BigfootWeekend September Expedition

Thursday, August 2, 2012

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

Click on photo to enlarge

Once in a blue moon we find a Bigfoot photograph that just blows our mind. If you think the Melissa Hovey photograph is the king of Bigfoot photographs, then you might want to feast your eyes on these photographs. You may want to read the backstory before you complain about it looking too "real" to be real. A few minutes ago, we got this message from our friend Timothy D Ervick, the Director of Ontario Wildlife Field Research-Ontario Bigfoot.

Temagami cottagers have encounter with a very large hair covered creature and have the pictures to prove it.

We all remember the tales of "Old Yellow Top" from the Cobalt area starting in the early 1900's. Well, having investigated numerous reports from the area in recent years "Old Yellow Top's" descendants are alive and well in the Temagami area today. From vocalizations, huge footprints, to actual close encounters with the creatures are becoming more prevalent. Here is just one story of many to come…….

Location: Cabin on small lake just outside Lady Evelyn Smoothwater Park in Temagami Ontario, Canada.

Witnesses: Mr and Mrs. D Heibert

Date: April 15th 2009

Time: 2:39 pm

At approx. 2:39 in the afternoon Mrs. Heibert was opening the blinds in the back bedroom of the cabin and noticed a very large hairy upright creature on the top of the hill about 50-70 yards away. She informed Mr. Heibert who grabbed the digital camera and went outside to take a picture of it. While walking around the back corner of the cabin powering up his camera (8 MP Canon EOS DIGITAL REBEL XT, 300 mm lens) out of the corner of his eye he noticed it had seen him and froze. He had to delete several pictures from his SD card in order to be able to take any pictures. Mr. Heibert managed to take 2 pictures and while looking down at the camera it disappeared only to reappear 15 minutes later at the wood pile. It was peeking at him from the tree line beside a path. It was approx. 10 + feet tall and very massive. The creature roughly estimated to be twice the size of the witness. 3 pictures were taken in all. The pictures were taken from the back of the cottage looking up the hill from the top of the propane tank cabinet.

“This thing stood perfectly still for what seemed like 5 minutes. I turned my head for a split second and it was gone”.

In the following weeks the screens were pushed in or torn off some windows of the cabin.

The encounter was reported to the MNR and OPP in New Liskeard on April 28/2009. 3 digitally transferred pictures were left with the officer as well as a one page written report on the incident and the witness’s phone number. The officer they spoke with found it hard to believe they were reporting it and asked, : are you serious about this, and laughed....

A game Warden and several MNR biologists (Names withheld) attended the cabin and stayed several days investigating and taking pictures of the area. They stayed on after the witnesses left.

In 2010 witnesses sell cabin. Witness’s wife was no longer comfortable and afraid to go there.
They believe the cabin has since been torn down.

Previously In summer 2004 they were awoken at 2 am by what seemed like really deep penetrating ground thuds, like picking up a huge boulder and pounding on the ground it shook the entire landscape. It went on for about 20 min and was very random maybe 10 or 15 hits to the ground. It was very singular and deep like a seismic thumper truck, the last hit to the ground was followed by the sound of big trees cracking bout 150 yards out. The witness made coffee and stayed up till dawn that night.

In 2006 after lending a local friend and three others the cabin for hunting season. They reported two black or dark blue helicopters flying low and circling for several days and nights in the area. It was definitely not Game people doing rabies cube drops; this would have been fall 2006. It is assumed they were looking for someone or something and that was also the first year in many that no one received a moose tag to his knowledge.

In 2007 there was three large boulders put on the road at the bottom of the hill as you come into the top of Lake xxxx it looked like they were rolled down the hill and placed there. Two of them came up to door of the truck, one was the height of the bumper, and one of them was still there in 2010 because people began to just drive around it.

Ontario Wildlife Field Research- Ontario Bigfoot has many ongoing investigations in the Temagami area. Temagami is a very rich area for reports and incidents with this unknown creature. As well as many historic reports from other investigative groups and the local media. In our opinion these witnesses (Mr. and Mrs. Heibert) are very honest and forthcoming with answers to our many questions. We appreciate the valuable information and knowledge we have gained by hearing they’re story.

Timothy D Ervick Director

Ontario Wildlife Field Research-Ontario Bigfoot

Public Report OB1204

(Pictures below are used with permission by the owners © All Rights Reserved by Jeane Heibert)
Click on photo to enlarge

Click on photo to enlarge


276 comments:

  1. wake up timmy, now is your time to shine haha

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Actually they are really good photos, very clear amd all.....just wondering what Im supposed to see? The fur looks the same as the lamo "Matilda Sleeping" vid, doesnt it? And, doesnt the hair basically look to be the same as in the pics if Smeja's sample? Seriously?

      Am I looking at the back left shoulder, butt and back if head? Creepy pics actually...

      Delete
    2. I am skeptical about these photos, no sense of scale, too blob squatch like and they look like they are retouched. But I am not a photography expert either. One thing I realize is that there will always be skeptics when it comes to photos. It is going to take a body to prove it and that brings me to another question where to shoot a bigfoot to take humanely and do the least damage to the speciman. A head shot would be quick but would potentially do great damage to facial and skull features, a full metal jacket would do less damage but run the risk of not making a clean kill. A heart/lung/spine shot might be the best option but with a sacrifice to these organs..

      Delete
    3. The photos look fake to me too. But then again I thought the Erin Andrews peephole video was staged the way she seemingly posed towards the camera and then she stuck her finger in her butt-crack and sniffed it, I knew then she was unaware that she was being filmed. Things are always as the seem..

      Delete
    4. In one photo, the hair is displaced like they just started taking the photo after puuting on the suit,and its a closeup
      in photo 2, the hair is nice and combed picture further away, steady, no blurs.....nice pose!

      Delete
    5. thats why u post anonymous.. because everything looks fake to someone who wont even use there real name...anonymous says.. its fake its fake ... but wait im fake to cause i dont have a real name..who made u the expert..anything looks to real its considered fake leave it blurry there might be a chance its real.. how many bf suits do people have and who makes them.. there goes "i have to see it to believe it" out the window..

