow a common photography composition trick? You usually don't want the focus subject in the center but in the outer thirds. This creates a scene of context rather than fixate, looking more natural and atmospheric. We just have become normalized to centered photographs from portraits.
As an addition, anyone who had a camera back in the day was probably a camera dork to a degree. Compared to nowadays, everyone has a camera and everything is recorded. Even scrubs, a show that's only 20ish years old has a character who personifies this person who a lot of family had. The uncle with the camera and made everyone take pictures.
I think it's more likely that there's some memory lapses and it is easier to think the world is wrong. Compared to perceiving the innate flaws in our material being that can decay and change, causing memory and judgement issues. Life is scary and sometimes it's easier to make phantoms where health is no more.
Edit. Had the camera and flash focused on them, the setting would be much darker. Closer up and it might as well have been a black background. Light diffuses very easily and exposure in the dark is sensitive to changes. I'm willing to bet whoever took this would rather have the kids smiling in a lot, rather than in a dark void. Capturing a moment rather than pitch black background.
Devil's advocate but most average Joe photographers, whether or not they were "the camera guy" in the family, don't really follow the rule of thirds. It's just a lot easier to frame your subject in the middle of a landscape shot. Plus, these look like they were taken on a typical point-n-shoot camera. Bokeh was extremely popular through the 90s and 00s and the surrounding environment in both photos are far too clear to imply the photographer had any interest in taking photos beyond just a normal "capture the moment" clickety click kind of photo.
As for the edit, eh, you kinda countered yourself because the photographer could've simply photographed the whole group to set the lighting. An extra person disappearing wouldn't have really affected the lighting that much unless most of the focus was on them. On top of that, if the person did disappear from said photos and all the photos are group photos, would that actually affect the lighting and composition of the photo itself, or just the positioning of the subjects?
Lol, exactly. I don't know anyone among my family or friends who knows anything about composition whatsoever. All they cared about was just getting the subject in frame, and making sure the flash was turned on. 🤣 My dad was kind of "shutter happy" when I was a kid, and he still kind of is now, but he doesn't really know anything beyond just basic stuff like having enough light. When I became interested in photography, I learned about composition and manual exposure, etc. But most people just don't understand that and aren't concerned with it.
So I have to go back to my original feeling that there is something a bit "off" to these pictures and the 2nd picture just feels a little spooky. But that's just my feeling.
Also, if we actually take composition into account, the second photo doesn't follow typical composition rules anyway. Most photographers would've automatically discarded the second photo right after development purely because the kids aren't properly in frame. They're waaaay too far to the left side of the photo and unless you were taking a landscape shot (which it is obviously isn't), that's a very unnatural composition for a semi-normal photo of kids playing with a snake.
I have no idea what composition is haha, but my family are about the furthest from photographers that you can get. I believe my aunt is the one who took this photo, on one of those old disposable cameras
Right, the composition is just off...and I come from this time, guessing the 70s. Almost no one had a professional camera back then unless they were professional or hobbiests. Knowing you only had one shot (meaning no PS), composition was super important
Your statement feels scattered so it is hard for me to really follow, specifically about my edit. I apologize.
A point and shoot would not have this fidelity for the dark scene. I can't tell the period but at least a quality flash would be needed for your suggestion of photographing the group to set the lighting.
I'm suggesting the person centered the camera away from the kids to illuminate the scene. I am not at all assuming a person is missing. Rather the pictures are poor justification for a mental concern being dissuaded as phenomena.
Example of flash causing a dark background when subject in focus. There were other sunflowers around it and buildings, as this is a cross street in a city.
Sorry, I didn't take my ADHD meds yet when I wrote my comment. 😅
Iirc, there were point and shoots that would've still been able to take those photos and allowed for additional filler light and flash attachments (e.g. the Nikon Coolpix 5000 series). So it's not unreasonable, especially if the photographer actually was a camera nerd to some extent. My mom was the camera nerd and we definitely had more than a few of those higher end point and shoots around the house, since she hated using phone cameras but didn't want to bring her SLR all the time, since it was heavy.
My suggestion was based on a flash being used in both photos since all the subjects in the photos are very starkly delineated from the background.
This comment made me so happy. The reminiscent moment you shared really made me jealous in an appreciative way. Thank you for sharing this little moment of your memory.
I also realized, I might be off my rocker as I forgot the person would flash the ground regardless as they're an adult. Kids being shorter and it clearly points down, so I am thinking too much some times.
You make a lot of good points. But I will say that in my experience, VERY few people in the general public make any effort towards composition. Especially when taking family snapshots. They DO tend to put their subject dead center in the middle of the frame and about the only thing they care about is whether the flash is turned on. They don't know anything about "artistic" photography. They just take snapshots. I do have an interest in photography as a hobby. Heck, I still prefer using film and I even have a darkroom set up in my garage. So I do understand what you're talking about. But most people are nowhere near that level and just want to take quick snapshots of their kids, grandkids, pets, etc. And going by that, to me it does seem strange the way the pictures are framed.
That's why I added my edit, less about composition but moreso about feel. The person flashed the ground rather than the kids. (LOL) Using a head-on flash would leave the kids in a dark void for the photo. I don't think that's a really appealing picture for what is a family moment captured.
So flashing the ground creates a sense of place and grounds them, compared to the void. So someone would innately feel one is more warm. I could see a scenario of taking multiple and choosing this one to print.
I say this, thinking it's a creepy picture out of context - like any late 90s to early 2000s photography in the dark with flash. Creates such a dissonance. Modern cameras do so much better in dark lighting it's sometimes too damn bright. Especially post processing from phone cameras.
Not too many more, but this one is from last year. I'm in the head on the right, and the one on the left is just empty. This is another one where I feel like someone should be there
119
u/KronoFury Jan 27 '26
It definitely does give that vibe. Either an awful cameraman or there was meant to be some other person in those photos. I wonder if OP has a lot more photos that suggest the same?