The Spider Cliff Mysteries

Return to the discussion listing

Story 7: Case of the Camera Obscura

switch to image view

Posted by smjjames, 12:18am, 5 Dec, 2005

he and rebecca probably split up soon after, or maybe rebecca's house is close to where they were showing that and then he went on his way.

I found it pretty easy to get the clues in this one.

also, one major clue is that all the missing objects were once together in the Bean house parlor, and I bet that mirror is the one that was broken. plus theres that antique magic lantern, and some of the slides were from when Annabelle was still alive! about a century ago. Even if Eliza says the artifacts are worthless, she probably doesn't appreciate thier value, and there could be something else that makes them valuable, some kind of secret knowledge to be unlocked or some kind of magic associated with them.

theres also the first mention of the Obscura Camera in this chapter.

I think this book that alex is doing has something to do with this whole mystery as Alex had the idea of doing the slideshow to encourage interest in the book. which he seems to be really determined to sell the ideas in that book to everybody else.
This message was last edited on 5 Dec 2005.

Posted by Deverien, 12:57am, 5 Dec, 2005

Interesting stuff so far. But this latest chapter still doesn't answer why Rebecca took the Sheriff's oil lamp in the first place. Unless I'm missing something...

Posted by rora123, 4:47am, 5 Dec, 2005

a little bit of relevance to the latest chapter, well really only a little........i can see how eliza would use camera obscura to draw pictures because as an art student, i am studying vermeer and in the painting 'The Allegory of the Art of Painting' he uses just that, by passing light through a tiny pin hole to project an image on a screen wall, to then create an even better image of what is in front of you.

and it is interesting that this technique was used by artists in the 17th,18th and early 19th centuries as an aid in drawing from nature......and it seems as if those antiques may not be so insignificant we have to find out the true value of these objects


Posted by Barlow&Crystal, 7:14pm, 6 Dec, 2005

I have a dumb theory. If the objects are shiny wouldn't that mean that a light in the Bean house parlor would reflect a light beam pointing to a secret spot where a treasure would lie. Just a thought. Had to edit.(forgot title)
This message was last edited on 7 Dec 2005.

Posted by Deverien, 9:33pm, 6 Dec, 2005

Quote by Barlow&Crystal:
"If the objects are shiny wouldn't that mean that a light in the Bean house parlor would reflect a light beam pointing to a secret spot where deep, dark, mysterious secrets would lie."

Jinkies, you've got it! The light from the oil lamp would be bounced off the mirror, then refracted off the decanter, pointing a beam at a location on the map of the world! That will tell us where the jade monkey is buried! The monkey, I tells ya, THE MONKEY!!
This message was last edited on 6 Dec 2005.

It's Alex

Posted by wonderles, 3:55pm, 7 Dec, 2005

I think Alex did it to create hype for his new book. Or he disproved the treasure in his book so no one would believe in it so he could find it himself. Haha, tricky Alex.

Posted by paper_dolls, 10:02am, 8 Dec, 2005

Well, at least now we know why Rebecca set up the entire camera trap...

She obviously is interested in the treasure, because she took the lamp. Why, I'm sure we'll find out soon. ^--^. But the globe is missing too - and I think she DIDN'T take that one. Not knowing who was competing with her for the treasure, she set up the trap with the decanter, to nap them and likely take the globe.

Now... how do they point to the treasure? And is there another object that is needed? Only those four are in the slide - but good ol' Dr. Bean said "Everything in this room", and it wouldn't be a mystery if we didn't have something else important we don't know about yet, would it? ^-^

PS: ALex + Annabell = too much fun. VEG And Alex mentions a solution to the entire yucky thing - make HIM a zombie!!! (And watch what's left of his brain melt. VEG)

PPS: And a theory as to why Rebecca lost her magic powers: Alex FINALLY put 2 and 2 together, and did something about it. I think that would be "obvious" from the Sheriff's point of view. ^-^ Of course, her lying is good, too....

Posted by Deverien, 2:34pm, 8 Dec, 2005

Whoever stole the camera film was the same person that startled Crystal in the shed. I'm sure of it.

Edit: After some more thought, I'm fairly confident I know who took the film and the decanter, but I still don't know about the overarching 'treasure' mystery.
This message was last edited on 8 Dec 2005.


Posted by wonderles, 5:34pm, 8 Dec, 2005

I wonder if the mirror that was broken was special or any mirror would do. If it was special, can they still find the treasure now that it's smashed? For the sake of this story, I'm going to guess Yes.

Posted by vega777, 7:04am, 9 Dec, 2005

wild theory time:
What if the sheriff has been stealing the items so Rebecca doesn't have an "imbalance" of money(or whatever the treasure is) as compared to the others.
What if he's trying to find it first so he can distribute it...

Posted by Kiriai, 3:35am, 11 Dec, 2005

Hmm, so it seems like Alex is being untruthful with Crystal. He says he fell asleep at the end of the show. The show which was his idea, about history of the town. He then finished his book and met Anabelle at two a.m. Doesn't sound like he was that tired.

I guess he expected to finish his book late, hence he prearranged to meet in the cemetary... not likely. Seeing how the mirror in the Bean House was broken soon before that, and at least two people were up in the house, seems odd.

What is the Sherrif's obsession with plants? How to decode the message? Why are Rebecca's powers not working? What is the treasure?

What was taken from Eliza? Was it the exact plans of the Bean house to set up the artifacts where they belong? Was it something else? Did Turnip help steal the plans (not likely) so did anyone else? The sherif was arround. But there were no footprints, so who could have stolen something without leaving footprints?

It seems unrealistic that the lamp could project through the decanter from the angle. Perhaps the lamp casts a light to the mirror which is reflected to the decanter, which due to the point on the curved surface the light hit, reflects the beam to the globe. But that doesn't seem to help much.

"Everything you see..." would include the person giving the quote, but perhaps he was excluding himself. Lets say the light hits the globe at a point. How do we determine the location of the treasure? Simple: a globe is broken into minutes and seconds. The treasure is in the clock, and can only be found when the clock is at a specific time.

Random thoughts...

Posted by meserene, 1:27pm, 11 Dec, 2005

Wow, REALLY in depth logic happening here. I can't follow all too well.

Maybe the person who startled Crystal stole the film... Deverien said that. I think it's because they neded gloves; maybe gardening gloves?

What confuses me is why anyone would want this treasure, and what it is. The person couldn't use it or display it if it's an object because everyone would notice, and if it's money, same problem- people are likely to notice sudden wealth in an extremely small isolated town. Maybe Alex wants the treasure to boost sales of his book by uncovering a mystery, or he thinks it contains some historical artifact. OR maybe he knows it's demon hunting-equipment and wants to banish all of the 'evil' and replace Barlow as demon-hunter in one fell swoop.

I like the reasoning better than the timing.

Another thing: At first I thought Rebecca lost her powers when the decanter was stolen because she lost them in the morning and I think that's when the decanter was stolen. But now it seems like she just had the decanter to lay a trap and it's tied into a Bean mystery, not hers. Why is Rebecca a witch? Is it in her blood, or are her powers brought on/magnified by an object that can be taken?

One last thing, wouldn't it be trippy if Alex found out HE was a witch (or the male equivalant)? Then maybe he wouldn't be so paranoid of evil. And Annabelle.
This message was last edited on 11 Dec 2005.

previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 next

You don't have permission to reply to this thread.

Return to the discussion listing