      Delete
    6. I can't believe it. Erin Andrews totally sniffed her stinkfinger. WDF

      Delete
  2. Clearest picture so far. These are the photos heads have been waiting for. Let the hating begin. Good Photos for sure. I wonder if Mr. Heibert takes pictures for a living

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No hating has to begin, this was shown a hoax and the costume identified on the old BFF, if you pay to join you can read all the information there now.

      Delete
    2. I recognize this guys work... He's a charter member of Canadian Regiment of Amateur Photographers - Auto Focus Only Operating Telephoto.. C.R.A.P.A.F.O.O.T.

      Delete
  3. Wow! Wish we had some scale in the background!

    ReplyDelete
  4. I really hope that they only picture they are trying to say is real is the last one on the bottom.... If they are saying that those other 2 photos are real then this whole thing is a hoax. No way those other 2 are anything more than a photoshop job

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. How the hell can you tell without the originals pictures and the digital information, or is that just a guess to make you feel better?
      Damn, we get some really dumb comments about pictures without any shred of proof one way or the other. An information vacuum is NO evidence at all. I will continue to say, anti up the forensic detail on video and digital stills or don't waste out time. Time for titillation is over folks and it is time to get serious about examining the material properly BEFORE it is made public.

      Delete
    2. this flyerboy you know went to some liberal arts college and lives in his mom's basement or attic! so we should respect him when he say's photoshop or the whole thing is a hoax with or without any f-ing proof either way. hey flyboy just shut up already and i think i heard your dad calling. it's time to cut the grass. but not the grass in your sock drawer!

      Delete
  5. Great composition on #2
    Let the games begin!

    ReplyDelete
  6. I bet pics like these are outthere, somewhere, but i think these were hoaxed

    ReplyDelete
  7. The witnesses are in their seventies and retired so PS I wouldn't think so. We also checked the originals as well as we could. I believe they are genuine. We have done our homework as well on the witnesses who are genuine as well.lol

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Seventies + retired = credibility. I think not.

      Delete
    2. The story is convincing and im sure you guys did your job as investigators. Dont know what it is but something just seems wrong with colors, foliage etc.. Either way appreciate you sharing. Be intersting to see what others impressions are

      Delete
    3. The last one "tree peeking is inpressive" the other ones look like movie posters

      Delete
    4. Sometimes older folks take up shoplifting, why not hoaxing?

      Delete
    5. Tim great work. The way you displayed the original locaton of the photo's is very important. Publishing all the info you have on this (e-mails, police reports, MNR documents...) would be ideal. Controversy is inivitable in Bigfoot, that's just the nature of the beast.

      Delete
    6. Was there a forensic expert opinion?

      Delete
    7. Nice ghillie suit! I have one similar but didnt paint mine grey.

      Delete
    8. Lots of folks claiming hoax on every new video/pic released. How would you like to have some great evidence on film and have everyone screaming hoax. Oh. Yea. Sorry. I forgot. To get pics and etc you have to log out occasionally and go outside. But then you might miss the next "hoax".

      Delete
  8. Awesome ! This group introduced us to some great pics! Any more info on their work?

    ReplyDelete
  9. great pictures only a matter of time!

    ReplyDelete
  10. so quick to yell hoax gezzzuuusss..... can you lay off and have an open mind for god sake they are in their 70ies why the hell would they go threw the trouble to hoax the photos....

    ReplyDelete
  11. Bigfoot + story and pics? No money in it,no sir.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Thats a big S.O.B. right there! If you'er going to get a pic, get a big one!

    Guess what crybabies, it isn't a blobsquatch.

    It's ok, I would still like better photos too.
    But since I've seen one and actually know what I'm talking about, it's likely REAL! And they are real!

    Notice how the head is almost I dentical to the one in Melissa Hovey photo??????

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. LMFAO, yeah, sure, it's always a stupid backstory of why the witnesses didn't get more pictures. Also, ever wonder why all the facials have lims or other objects blocking them out? Well, it's because they're bullshit. Complete bullshit.

      Delete
    2. Ya, and Hovey's is a blatant fake. Its FX from a movie. If it was anything more we'd have supporting photos. Or did it take just the 1 and then the magical BF vanished into the wind emitting EMF?

      Delete
    3. there is more photos dipshit!, you just don't get to see them cause your all asshole's!

      Delete
    4. hey leon w. you are my favorite bigfoot blogger! you pull no punches and your knowledge is impressive. i like you can't stand these liberals that are currently f-ing up this great country! keep on telling them to kiss your @ss L.W. cause if you don't i wil!

      Delete
  13. Pics 1 & 2, taken while the BF was supposedly "froze still" after being seen, do not line up with the story. The BF is facing the same direction in both pics, but is not in the same place in relation to the fallen dead pine on the ridge top between it & the camera man, and the two pics were taken at different angles, while the story leads us to believe that the cameraman was in one spot & couldn't move without scaring the BF off.

    ReplyDelete
  14. This is suppose to impress me? They don't even look like real photographs and the angles all stink. The Hovey photois more fascinating any day. With the Hovey photo, unlike this garbage,it is hard to imagine doubt.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I find it funny that whenever someone says its this suit or that suit, they look nothing alike. The hair on the suits don't look real at all

      Delete
    2. This is so very amusing. First, the Hovey pictures were "fake, fraud, puppet, museum wax dummy, etc. etc. etc) Now, these photos are fake and the Hovey pic is the "real deal?" IMO these photos look great, but they do look "semi" staged or photoshopped. I have always beleived the Hovey photo looked real. Who knows? I am not a photo expert but these pictures are of very high quality and very interesting to say the least.

      Delete
  15. Again, photos that will do nothing to convince skeptics or advance proof for the existence of bigfoot. As with all available evidence, this will only convince those who already believe that bigfoot exists.

    If you want to prove the existence of sasquatch, the only thing that will do it is a type specimen.

