Flim-Flam! Psychics, ESP, Unicorns, and Other Delusions - James Randi [19]
Shadows of the holding clips on the lower margin of "photo number five."
Illustration of the lower right corner of "photo number five."
Now, if the plate had been inserted into the camera a second time, it would be almost impossible for it to arrive in exactly the same position as before, though the side-to-side alignment would have been reasonably accurate. At the ends, a second use of the plate would provide evidence that two exposures were made. In this case, such evidence shows clearly under strong magnification. The effect is shown in the following diagram, in which the relevant portion of photo number five is enlarged for clarity. There is no such effect visible at the top edge, because the very heavy overexposure resulting from a double shot of bright sky has "washed out" any evidence.
Unless the girls were very carefully attempting the superposition of two images, double exposure would not have been needed. A ground-glass viewing plate could have been inserted into the Cameo camera (it was equipped for such use) and wonderful effects could have been obtained. But of course, to fool such people as they were dealing with, such refinements were unnecessary.
It is my conclusion that the two girls did make a double-exposure in the case of photo number five, and did so in error. It would have been all too easy to use the same plate twice by mistake, and further evidence proves that they did expose it a second time.
The above proof is supported by the observation that the shadows at the edge of the clip are very sharp, since the clip did not move relative to the plate itself. Only the shadow of the camera back shows displacement.
As for the additional evidence, again I am amazed that the many so-called experts have for more than sixty years failed to note that there is a duplication of two of the fairy figures! The girls set up a shot with cutouts, photographed the scene, and then, when changing plates, goofed and reinserted the used plate. Having shot a new setup, they rushed off to develop both plates. They found one blank, and the other one a mysterious mess of seemingly translucent figures. It was a stroke of luck for them, and the dummies who examined the plates declared that a miracle had taken place!
An episode that transpired between a reporter and Elsie in January 1921 should have alerted him to the true nature of the hoax. He was sent to interview the girl for the Westminster Gazette and found her at Sharpe's Christmas Card Manufactory. At first she refused to see him and sent word to that effect. He persisted, and finally she met him for a very strange and forced encounter.
She began by telling him that she had nothing to say about the photographs, explaining that she was "fed up with the thing." But the reporter, determined to force a story from her, asked her where the fairies came from. Elsie said she did not know. "Did you see them come?" he asked. Yes, said Elsie, but then when asked where they came from she laughed and told him, "I can't say." She would not say where they went after they danced for the camera, and became embarrassed when he insisted upon an answer. After a few more questions went unanswered, the reporter decided that making suggestions might loosen her up.
Careful examination of "photo number five" reveals the partial duplication of two of the fairy cutouts, the result of a double exposure. The drawn lines show the replication.
He asked whether the fairies might have just "vanished into