Thanks for the referral to this article by friend of the blog Greg Bart. It is dizzying in the number of coincidences – the old camera found at a garage sale, the picture inside the camera of a deceased family member; the family members who died in car accidents, both from neck injuries, the irony that one of those was working for an insurance company… definitely a story made for The Odds Must Be Crazy.
Wichita boy’s garage-sale buy holds a treasure for his family
A 13-year-old boy bought a Polaroid camera at a garage sale, and brought it home to look on the internet for instructions to use it. When he opened it, he saw that the camera still had a photo inside. He showed the photo to his grandmother; she didn’t know that the photo had come from the garage sale camera, and commented that it was her son, the boy’s uncle, Scott, who’d died 23 years earlier. She thought it was a family photo, but didn’t really recognize it.
In the photo Scott is sitting on a sofa with a high school girlfriend, Susan. The grandmother guessed it was taken in 1978 or 1979, about 10 years before his death. When told it came from a garage sale camera, she thought her grandson was kidding. Nobody else in the family could believe it, either.
At the time he died, the man in the photo was about start a new job with an insurance company. He was in a collision and died from neck injuries. His brother had died seven years earlier in a car accident, also of neck injuries.
The family said they don’t know the people who were having the garage sale, and in fact, the man who sold the camera may have picked it up at another garage sale himself.
Although the family considers the discovery of the photo in the garage sale camera miraculous or a sign that their lost loved ones are communicating from beyond this life, and it is understandably startling and disconcerting to find a photo of a lost loved one in a polaroid camera, I remember those, and I’m somewhat surprised that the picture was still as good as it looks in the newspaper photo. I seem to remember that they fade after awhile. But nonetheless, I can’t help thinking about how many Polaroid cameras people had, and the popularity of the hobby. They were amazing for their time – instant pictures that were even sometimes used like postcards – but as common as cellular phones are now. It’s interesting that a 13 year-old boy, after Polaroids were no longer being made, would pay a dollar for one at a garage sale; and brilliant that he would look up on the internet how to make it work.
« Friendly Faces on Foreign Foundation Shirley You Can’t Be Serious »
I think the part about the insurance company and two sons dying of a neck injury in a car wreck aren’t really all that odd. We didn’t have all the safety laws and safer cars back in the 1980’s. A broken neck would be pretty common if someone not wearing a seat belt hit the windshield. And lots of people work for insurance companies.
The picture stuck in the camera is a bit odd, I wondered also about the picture remaining, but I suppose it might.
What is suspicious to me is that that the child just happened across this camera. Just happened to show the picture to one of the few people that would recognize it. Isn’t it more likely that the child took a picture of a picture that he had discovered. Maybe the picture he chose was one that no one remembered. And now that the family is convinced that it was some kind of miracle the child can’t back out of his story?
Then again, can a Polaroid camera take a good close up of a picture and make it look believable? Looking at the image, I’m not so sure. It could be faked, but odd things do happen. If the girl in the picture lived in that neighborhood then it is possible.
When he said that he opened the camera he found the picture. Does he mean it was waiting to be opened up with all the developer stuff on it? Or was it just lying loose in the camera (yes there is room to place a picture on top or bottom of the film pack)?
If the dead son wanted to communicate that he was okay on the other side, did he arrange for the nephew’s arm to be broken so he would be bored and go to the garage sale and find that picture? Wouldn’t the son send a better picture, one with a message? Sad how far people will reach to make that connection.
Here is a link to the LA Times version of the same story.
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-old-camera-surprise-20120528,0,609406.story
Their reporter had a slightly different take on it. Also, I agree that it’s possible that the 13 year old staged the whole thing – but the two newspaper stories don’t even go there… and I am learning that coincidences are just ‘way more common than most people think. It still is fun and interesting to me – this one was a humdinger.
The tale of a family photo found in a garage-sale camera is
probably a hoax. Why? Consider the story as told in the newspaper
articles cited here, along with the design of the Polaroid Impact camera and its
600-film.
Both news stories tell of 13 year-old Addison Logan opening
a garage-sale camera and finding a cleanly processed family-photo inside. The Los Angelis Times story includes an image
of the Polaroid photo in its 600-film cartridge, leaning against a Polaroid
Impact camera. The story mentions the
camera model by name.
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-old-camera-surprise-20120528,0,609406.story
The Wichita Eagle article doesn’t name the camera
model. However the article shows the boy
and his grandmother along with the photo and a similar camera:
http://www.kansas.com/2012/05/25/2349030/wichita-boys-garage-sale-buy-holds.html
The Polaroid Impact camera and its 600-film are described at
Camerapedia:
http://camerapedia.wikia.com/wiki/Polaroid_Impulse
How this and similar Polaroid 600 cameras operate is
demonstrated step-by-step in this YouTube video:
http://youtu.be/IIPV83_hLqM
Details of how the camera works and the film processed are
seen about 2 minutes into the video. This
is important for understanding why the story is probably a hoax.
Polaroid 600-film came in a cartridge loaded with
light-sensitive photo paper. The paper
was stacked face up and unprocessed. An
opaque cardboard sheet (the dark slide) was placed on top to prevent the
unexposed photos from being ruined by room lights. This dark slide automatically ejected from
the camera when the cartridge was loaded, leaving the topmost photo in position
for the first snap of the camera.
As pictures were taken the top photo would be exposed and an
electric motor (powered by a battery in the film cartridge) would eject the
photo out the front of the camera. As
the photo exited the camera the photo would pass between rollers coated with
developer, causing the image to appear a few minutes later.
600-film images were never processed inside the camera. And if the developer leaked into the
cartridge then the photos were ruined, regardless of whether or not the top
image was exposed and jammed in the cartridge.
There was never a reason to shoot an entire 600-film
cartridge, work an exposed photo back into the discarded plastic holder
(through chemicals), and insert the cartridge back in the camera. Doing so would risk ruining the photo and
possibly damaging the camera.
What’s strange about this news story is not how unlikely it
is. Instead, I find it odd that no news
photographer with either paper flagged the story as unlikely. It was only a few years ago that Polaroid
films went out of production. And given
Polaroid’s popularity I would think most professional photographers would have
some passing knowledge of the film – even in this digital age.
Nice research! Great to read.