    ReplyDelete
  16. "My husband thinks it's a bigfoot." What does the wife think it is?

    ReplyDelete
  17. Replies
    1. Ton's of emails back and forth for the last month and a half.

      Delete
    2. We also confirmed a few things about the report using other sources.

      Delete
  18. Interesting photos I must say, I do however have some issues with the subject though. The hair on this subject looks like it was made to fit another animal with the way it sticks up and goes against what should be water protecting coat, what I mean by that is. All animals have a fur that is made to protect them from getting to wet and has flow pattern which is to direct the rain away from the skin and this is especially true for animals in the cooler climates where it rains a lot. I did not see any signs of photo shop and will study the pictures further. Mr. Wilson from the lounge should look at these, he knows his stuff and I trust his knowledge on these type of things.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. We would welcome any analysis of the photo's. I'm not sure on the comment on the hair. We do have some pretty scruffy looking animals up here do to the climate. The pictures were taken in the spring. Not sure if that helps?

      Delete
    2. We have enlarged versions on our website if that helps to analyse them, plus links to originals.

      Delete
    3. Sure you would! The photos, when analyzed, show that the scruffy fur suit is topped by a genuine Lubatti mask, available online for $250. It also shows that the photos were Photoshopped to blur out the face so it would not be recognized as the Lubatti mask. The same one used in the Ben Matine hoax. But of course, you probably already knew that. As well as that the old couple really don't exist, and never did. Check it all out here:

      Delete
  19. If photo 3 of 3 is bigfoot, then Patty is a hoax because this bigfoot looks NOTHING like Patty.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I would just say that every species has different anomalies, shapes, colours and sizes. I believe most field researchers understand and agree with that.
      Most of the reports from Ontario have our Bigfoot black,tall and lean. These pictures show a very husky one.

      Delete
    2. Needless to say when we have an expedition to that area (which we will do fairly soon) I won't be going in there alone.

      60k in the bush, no cell signal,a trillion bugs that bite and the possibility of the "Big guy" still being in the area.......priceless.lol

      Delete
    3. the photo of the peaking one,the face looks simular to the photo of the one in florida
      that is a close up. the hair looks very real,
      that would be hard to fake.

      Delete
    4. That bottom or the third picture looks like its holding a wolf or a coyote.

      Delete
    5. 10:21 Thats being pretty close-minded. Even in eyewitness reports, not all descriptions of the sasquatch are the same. Head shape, fur length and color, size, facial descriptions--many times it all varies greatly. Even if these pictures prove to be a hoax, I'm sure all sasquai do not look the same.

      Delete
    6. If sasquatches do exist, do they really look that different from one another? That's quite a difference between the third photo (peeking by the tree) and Patty. They're not even close.

      The variability is what leads some people to believe that they're hoaxes. I would think that you'd see some variability, but that much?

      Now, which one is the real bigfoot? The fact that Patty is moving and these are still pictures would lead me to believe that Patty is the real sasquatch.

      Delete
    7. That's like saying "if Danny Devito is real, then Vanna White is a hoax"

      Delete
    8. That's why a lot of people think Bigfoot is BS. They look too different from one another when captured on film or in photos.

      Delete
  20. Color scheme/contrast of the photos look odd. Almost like they are a brochure mock up or something.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That is something that stood out to me as well. Image looks filted to my untrained eye. It could just be the setting the point and shoot was on or just the way the camera processes data.

      Delete
  21. Just a pity the autofocus is on somethng else in every photo.

    Stood still for five minutes but only three photos? Red flag.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That was my immediate flag as well "stood still for five min. w only three photos".. Pictures do look good though and if the report to the MNR and OPP are accurate it could legitimize this.
      ANON 10:05 did infer that these were already debunct . Anyone have more insight to that statement ?

      Delete
    2. Did u read it? He had to delete photos to take the 3 so he could free up space! If I grabbed my camera at any time it's likely I have the same problem.

      Delete
    3. Yeah, sure, it's "always something" in regards to why the witness couldn't get more pics. 5 minutes to delete pics? He took that long to do that but only managed to make enough room for 3 pics? LMFAO! We also have another of a supposed face that is block by a branch. The faces are ALWAYS blocked by something. That's because it's bullshit.

      Delete
    4. Hey fartly at 9:56. Waddle out from your basement into the nearest woods and have your boyfriend snap a photo of your face while you are in the tree-line and he isn't. Post the pics here and prove that you can do it better. I guarantee you can't. Anyone who has actually attempted to photograph wildlife in the woods knows this problem.

      Delete
    5. He Captain Dumb Ass Gullible Retard, eat it up you peon brained sack of shit. Degenerates like you are the reason criminals make a living robbing people of their life savings. Better you than me......moron.

      Delete
    6. Anon7:31 your a moron! Prick dick penis head! You don't have s clue how to use s camera or video camera! Have fun with your boring life idiot!

      Delete
    7. Anon 7:31 is the retard !

      Delete
    8. Anon 7:31 your cell mate will teach u about love!

      Delete
    9. Can't we all just get along?

      -Rodney King

      Delete
  22. Emails? Tim...you need to talk to the witnesses.

    ReplyDelete
  23. I'm all for getting clear photos but something about this just screams costume for me. This looks like a suit to me. Sorry. Maybe they are genuine and I hope they are but I cannot see them being real. I also agree with Minionz. This so-called Bigfoot was stood still for five minutes and the witness only obtained three photos? Sounds fishy to me. And almost every digital camera has a video function. Surely a video clip could have been taken? Sorry, I'm a believer but too many red flags being raised for my personal liking. I call HOAX.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Bigfoot believer- actually go back and reread the account and you will see why he only got 3 pictures. Jeeeez ! Pay attention!

