The Case for Spirit Photography / With corroborative evidence by experienced researchers and photographers

by Arthur Conan Doyle

Apart altogether from any question of test conditions, however, there are certain results which, in themselves, afford definite proof of their genuine nature. I refer to those recognised psychic likenesses obtained by sitters who are quite unknown to the sensitives and who have secured results which could not possibly have been prepared in advance. One such case would be sufficient to establish the reality of psychic photography. It is no exaggeration to say that this has actually occurred on scores of occasions, and, in consequence, the evidence for the truth of psychic photography is overwhelming.

It has been said that recognised psychic likenesses exists only in the imagination of the individuals claiming them as such. It is, alas, too true that some well-meaning individuals will see a likeness where none exists. It is, however, equally true that many bigoted sceptics will refuse to acknowledge a likeness that is obvious to the unprejudiced on comparing normal and supernormal photographs. There are two sides to the question of credulity, and I have known sceptics deny the reality of a likeness where the supernormal effect has been an exact (but draped) duplicate of a normal photograph!

We must remember that it may be difficult to recognise a likeness between a normal and supernormal photograph where the subject to us is unknown. Two photographs of the same individual, taken at different periods, will often vary considerably, but those acquainted with that individual can recognise the likeness of each photograph to the original without the slightest difficulty. So in a supernormal photograph: those claiming a likeness between the supernormal effect and some near relative, or friend, who has crossed the border, are in a better position, from their knowledge of that person, to speak with authority on the question of recognition than those who never saw the original. This question of recognised likenesses is a point the critic tries to evade. The reader can judge of the value of this evidence from the few illustrations in this booklet which are typical of hundreds of similar results.

The mental attitude of some intelligent people to psychic photography is distinctly curious. They have got the idea fixed into their heads that these photographs must be one of two things—“fakes” or “spirits.” Naturally enough, in some of the cases that have been reported they find it difficult to believe that such a result could have been produced entirely by a discarnate entity. Therefore they jump to the false conclusion that the result must of necessity have been faked. In a scientific investigation we should first of all concern ourselves with facts, without troubling over-much with theories. A very little first-hand investigation will satisfy any unprejudiced individual as to the reality of psychic photography. Having reached that stage such a person will be in a better position to theorise on the cause of the phenomena.

After many years of close concentration on this subject I have arrived at the conclusion that psychic photography differs only in kind and not in degree from other phases of psychic phenomena. I do not see how we can possibly get away from the fact that many of these photographic effects are produced by discarnate intelligences. Whilst firmly believing this, I should never be so dogmatic as to claim that all supernormal pictures have been produced by discarnate spirits.

Spirit, whether discarnate or incarnate, to manifest to our material senses must make use of matter—there must be a medium. A medium, or sensitive, is just as essential for psychic photography as for, say, automatic writing. As investigators are aware, in automatic script it frequently happens that along with communications from the “other side” come writings derived from the subconsciousness of the automatist, and such, I am convinced, is often the case in psychic photography.

The subconscious is used to cover a multitude of theories. Certainly it is not an unfeasible explanation in some instances. Let me cite one case, which is typical of many. One of the members of the S.S.S.P.—Mr. Hobbs, of Purley, a keen business man—travelled to Crewe with his wife. They and the Crewe Circle were perfect strangers to each other. Mrs. Hobbs at the time was wearing a locket containing a photograph of their son, who had been killed in the war. This was tucked away out of sight in her blouse. The usual séance was held and to their great delight the visitors secured a picture of their boy. Trickery was impossible. Even supposing Mr. Hope had seen the photograph in the locket there was no time to produce a fraudulent result and foist this upon the alert sitters. A careful examination of the print, however, reveals the fact that the psychic picture is an exact but reversed duplicate of the photograph in the locket. Even the rim of the locket can be clearly seen. This sort of thing has occurred time and again.

The image of the locket would be indelibly impressed on the memory of the mother, and it may well be that in some peculiar way the sensitive proved a medium for the projection of that conscious or subconscious image on to the photographic plate. Such an argument is not to be lightly dismissed, and the fact that the image obtained on the plate may not have been in the conscious mind of the sitter at the time does not necessarily affect the issue. I candidly admit that some such explanation may account for many of these curious effects.

Sometimes the psychic pictures are facsimile copies of magazine covers and pictures no fraudulent medium would ever think of producing, and, like the faces in our dreams, they may come from the subconscious. At the same time, attempts to produce definite conscious thought-pictures, with the co-operation of a photographic medium, have almost always proved abortive in our experiments in this country. Some of the Continental members of the S.S.S.P., however, have concentrated on this line of research and have succeeded in obtaining thoughtgraphs which, more or less, resemble the object on which the thoughts of the subject have been intensely concentrated. These experiments, and, in particular, recent photographic experiments in connection with subjects under hypnosis, are yielding encouraging results.