Dave Posted July 16, 2022 Posted July 16, 2022 (edited) I searched the forum to see if this topic was posted previously, but didn't find anything. My apologies if this is a duplicate. The video is from 2012. MK Davis breaks down an image from the American Bigfoot Society, and he was able to pull some information out of the photo. Has anyone heard anything more in regards to the validity of the image? Edited July 16, 2022 by Dave
Patterson-Gimlin Posted July 16, 2022 Posted July 16, 2022 I thought it had already been declared a hoax. 1
Catmandoo Posted July 16, 2022 Posted July 16, 2022 At the end of the day, it is still a mystery. ABS has the copyright on the image, not the original person. The one submitted image is cropped. Usual backstory in the way of no proceeding or following images. Image release was 2012 with the image being taken 4 years earlier. A 'white flash camera', aka 'flash and dash' is good for color of hair, fur, skin, stripe / spot patterns at night. Still used by fin & feather departments to identify individual animals via color, stripes, spots and weird coats. IR flash images don't have the same capabilities for details. Opinions go back and forth. Still a mystery. 1
Catmandoo Posted July 16, 2022 Posted July 16, 2022 (edited) On 7/16/2022 at 7:25 PM, Annie Nore said: Is there any truth to this type of analysis? Expand Sort of, maybe. I do not follow MK Davis. He burned a small amount of time researching the 'hairy back shot'. He found slime. There is a way to analyze synthetic 'hair / fur'. The parent material is extruded in a 'natural' color for the respective plastic. It is not brown, grey, silver. Colored dyes have to be added. The color of the end product may require several applications / combination solutions of dyes. I have read about analyzing the reflected light coming off the target to determine underlying dye colors. I spend very little time checking images on the internet and I have not scanned hair / fur. 14 years later and still 'an unknown'. Let go of it. I used to know a marine surveyor who had a special acronym for items on his vessel surveys: "N.T.D.K." 'Neat Thing, Don't Know'. Neat Thing, Don't Know. We should use that term. Edited July 16, 2022 by Catmandoo text 3
Dave Posted July 17, 2022 Author Posted July 17, 2022 On 7/16/2022 at 10:43 PM, Catmandoo said: At the end of the day, it is still a mystery. ABS has the copyright on the image, not the original person. The one submitted image is cropped. Usual backstory in the way of no proceeding or following images. Image release was 2012 with the image being taken 4 years earlier. A 'white flash camera', aka 'flash and dash' is good for color of hair, fur, skin, stripe / spot patterns at night. Still used by fin & feather departments to identify individual animals via color, stripes, spots and weird coats. IR flash images don't have the same capabilities for details. Opinions go back and forth. Still a mystery. Expand Interesting. I would hope ABS did some validation of the image and original owner. On 7/16/2022 at 11:22 PM, Catmandoo said: Sort of, maybe. I do not follow MK Davis. He burned a small amount of time researching the 'hairy back shot'. He found slime. There is a way to analyze synthetic 'hair / fur'. The parent material is extruded in a 'natural' color for the respective plastic. It is not brown, grey, silver. Colored dyes have to be added. The color of the end product may require several applications / combination solutions of dyes. I have read about analyzing the reflected light coming off the target to determine underlying dye colors. I spend very little time checking images on the internet and I have not scanned hair / fur. 14 years later and still 'an unknown'. Let go of it. I used to know a marine surveyor who had a special acronym for items on his vessel surveys: "N.T.D.K." 'Neat Thing, Don't Know'. Neat Thing, Don't Know. We should use that term. Expand Makes sense.
Catmandoo Posted July 17, 2022 Posted July 17, 2022 On 7/17/2022 at 5:56 AM, Dave said: Interesting. I would hope ABS did some validation of the image and original owner. Expand ABS had the image for 4 years before releasing it. I do not know if the original is on film or digital. If any forum members want to open a can of worms, contact MK Davis and ask him if he has the software to 'scan' the hairs to check for dye / dye layers.
Dave Posted July 17, 2022 Author Posted July 17, 2022 On 7/17/2022 at 6:50 AM, Catmandoo said: ABS had the image for 4 years before releasing it. I do not know if the original is on film or digital. If any forum members want to open a can of worms, contact MK Davis and ask him if he has the software to 'scan' the hairs to check for dye / dye layers. Expand It does sound like it hasn't been proven a hoax yet, so there's still some meat left on that bone... 1
Huntster Posted July 17, 2022 Posted July 17, 2022 On 7/17/2022 at 7:45 AM, Dave said: It does sound like it hasn't been proven a hoax yet, so there's still some meat left on that bone... Expand The image itself accomplishes zip. Any meat would consist of answers: - Where was the image taken? - Was there any trace evidence casted at the photo location? - Were there any reports recorded in the area before/after the photo was taken? Those answers won't be forthcoming. The entire affair is thus rendered completely worthless. Cat's right: Let it go.
Dave Posted July 17, 2022 Author Posted July 17, 2022 On 7/17/2022 at 1:48 PM, Huntster said: The image itself accomplishes zip. Any meat would consist of answers: - Where was the image taken? - Was there any trace evidence casted at the photo location? - Were there any reports recorded in the area before/after the photo was taken? Those answers won't be forthcoming. The entire affair is thus rendered completely worthless. Cat's right: Let it go. Expand I agree with what you're saying... and let what go?
Huntster Posted July 17, 2022 Posted July 17, 2022 On 7/17/2022 at 3:44 PM, Dave said: ........ and let what go? Expand Spending effort on meaningless (and likely hoaxed) pics and videos. It's like handing money out of your car window to panhandlers; you think you're doing good, but what you're really doing is rewarding bad behavior and motivating more people to bad behavior. 1
NCBFr Posted July 18, 2022 Posted July 18, 2022 Since there is no context, no details, and no background on the image you have to assume it is BS. With that said, 1. One does not simply walk in to Mordor. You do not get this shot unless you are well hidden with a very high quality long range lens. Good luck camping in the bush for months on end hoping for the money shot which is 1 in a billion+ maybe. If you take the pic 5 feet behind a real BF, odds are your head will not be attached to your body 5 seconds after the phone/camera goes click. 2. I find the background fascinating, Assuming the pic is real, is it standing in front of the garden of Eden? Looks kind of like Florida maybe, but would really love the backstory.
ShadowBorn Posted July 18, 2022 Moderator Posted July 18, 2022 This photo is a hoax. It was taken in a room. If you go back on the video to the time stamp 2:08 and pause. You will see the shadows of the leaves on a drywall. As the flash goes off on the camera. I am not buying it. Hoax. 1
Dave Posted July 18, 2022 Author Posted July 18, 2022 On 7/17/2022 at 6:34 PM, Huntster said: Spending effort on meaningless (and likely hoaxed) pics and videos. It's like handing money out of your car window to panhandlers; you think you're doing good, but what you're really doing is rewarding bad behavior and motivating more people to bad behavior. Expand I hadn't realized you deemed it a hoax. I also hadn't realized learning more about the photo (as you suggested would be what we'd want to know about it) was "holding onto something." I had no preconceived notion about the photo or its authenticity, hence why I was asking about it. I suppose that qualifies as "not letting it go." I'll be sure to run all topics by you before posting so I don't appear to be "holding onto something." On 7/18/2022 at 4:27 AM, ShadowBorn said: This photo is a hoax. It was taken in a room. If you go back on the video to the time stamp 2:08 and pause. You will see the shadows of the leaves on a drywall. As the flash goes off on the camera. I am not buying it. Hoax. Expand Interesting, thank you.
Recommended Posts