      Delete
  24. Can't get much clearer than these. Did anyone measure those broke off branches on the downed tree it is next to? It looks like it took a step between photos. In the top pic, it is at the end of the tree, you can see the two angled broken branches in the second pic clearly on the end of the tree. The second pic looks like it was taken first. The forearm looks fairly long in the top pic with the arm bent like it was taking a step and reached to grab the tree as it moved. The fur looks really long. I can't think of an animal with hair that long over so much of the body. It also has a silvery sheen to it, quite like other photos floating around. The long hair looks to be mainly on the torso. Could be longest there to keep core warm during winter? As for why only three pics and no video, it does seem convenient but the report did say he had to delete other pics first. Then factor in a 70yr old guy, with his heart pounding, trying to keep an eye on it and figure out how to delete some pics. If it is real, or the guy believes it real, can you imagine the adrenaline rush? Hunters get buck fever. I bet this guy had 'foot fever. I hope measurement were taken or if not, they need be. Should be very easy to locate this spot and measure everything to see how big it is. That will either help prove or disprove everything.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Big Jim, I am with you. When you bring out the point that the reason for only 3 photos. I really love all of these people talking sh*t about, " I would have done this" or " I would have done that". The truth is, none of us knows what we would do, put in the situation that this old fella was put into. I have had one sighting, so far in my life, and it was from the safety of warm, moving, and locked truck. I can honestly say, it changed me for ever. I cant even begin to tell you what the hell I would do if the only thing between this creature and me was grass and air, and neither can anyone else. I'll bet you there are some of these "macho" men that probably would have made a mess in there tighty whitie's if placed in the same situation! I wonder how many of the haters have ever even pulled the slack out of the trigger of a rifle, with something bigger than a chipmunk in the cross hairs? In my opinion, the fact that the old man had the wherewith-all to capture any photos at all, much less, one's that look like they should be in a travel brochure, is a red flag to me that these might be fake. If these photos turn out to be real(really, how will we ever really know) then take a good long look at some of the best evidence since Patty.

      sbizkit38

      Delete
  25. What this shows is that even good photos can be doubted and inconclusive. I have no way of knowing what this shows. Needs further details like stated above.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yup. That's why nothing will prove bigfoot's existence but a specimen.

      Delete
  26. I don't understand when people talk about the ground vibrating. I've read this from time to time, but even though they are supposed to be large and heavy, it doesn't seem like they would be heavy enough for that.
    I'd like to hear opinions from people who have seen one about that.

    Also, wouldn't it be really funny if they really are some type of large and intelligent humans, and they don't really have all that hair, but it's actually something sort of like coats or camouflage full body suits they make, or the little Bigfoot woman makes? So that's why they are different hair lengths and colors. Or it is their choice of fashion in the tribe.

    Not saying that's true, I just think it would be really hilarious if it turned out that way. They would be saying, "Stupid people, they think we are actually that hairy...idiots. We throw rocks at them and knock on trees and answer their stupid "howls" because we get a kick out of pulling their chain."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That's not hard for me to believe at all. Those guys that have 18" speakers pounding shake the ground and some knick-knacks off peoples shelves.

      Delete
    2. I can understand better if they are saying the vibration or shaking is coming from their guttural calls. That would be in line with the speaker example. But I thought he was saying his movement, his footsteps pounding was causing it. That is what seems hard to believe. Conjures up images of Godzilla, lol. Have I misunderstood what he meant?

      Delete
    3. All he said was they were awoken by deep ground thuds, like pounding large boulders into the ground and big trees cracking. nothing was said of it being caused by anything, just what it sounded like.

      Delete
    4. Never considered them wearing fur, it is quite an interesting theory.

      Delete
    5. lets guess what a 700 lbs bipedal creature sounds like trying to run away!Ground pounding and with that force under your feet youll stomp on the ground to make your message heard ..stayback!! U only get that from hearing it first hand!

      Delete
  27. In image #3 the foreground foliage is a different resolution to the rest of the image. Guess what that means.....

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Same in #2, plus obvious signs of compositing. My initial excitement has given way to the sad conclusion that these are fakes.

      At least we know that good high-res images are hard to fake.

      Delete
    2. According to Tim he checked out the originals and they were authentic. I assume that means not enhanced or photoshopped.

      Delete
    3. If that's the case, why present these 'photoshopped' images rather than the originals?

      If you were studying mountain gorillas you wouldn't publish composite images where the gorillas have been cut out and layered with trees taken from different sources of varying resolutions.

      With all due respect Tim is either lying, gullible, or doesn't have much expertise in digital image manipulation.

      Delete
    4. the 3rd image has been brightened. Original is much darker

      Delete
    5. That doesn't change the fact that there are fake artfacts (intentional degradation to hide inconsistencies) and that foreground tree doesn't match the quality and lighting of the rest of the image. It's been pasted in front of the supposed Squatch.

      Delete
    6. Unreal, he is in the woods with filtered lighting, he is not going to get a pic where the lighting is consistent across the board. Since we don't know the apature setting, we can't talk about if the blurring in the foreground is expected or not.

      I don't know what this picture shows but you arm chair quarter backs really stink in your analysis.

      Delete
    7. ......so what about the difference in resolution (not blurring), digital artefacts and fringing. As a professional CG artist with years of experience using PS, these are just some of the things that jump out at me.

      Since you brought up blurring, how about the motion blur in image #1, where the background has vertical motion blur, but the squatch has none? That's simply impossible without post production. Then there is the is the blurring in #2 that varies to such a degree that it doesn't correspond with the way depth of field is handled by cameras.

      Delete
    8. So you work on Syfy originals? Go into a forest and snap some photos at random with automatic settings.. See what you come up with and get back to us.

      Delete
    9. No, I don't work in the tv/film industry, but I do have a lot of experience creating digital montages - that's why I can spot the clumsy mistakes in these images.

      Delete
  28. If the creature stood still for 5 minutes how come they only managed 2 photos?? Also if it froze then it doesn't explain that the 2 photos of the creature standing are different in relation to body position to the pine and the way its standing. I'm a believer in bigfoot but this is horseshit in my opinion.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. He had to delete photos to free up space on his camera because the memory was full while it stood there! That's why.

