An Image for your viewing pleasure

[Bill]

This image has recently come into my possession. I will make no comments regarding what it represents and leave it to you to decide.

[Bullet Maker]

It looks to me, like a father with his son, sitting under a tree, looking out over a field. Maybe there turkey hunting, or deer hunting. The bigger of the two, look's like he maybe wearing a head net, and a coat. Or maybe a coat with the hood up over his head.  Interesting photo.
  

[Ray Ford]

I would agree with Bulletmaker--altho at a glance you could call it something else.  It is a man in a hooded hunting coat with a boy beside him.  And, having never experienced a dad, it is good to see a man in a hunting coat with a boy beside him.

[Bill]

Without revealing more details at this time I will say you are both totally wrong about what the image protrays. Yes I do know for sure what it is but don't wish to divulge that until more folks have a chance to try to figure it out.

Ya'll wanna guess again?

[Ray Ford]

Bill,

You're playing games.

A woman in a parka with a girl beside her?

What this illustrates, more than anything else, is that, by using light and shadow in a photo, you can fool people about what is being shot/photographed.  Do you recall my post about that morning, during a past deer season, when #59 and I were on Spencer Creek near Bulletmaker's place.  Just at dawn, from where I was sitting beside a tree, I looked north and saw what, if photographed at that moment, would have appeared to be a large bigfoot with one arm dropped and the other extended up onto the tree next to him.  There was no movement, so I watched as the sun light increased.  Soon, what looked like a bigfoot, emerged as an arrangement of fallen limbs below the tree.  But, if I had taken a photo when I first saw it, I could have provoked a lot of discussion with the image.

I wrote that as though I knew what a bigfoot really looks like--if there are bigfeet out there.  I don't.

[Ray Ford]

Bill,

While I've got you on line, what happened to that fiction thing that was on this site--the one on which I posted about the part-Cherokee boy and the old man?  I recently found out that that boy was more than just Cherokee.  He was also Choctaw and Creek.

He was kinda like the young, Indian-looking woman that I met recently.  I asked her if she was part Cherokee.  She replied, "I'm three different kinds of Indian, a little bit of Black Dutch, and a whole lot of White Trash."

You never know what kind of answer you'll get when you ask a woman a question!

[Bill]

So far as I know it is still here Ray I just dunno where. I didn't delete it so unless John has it should still be here in whatever forum it was you posted it. You might try looking at your own profile then clicking on the Last Posts of this Member down near the bottom and scanning thru until you see it.

You could say I'm playing games BUT this photo is of a actualy UHS which this site is supposed to be about. What I'm really trying to do is to initiate some discussion on the actual subject of the site.

I believe UHS is unknown humanoid subject and that is precisely what the photo is of. No one here (except me) knows specifically what the subjects are thus they are very properly classified as unknown to all but me.

I was hoping for a bit of forensic investigation effort on someone's part to determine just what the photo is the same way folks claim to do every time a photo is posted saying it is a bigfoot. Since I have admitted I do not believe a creature such as bigfoot exists does not automatically infer that I might not be the first person to offer actual photographic evidence they do now does it?

I will give a little more time then reveal the original photo which is much higher resolution and offers adequate detail to allow us all to know what the unknown is. I think folks might be surprised at what I have captured on film once all details are revealed. Yeah I like to keep folks guessing a little while. By now I'd have expected some experts from other sites to have jumped on it with both feet. I wonder if they have? Since I don't go to other sites I wouldn't know really.

[Ray Ford]

You, Bill say "Yup!" and I say "Yep!" and that's my response to much of what you're saying.

Let me make one observation as a non-professional photographer and UHS image commentator:  The outline of the larger of the two figures that I see appears to be unusally sharp.  That is something that I was instructed about in an art class that I was in so long ago that I no longer remember if the instruction  was even in a class.  That makes me wonder if the figure is some kind of overlay.  There is a difference in the sharpness of the large figure and that of the smaller figure.  In high school journalism--I do remember that class--I had occasion to "edit" some photographs by cutting a figure out of one picture and cementing it onto another photo.  I also had occasion to cut a figure or two out of a photo to eliminate all or part of the background--or other people.  This was a primative era of pre-digital cameras, hot-lead type, and no computers with Photo Shop.  The result of my work would sometimes be a too-sharp outline of the figure--unidentified humanoid or something else.

I, too, have expressed my doubt about the existence of such a critter as bigfoot, and I, too, would be the first to share any evidence that they do exist.  I would hope that this site would be a place where people like you and I are welcome, not a site which requires participants to be true believers in the existence of the big hairy guys and gals.

I enjoy hunting for the critters because I enjoy being in the woods and fields.
I'm not really sure I would enjoy finding one.  

[Bill]

It doesn't seem to be getting a whole lotta discussion other than from you and I Ray. Prolly this weekend I'll provide full disclosure on it. I would first like to read John's comments on it at least.

It isn't a pasted up image it is as the camera shot it except for one change regarding lighting and it has been cropped so that all other than the image shown is left. It isn't a night photo as the lighting would tend to indicate it was a broad daylight image intentionally darkened to remove highlights that would otherwise make it immediately obvious what the subjects are.

The larger figure is closer to the camera than the smaller image which is standing further back by a few feet. The smaller figure is indeed just that a smaller figure plus a bit further from the camera.

Yes it's an exercise to get folks thinking and perhaps doing a bit of forensic investigation. I posted it cuz it truly does look as much like a bigfoot photo as presented as any other I've seen floating the internet. I can assure you there is no costume involved and no manipulation of the image other than cropping it for size and taking away lighting to make it look more like the typical night time image folks post almost always.

[#59]

I've seen stumps that had a silhouette very similar to what's in this this photo.

Ray...I dunno where your thread/post went...maybe when the Lee/Harrington, et. al. attack happened and Matt had to do some quick major surgery it was collateral damage?

[#59]

Also, unlike the photo taken on BM's place last November we do not have the original negative which can be examined by individuals with expertise is such areas.

What I do think you are getting at is the plethora of blobsquatch photos in cyberspace that have two (2) basic camps...the true believer kool-aid gang and the paranoid skitzo skeptics, both of which base their prognostications upon inherent bias and/or other flawed precepts and totally absent any scientific method or protocol that would "stand on it's own hind legs".

The photo (as presented) probably ranks within the catagory of things people see in slices of toast or up in the clouds.

[Bill]

OK guys here is the original image.



The larger UHS is me taking a photo of the window Matt is adding to his new home. Faye is the smaller UHS and is slightly behind me as I took the photo. Later when I was working them up to send to my friend in PA to show him the progress Faye commented that we looked like bigfoot so I cropped the image and took away enough light to make it a blobsquatch and posted it to see what folks would say.

[Bill]

Here is a slightly enchanced version that better shows what we are in it.

[Ray Ford]

And I now know for the first time that Matt is not a bigfoot cub but a real person.  Nice-looking young man.

[Bill]

Yup he's real tho not always real smart. He was up on the roof somewhere today trying to fix a leak the rain has made obvious. He hasn't got the metal on yet just roofing felt and some huge plastic advertising signs used on road side bill boards.

I've not spoken with him so am not sure the details but Faye says he took a tumble and landed on the red side shed roof of the barn he is adding his two story addition next to. Here is a photo of where I think he was when he tumbled.