Your dogs are reacting to an animal that's in/around the house that shouldn't be in/around the house.
You're looking for patterns where there are none. You see your dog acting in a weird way, and you go looking for extra information to explain why. You're predisposed to believing it's paranormal, so you look for a paranormal explanation. You see the dog is looking in the general direction of a picture of your dead grandpa and make a conjecture they're related. You then experience an event that seems unexplained and seek to attribute it to something just previous to rationalize it.
Now let's fill this in with a few more details from your event. You think your grandfather would be a benevolent ghost, correct? And if you truly believe your dogs are detecting the paranormal, then the fact that your dog was "staring" at a picture of your granddad would have implied you thought the paranormal event was your granddad. Then the event you experience afterwards is perceived from you as hostile. This doesn't match up with the previous assumption that your granddad would be benevolent. Yet there's no indication that it should be anything other that your granddad based on how you're assuming things. So your thought process to justify this paranormal event leads to a conclusion that does not follow.
This makes me believe you're not experiencing anything paranormal, and are instead looking for information to confirm your belief, and ignoring any relevant information that would prove you otherwise. Damned be the fact your conclusion doesn't follow from your evidence, you feel a loose connection between them and are now convinced that it's right because of this weak connection.