      Delete
    2. Yeah anon 4:47. Actually read the account. His camera memory was full. Takes time to delete some photos especially if your panicked and your like my 70 year old dad who's constantly asking me where the view button is!

      Delete
    3. Uh huh, yeah, sure. It's "always something". LMFAO! Eat it up you buffons, lap it up you morons.

      Delete
    4. I can when you consider all of the following occured in that five minute interval.

      First, If you read the full account, the five minutes is just an off the cuff estimate and could have been much less.

      1. Wife sees something thru the window
      2. Wife goes out side
      3. Wife looks for husband
      4. Husband sees creature
      5. husband goes and gets camara
      6. He lines up the first shot, turns out his card was full
      7. He does not want to delete "good" photo's so takes the time to review his card and deletes a few photo's he doesn't want
      8. He then takes time to compose a good picture
      9. He moves positions, takes another
      10. He starts to setup for third, and the creature starts to move, forcing him to recompose but doesn't have time to pull off another clear shot.

      He may have other pictures, blurry ones and these are the only three worth sending out.

      When you consider five minutes is just an estimate and likely exagerated combined with the things going on in that short time period and the quality of the pic's, two photo's make sense.

      For three mornings straight, I had a male pheasent perch on a dirt pile right outside my camper and crow, he was 15 ft from the camper. the first day was a suprise, the second I thought, hey he will be back, the third day, i had my camera ready and still failed to get a decent photo of the bird

      Good pictures are hard to get and take time to compose and setup.

      Delete
    5. The photographer NEVER stated that he stood completely frozen too. One step with a camera will drastically change the angle.

      Delete
    6. Hey 12:51. How dare you make since. You had better start squealing "fake", "hoax", the photographer is a lieing bastard who is a glory hound, etc. Your level headed reasoning has no place here. I am a JREF person and the world is flat, bigfoot is a myth, the old man who cropped these photos is a glory whore....

      Delete
  29. "The only way Into Slyvanic is through me." - TS

    ReplyDelete
  30. Someone has to get a man in the same position and take pictures for comparison. It will be easy to see if it is a hoax or not.

    ReplyDelete
  31. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  32. In the peeking photo the subject looks more ape-like than human. Seems like we have been going back and forth on this issue recently !

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I can't see anything in the third pic

      Delete
  33. Replies
    1. Agreed. Those fools who claim these photos aren't possibly real need to go back to JREF and yank their spankys. Good post dude! Those idiots!

      Delete
  34. I'm the first to complain that people are going to complain either way, "not clear enough" or "looks too good". But frankly, this just looks too good. It looks Hollywood professional. My Spidey sense is tingling like crabs right now. -- d3w177

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I disagree......there are far too many amateur mistakes in the digital manipulation. Most proffessionals would be embarrassed by the poor quality of these images.

      Delete
    2. Mistakes? the giveaway is the raw image data, like the extent and quality of the lens detail. Whatever equipment captured these images was high quality. It looks like someone who knows what they are doing trying to look like a noob. These are stills from a planned shoot.

      Delete
    3. I'm with Gareth. This looks pro. I'm saying it looks too good in the sense that it doesn't look like the usual Butchy Kid bullshit amateur hour stuff. Nice suit. Good setting. Clear photograph. Someone took their time and clearly wanted you to believe this one. -- d3w177

      Delete
    4. Yes, mistakes in the way the different elements have been montaged together - the sort of mistakes a pro works hard to avoid.

      Delete
    5. I think what the first anon is saying (and please let me know if I'm wrong) is that an actual photo of something like this, wouldn't look posed, polished or arranged. This one clearly does. It looks like a poster for a sasquatch movie rather than a nature photograph. But as I said. It's a whole shitload better than a great many of the photos of proported bigfeet. --- d3w177

      Delete
    6. I agree, there is a certain amount of artistic/professional flair to the composition and they certainly don't look like photos captured on the fly.

      The montage elements are however poorly executed and remind me of the sort of efforts produced by competent photographers who have only just started using Photoshop.

      Delete
  35. Somebody on the BFF mentioned this is the same suit from the Ben Matine Documentary. It was filmed at the same lake as this and at the same time. Supposedly the Ben Matine documentary is fake. What is everyone's thoughts on that? Look up Ben Matine Documentary on Youtube. It looks very similar.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ah yes! I thought this looked familiar!!

      Delete
  36. This is why photos will never be accepted as convincing evidence...especially today with all of the sophisticated software that can produce almost any beastie and effect.

    We need a body, living, dead, or zombie.

    new anony

    ReplyDelete
  37. A video of a sasquatch doing something extraordinary would help..lifting a large rock and throwing it 100', picking up a deer and ripping it into two pieces, smashing a car roof, running 35 mph, picking up a thick tree and throwing it 25' or snapping it in two pieces...something besides just an image or of one walking. At least then, you would be able to consider the physicality of the beastie if the actual objects were examined.

    new anony

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That would be great to have on video. But it doesnt even need to be that spectacular. Thw witnesses claim it was at least ten feet tall. Just a video that shows walking or movement and some convincing size comparison would be good enough for me. With a photo, it could just be a large dummy with a suit on. Why didnt this witness try taking a video of it?

      Delete
    2. I saw a ten footer that could have been this one's twin brother, he was massive.

      Delete
    3. Have you seen the Six Million Dollar Man bigfoot? He picked up a lot of heavy stuff and threw it around.

      Delete
  38. Blurry photo: " oh that's not good enough"
    Clear photo " oh that's too good. Must be fake"

    Ps read the damn report before commenting. Shows laziness and get annoying.

    ReplyDelete
  39. I don't care what anyone says......these pics look to be taken by a professional photographer. Looks staged to me. Also, there's always a branch or something covering the supposed face. Why is that? Oh, because then you will be able to tell it's bullshit. It IS bullshit!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. These pics look doctored up bigtime....

