>>26502
Solid points. Personally, I've never gotten pictures in my incidents because I just didn't have anything on me to take pictures at the time. But even if I did, in most cases it happened so fast I probably wouldn't have time to get good pictures. The time it would take to turn my camera on, switch the settings most likely, and get focused and take a pic would probably be too much. If a ghost popped up right now, I'd seriously have to decide if I want to look at it while I can, or try to fumble with my phone and/or camera and probably have it gone by the time I'm ready. They usually don't stick around more than a few seconds and there's really no predicting when it'll happen.
However, that's just me on my own. Worldwide, people are constantly taking pics, videos, and so on. And you'd think that just through sheer luck, they'd accidentally photo or video ghosts. Sorta like how if you buy a lottery ticket, it's probably a loser. But hundreds of thousands of people buy tickets, and the odds of a winner get much better. I'd think there should be more random selfies or tourist pics or whatever winning the ghost lottery, as it were.
As for nobody watching surveillance tapes, that's a very good point. But, that should be less of an issue now, because they have software that automatically scans surveillance video now for motion and activity and flags the parts where stuff moves. That way, you don't need to have somebody actually watch endless hours of nothing to catch anything that matters. The primary idea is that your cameras might catch stuff that never set off alarms or otherwise got attention to make you bother checking in the first place, but the same motion detection software should apply to ghosts too.