"Exclusive: Temagami Ontario Bigfoot Photographs, Never-Before-Seen Photos"

After reading the story and examining the pictures...I'm on the fence about this one, but it's a good piece of evidence.

I think the 2nd one looks like a little Photoshop job by that I mean the outline of BF looks funny and it was taken from another pic and put there!

That photo of the face looks a little suspect....

Red flag.

Other forums are saying it's hoaxed and that it's from a recreation attempted for a film or documentary exmaining the Ben Matine story (interesting story if you've read up on it but it seems fake).

Yeah...the way tthe "hair" looks just reminds me of cheap hair used for halloween masks.

Yeah I'm with you guys, looks like it could be a hoax.

Hey, at least it's not blurry.

Some@$$hole wrote:Hey, at least it's not blurry.

This is true...for all we know, it could be the real deal.

The hair reminds me of the hair from the Ketchum sleeping pregnant squatch thing pics.

I like that it's not a blobsquatch.

If it's a suit, it's a damn nice one.

Some@$$hole wrote:The hair reminds me of the hair from the Ketchum sleeping pregnant squatch thing pics.

I like that it's not a blobsquatch.

If it's a suit, it's a damn nice one.

Yes definitely high quality material!

seems to me that no animal would have hair that stuck out like that all the time as it creates problems moving through brush, which leads to matting which lads to bacteria which leads to health problems.....

StankApe wrote:seems to me that no animal would have hair that stuck out like that all the time as it creates problems moving through brush, which leads to matting which lads to bacteria which leads to health problems.....

I agree, all of that unkempt hair would cause problems for mobility, and well...cleanliness.

On a side note, I wish there were thumbs up buttons or something of the liking.

The Temagami Bigfoot reminds me of the Russian Bigfoot. The Russian one is an obvious hoax in my opinion. The hair colour on the head of the Ontario Bigfoot doesn't match the body colour, just like the Russian one.

Great post

Idk why but some how I haven't seen any pictures of the Russian Bigfoot....until now. But I can see the correlation you're explaining and I agree that the hair on both body and head are not one in the same. Which allows a higher percentage for hoaxing.

KEEP EM COMING

Detral wrote:Great post

Idk why but some how I haven't seen any pictures of the Russian Bigfoot....until now. But I can see the correlation you're explaining and I agree that the hair on both body and head are not one in the same. Which allows a higher percentage for hoaxing.

KEEP EM COMING

I checked the EXIF data on the photos and they were run through Adobe Photoshop, probably to add the text. This was done June 4, 2012. I would prefer to see the original photos with the EXIF data intact. It will show the date the photos were taken and with what type of camera, among other information.


Russian Bigfoot

Tim Ervick says they have enlargements as well as links to the original photos on their website. He's a stand-up guy ~ hope he's not being hoaxed...
http://www.ontariobigfoot.com/

Just to play Devil's Advocate re that ratty hair ~ in that neck of the woods it would be beneficial to have a matted layer protecting your skin from all the black flies and skeeters.

Read the Matine story and if it's connected somehow, well too bad. Hoax.

The hair doesn't red flag for me, lots of animals have multiple colours - hell my beard has a frickin' rainbow of red, brown, and grey. And the matted hair also doesn't prove anything to me, either way. It's just one picture and hell, maybe the bigfoot slept on it funny last night. Hair can go kinda crazy sometimes.

Sure does look like the Russian pics, though.

I don't know about the photoshopping, but my wife said it was obvious. She's right more than I am (at least, that's what she tells me). More well placed branches. Dang branches, always covering the seams and zippers and whatnot.

SasquaiNation wrote:

Detral wrote:Great post

Idk why but some how I haven't seen any pictures of the Russian Bigfoot....until now. But I can see the correlation you're explaining and I agree that the hair on both body and head are not one in the same. Which allows a higher percentage for hoaxing.

KEEP EM COMING

I checked the EXIF data on the photos and they were run through Adobe Photoshop, probably to add the text. This was done June 4, 2012. I would prefer to see the original photos with the EXIF data intact. It will show the date the photos were taken and with what type of camera, among other information.


Russian Bigfoot

"I checked the EXIF data on the photos and they were run through Adobe Photoshop, probably to add the text"

........Good way to cover up photo-shopping the actual photo.

The leg on the Russian Bigfoot looks like some wool dress pants I would buy at JCrew or Banana Republic (expensive too. like $128 bucks to start for a pair of wool pants).

I find it coincidental that this story and the Matine story both mention two helicopters.

Hieberts take photos of Bigfoot from a cabin.Lend cabin to friends in fall of '06. These friends see two dark helicopters.

Matine video mentions witnesses from a cabin who see two dark helicopters. This also happens in 2006. Matine on the run in fall of '06.

I'm getting the impression that a person or persons are recycling the same hoax every few years. Just change the names. The guts of the story stay the same though.

Just my opinion based on what I've managed to find.

SasquaiNation wrote:I find it coincidental that this story and the Matine story both mention two helicopters.

Hieberts take photos of Bigfoot from a cabin.Lend cabin to friends in fall of '06. These friends see two dark helicopters.

Matine video mentions witnesses from a cabin who see two dark helicopters. This also happens in 2006. Matine on the run in fall of '06.

I'm getting the impression that a person or persons are recycling the same hoax every few years. Just change the names. The guts of the story stay the same though.

Just my opinion based on what I've managed to find.

oddly enough I get that impression too...

these photos remind of the Harley Hoffman video



and the face reminds me a little of this one

Good Comparisons

As I mentioned in the blog comments I was initially excited about these images, but as a professional CG artist the more I look at them the more problems I find.

I'm not particularly bothered by the lack of Exif data, or the fact that the image has been through Photoshop. Not all cameras embed full camera profiles (at the very least you would however expect a mention of the camera manufacturer) and many people use PS for basic legitimate processing.

There are however lots of red flags. I've mentioned some of the most obvious signs of image manipulation in the blog comments, but there are a couple more worth mentioning.

Firstly the pixelation and number of artifacts is inconsistent with the size of the photos even if they were taken on a low quality setting. Also, the resolution appears to change from photo to photo - did the photographer have time to change the image quality in between shots?

It's also worth looking at the image supposedly taken without a flash and comparing it with the supposedly brightness adjusted version of the same image. The non-flash image simply doesn't have enough data to produce the adjusted results - brightening an image doesn't increase image resolution. It looks to me as if the darker image was created afterwards using a destructive process that loses image data.

Other things already mentioned include:

- Inconsistent/non-realistic lighting & depth of field
- Fringing and sharp edges for elements that have been layered into the compositions
- Fake artifacts used in an attempt to disguise the varying quality/resolution of elements pasted into the images
- The use of motion blur on background foliage (why isn't the squatch subject to the same blurring?)

I'm open to the possibility that I might be wrong about some of my analysis. I'ts quite common for CG artists to get tunnel vision, even finding faults in perfectly legitimate footage. I do however think that the number of red flags is too great to ignore in this case.