      Delete
    2. now you mention it they do look too polished. The centre focus effect on the long shot and the detail in the lens does say, expensive kit and good photographer, probably a pro or v good amateur with a high end SLR. The face occlusion is also suspect. Je detectez les odour de poisson as they say in Scotland.

      Delete
  40. Somebody get MK Davis on the phone stat! He has some work to do.

    ReplyDelete
  41. well this kept us busy for a day on to the next I guess :) Hear is hoping SWP will bring us back some footage to enjoy whatever that may be at least you will know it is no bull shit! :O)

    ReplyDelete
  42. These are obviously photoshopped. Anyone who thinks otherwise is either STUPID, NAIVE, or BOTH!

    ReplyDelete
  43. These photos are amazing. Shawn, your site is the absolute best!

    ReplyDelete
  44. This reminds me of the account told by Ben Matine. Alot of things are similar between the two accounts, even the use of unidentified helicopters being in the area. Google Ben Matine, and you can find a short doc on youtube, it spooks me out.

    ReplyDelete
  45. Sally here - We've seen this Bigfoot before. He's the no-count brother in law of our Bigfoot family. He's a lazy, good for nothing bum and if given the chance, he'll freeload off of you as long as you let him. He'll also eat all your food and steal your woman. We call him Snagglepuss.

    ReplyDelete
  46. Someone said above and it's been repeated many times. Now mater how good photos are it won't convince any skeptics. And that is because skeptics are MORONS that don't believe anything anyone ever says.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I would have to agree and state something further.

      A long time ago I watch an episode of Oprah and she was interview people about angels. (Now I know that this is a topic that science will have a hard time proving, lol)

      But the skeptic she brought on, when questioned only said "Lie detectors tests can be passed!" That's all he said. Every time he was asked a question that's the only thing he said. He was like a broken record. Opera and guests were all baffled by him because that’s literally all he said.

      The point I am making is that skeptics assume everyone is lying and only lying. They can't accept the idea that MAYBE, JUST MAYBE some of these witnesses are ACTUALLY telling the TRUTH and that further SOME of these pictures and videos and I mean SOME of these pictures and videos are of actual bigfoots. Now everyone knows of course there are some fake videos out there. My favorite on youtube has a guy in a suit walking out of the bush. Another teen runs up to him and kicks him hard in the nuts and down he goes. (I know funny right?) Then the camera kid says "Looks like you got poned!" So the kid in the suit gives him the finger as he is lying on the ground in pain.

      The point I am making is that skeptics don’t leave any room for what if they are wrong (OMG!) and some people are actually telling the truth about seeing and photographing bigfoots!

      ChadW

      Delete
    2. These aren't good photos. They're staged and only idiots will believe that these are real and at the same time believe the bullshit story. Bleevers are the most stupid people I've ever been around. All logic and common sense are non-existent.

      Delete
    3. I don't know if I'd call all skeptics morons. Are we supposed to turn off common sense and accept all of the many hoaxes as factual? I think a healthy dose of skepticism and objectivity should be applied to all bigfoot evidence.

      We bigfoot believers needs to find a specimen and hand it over to science. That is the ONLY thing that will silence the skeptics. I'd love to see the skeptics eat crow.

      Delete
  47. It's some stills from the Ben Matine hoax project. Obvious when you look at that.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No it is not, go look for yourself. It's not even close!

      Delete
    2. Yeah, it's close. It's the same BS hoaxed squatch.

      Delete
  48. I will never go public with any photos I may have, that are very similar to this, because of exactly what is happening here!

    I'm no hoaxer yet, I'd be treated like one here no matter what.

    I'll just be happy with knowing what I know because it's just not worth sharing with idiots who do not even read the article or bother to read the few wise comments interspersed with the stupid ones!

    93% of the people here do not deserve to know the truth and I hope the truth never comes out!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I understand how you feel but criticism is part of this community. Every pixel is dissected and every bit of information needs to be known.
      IF I was ever lucky enough to get photos or video of Bigfoot, I'd share it in a heartbeat. Why? Because I would know it was real. People could accept it or dismiss it.
      Questions would be asked even if the tiniest of details were mentioned to accompany the visuals.
      Holding back because you may have your feelings hurt does nothing to show that Bigfoot exists.
      Every piece of evidence helps but you need to understand that so many hoaxes take place regularly.
      If you have photos, you're certainly entitled to keep them to yourself. That would be a shame though.

      Delete
    2. Anon 3:26,

      Spoken like a true hoaxer. Always worried about being called out on their bullshit instead of letting it roll off if it is indeed real pics of a Squatch. I swear hoaxers are mentally ill, getting all butthurt about getting called out on their hoaxes. Truly laughable.

      Delete
    3. "93% of the people here do not deserve to know the truth..."

      Where did that number come from? It's actually 91%. Get your facts straight.

      Delete
    4. Sorry but according to my calculations on the comments here it's 93% at the time of my above comment based subjectively on what I considered worthwhile posts vs less than worthwhile posts. Granted I did not include the two stupid replies to my post above or the idiotic ones since.

      SasquaiNation's reply was appreciated. Thank You SasquaiNation.

      Delete
    5. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    6. I do understand your point and know every-time something is made public we do take a lot of heat. I don't worry when people make comments good or bad as long as they are constructive.

      I know what the "Holy Grail" is when it comes to Bigfoot. I know others know what it is as well. These pictures or future ones from anybody won't be the holy grail. But they might just be a piece to this puzzle and mystery.lol

      Delete
    7. I understand Timothy but I believe the key word there was "constructive".

      I was never referring to "constructive" comments.

      Delete
  49. Replies
    1. Actually for your FYI, hair and fur are the same thing. The only difference is terminology. We tend to use fur when talking about hair in a dense amount. Normally on animals. But scientifically hair and fur are identical. Many humans could be called furry. Robin Williams and George "The Animal" Steele pop to mind pretty quickly. Hell, even I would be furry if my body hair was dark instead of pale. And everyone's head is furry. At one time anyway.

      Delete
  50. Much better than the usual blobsquatch but still not good enough, you can only see ambigeous details and not definitive ones, could be a hoax or the real deal? I highly doubt any photoshop trickery since this would be so much easier to do with a man in a suit.

    ReplyDelete
  51. Tim, I appreciate your time and effort on this, but as clear as the photos are, there are no defining shots. No hands, face, or any other picture that would indicate this is a "real" Bigfoot and not some guy wearing a bear skin.
    These photos remind me so much of the Russian Bigfoot photos and it's all I can do to remain unbiased.
    I also have issue with the man having to delete photos from the memory card in order to take photos of this Bigfoot. My 4MP camera with a 1G card can take 1200 pictures and my other camera can take over 1400. That's a lot of pictures to have on a card. Did he never download the pictures from the card? Is he a bird watcher or have another interest that would cause him to take so many photos before downloading them?
    Issues I have with the subject in the photo include:

    1.)Hair on the head is different colour than the body.
    2.)Hair on the head appears to be different than body hair. The hair on the head is more uniform in direction and body hair is in various directions.
    3.) No pictures of defining features.
    4.) Subject looks posed.
    5.) The only shot of the face is blurry.

    As clear as the photos are, they are inconclusive at best.

    ReplyDelete
  52. For those who say this is from the Ben Matine documentary I suggest a visit to this video-

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P-_H8nbCUYg

    or why not google Ben Matine and see for yourself, these pictures do not even come close to the documentary pretend pictures!

    ReplyDelete
  53. this is just crap ,capitolize that for y`all, CRAP!

    ReplyDelete
  54. Doesn't look like Patty. If this is a real bigfoot, then Patty is a hoax. If Patty is a real bigfoot, then this is a hoax.

    ReplyDelete
  55. did the 70 year old witnesses explain why the pics have spent time in photoshop?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. My guess is that there are no 70 year old witnesses?

      If the 70 year old couple does exist and this story is true, then the wife is a knucklehead. "My husband thinks it's a bigfoot." And she's doesnt think it's a bigfoot? If you actually saw this creature and afterwards saw the three pictures, what would you think it is?

      Adding the stupid line "my husband..." leads me to believe that the whole story is a bunch of hooey.

      Delete
  56. Looks like the same costume in this video. Same place. Hmmm...
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P-_H8nbCUYg&feature=player_embedded

    ReplyDelete
  57. When the photo of sasquatch is small and hard to make out, it seems like a hoax. When it is clear and closer to the camera, it seems like a hoax.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You can't win, can you?

      So much hoaxing has gone on for so many years that no photo is going to seem legitimate to everyone.

      Delete
  58. Its Ron Jeremy at his camp site!

    ReplyDelete
  59. I would like to see the original EXIF data for these photos. I know they went through Adobe in June of 2012. Did the photos go through photoshop before 2012 as well?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That would have been me enlarging them for our site and to take a better look at them. I probably used PS to do the enlarging.
      On our site under each picture you will find a link to the original Panoramio photo's. You can also find additional info on each photo on the lower right side of the pictures in Panoramio. (EXIF)
      Let me know if I can be of any more help.

      Delete
  60. the hovey photo is a farce, it would be nice to let these have their own merit,

    ReplyDelete
  61. Wait, isn't this the Ben Matine Bigfoot? It's the same location. The subjects in both photos look very similar. http://s3.postimage.org/go2cejwu7/Picture1.jpg

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yeah, it's the same bigfoot.

      This is a hoax, another in a long line of hoaxes. Whoever came up with this BS should be given the chair. I'm tired of hoaxing. It obscures the legitimate evidence for the existence of sasquatch.

      Delete
    2. Ben Matine story was found to be a PR campaign for a movie and I agree it is the same name "Temagami" but I was generalizing the area. Our report is from North of Temagami Lake.

      We are also tired of hoaxers and would never expect anyone to consider these photo's and report as solid proof of the existence of Bigfoot. We all have a lot more work to do to get to that point.

      Delete
  62. I' m in the military at Fort Lewis and we see these creatures through our scopes and night vision all the time when we are on night missions. Keep debating , but they are there!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Uh, the next time you see these creatures through your scope, blast one.

      Delete
    2. So your calling me, my commander , and my unit bullshitters? $&@& off! Get your lazy ass off of your chair and do something besides living your life laying around and commenting on stuff u have no idea about!

      Delete
    3. If you see these creatures "all the time," why don't you shoot one?

      Delete
  63. The Hovey photo did look like hair rather than fur though. I have never seen one, so I had trouble understanding why they said that specifically. The Hovey photo demonstrates 'hair' to me, even if it isn't real. This photo, Freeman, Matilda, and Patty look like fur. I guess there could be different types, and maybe when they age it gets gray like ours and they start losing it like us. I recall a witness in that NatGeo documentary "Is It Real" said what he saw had a scruffy messy coat. Then you have some reports that say it looks kind of nice. That skunk ape photo where it is walking away and the one the anonymous woman sent in thinking it was an escaped orangutan appear to have brown somewhat long hair that looks almost manicured. And then you have the Minnesota Iceman which depicts a somewhat human looking body with hair, not fur.

    To those who have gotten a pretty good look at one, do any of these aforementioned photos look close to what you saw? How are they consistent, and how do they differ if you don't mind trying to explain?

    Thanks in advance.

    ReplyDelete
  64. 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.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The helicopters are part of the report but may not have anything to do with the incident a few years later or anything to do with Bigfoot all together.

      Delete
  65. Another fake. Every other animal in that area has short hair. Anything requiring a fur coat that thick would be living in the snow climates all the time. The only exception would be a exotic pet breeds with a fur coat that thick.

    ReplyDelete
  66. Does anybody know anything new about the Ben Matine account? I can't find anything new about the subject apart from that short doc on youtube. Is there anything more to the story that I missed?

    ReplyDelete
  67. Look at the time of year. That is when all fur bearing animals are shedding their winter coats and that always leaves a tangled mess with naturally long hair. The fur is also at its thickest.

    ReplyDelete
  68. Anon2:31 your wrong. Again an Amature trying to acess a situation ! This was taken in APRIL, middle of spring and end of winter. Large coates and in the middle of shedding !

    ReplyDelete
  69. This is the "clearest" hoax image I have seen in a long time. The "fur or coat" is a hair brush from Photoshop which I have used many times in graphic design and image work. The poorly done layering is well, poorly done and the mis-match of layering which results in the odd and non consistent resolution is a real giveaway that this is nothing more than an image created in most likely Photoshop, or reworked from another digital image program.

    ReplyDelete
  70. To Timothy D. Ervick

    I find it interesting that the face of the peeking Bigfoot looks just like the drawing of the Bigfoot on your OWR website home page. Perhaps there are other pictures of very similar Bigfoot that look like that? ;)

    ReplyDelete
  71. wondering why when i zoom in on the second picture everything except the bigfoot ? got blurry

    ReplyDelete
  72. wondering why when i zoom in on the second picture everything except the bigfoot ? got blurry

    ReplyDelete
  73. The figure in profile in the further-away shot appears to be a pasted-in cutout, because of the oddly sharp edges of the figure and the strange lighting of the figure which doesn't match the surrounding lighting in the forest.

    The closer-up photo is impossible to tell.

    Probably they aren't genuine, based on the appearance of the more distant shot.

    --Zorro

    ReplyDelete
  74. i still dont see morgan freeman

    ReplyDelete
  75. Its from movie, there's a trailer I seen it about a year ago.

    ReplyDelete
  76. These photos are entirely too good... They are obviously fakes. Furthermore, if anyone ever produces a Sasquatch body, that will be entirely too persuasive and therefore also fake. Any proof that challenges the reality already decided upon by the skeptic is automatically manufactured.

    ReplyDelete
  77. The Ben Matine story has nothing to do with a movie.
    It was a documentry about Ben and Jim as well as the OPP,MNR,RCMP cover up.
    It was only deamed a hoax by 1 single little group of bloggers who were being played as fools on line by students volenteering for a Toronto production company during the bumbling Biscardi event.
    The 2 students were charged and sued by the production company for steeling confidential data.

    The Ben Matine Jim Jardineau event is truth.
    100%

    Ben Matine has been missing back in Lady Evelyn PP since 2008 with no trace of him anywhere. He had no next of kin or anyone other than the documentry crew and Jim Jardineau to look for him. The OPP did not. You people need to wake up and stop being arm chair bigfoot hunters not one group of people from the public have ever investigated the Tamagami area and there are some strange events that happen there.
    1 Balls of light that appear out of no where
    2 Massive appearing vortex water pools
    3 Magnectic eruptions
    4 Strange powerful underground thumpings
    5 Missing people
    6 wheather blocked anomylies
    7 Bigfoot siteings
    The MNR, forestry and OPP flatly avoid any and all conversation regarding strange events or bigfoot in that area of Ontario.
    It is a magic place the worlds second biggest magnetic anomylie, full of under ground caves, gold and dimonds.
    There is an under ground cave system that runns 247 miles west to Lake Wanatapi and is 6 miles deep in spots. The OPP and other milatant style groups have been conducting research and odd emergency searches there for some time now, there is also alot of missing people back in there, 20 since 1930, 6 in the past 5 years.
    I think what you are seeking lives under ground and in cave systems, and only surfaces when needed.
    You will see as time passes that the Matine Jardineau event happened and you have miss read the entire event, SHAME ON YOU ALL.SHAME ON YOU ALL !!!!!
    Do not trust the MNR at all ever, most of them guys are everyday bar hounds, pot smokers and jokers. Goverement pay hounds who do very little. The OPP cant be trusted either, so just remember what i said.
    FOOLS.

    ReplyDelete
  78. who wrote the shit background script for this stupid site
    Idiots

    ReplyDelete
  79. Hi everyone. I wanted to add something that I found interesting. I am becoming more interested in people who have disappeared in the forests of North America. I was listening to David Paulides on Coast to Coast AM and he was vaguely making a connection between disappearances and Bigfoot abductions. I understand that going missing isn't something odd while venturing out in the forests, because a person could get lost or end up getting killed by an animal. I was searching the web for missing people out of curiosity and I came across this http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/story/2012/05/17/ottawa-missing-persons-rcmp-unit.html
    I find it strange how the government is putting together a poster of missing children in a forest in a very dark and sinister way. I do believe that the government knows about these things. I am assuming that these things are evil.

    ReplyDelete
  80. I think we should declare a permanent open season no limit status on hunting for these heartless bastards that kill Sasquatch. Then we can mount their heads on a tree in Bigfoot's living room.

    ReplyDelete
  81. well i live literally 30 minutes from temagami, and 5 minutes from colbalt.. This is a very squatchy area, especially around temagami.. for those who have never been in the area you'd notice it as soon as you drive threw. once you reach north bay, its a whole different game... i believe these pictures are real because there is a lot of forested space around here and a lot of lakes. Perfect habitat for bigfoots. As well there are a lot of missing people reports.. all from people who have went hiking around there. yes it is possible of bears, wolves, cougars to have attacked them but these animals up here are afraid of people and wont even come close.. besides, most people can fight off these animals.. so its higly unlikely they have gotten killed from them..

    ReplyDelete
  82. You're right! My husband comes from Larder Lake which is further north than even North Bay. I've been to his town a few times in the 12 years we've been together and it's true, once you reach North Bay everything changes. The woods get thicker and human habitation gets further and further apart until you reach the next town which could be miles away. It's easy for people to make negative comments but it's also clear that those same people really don't have a clue to how the land lays in this part of the country. It's a whole different world up in the north in so many ways! Also, the size of this province is absolutely HUGE, the majority of it being wilderness and Quebec has even more of it than we do. It really is hard to wrap your head around the size of it and once you do it's easy to believe that something could be living there undetected for generations.

    ReplyDelete
  83. its just laughable to thin anyone would fall for this nonsense

    ReplyDelete