Photos Of The Day: Photoshopfoot And Uncropped Image Of Whiteshell, Manitoba Bigfoot
Photoshopfoot:
Let's end this madness right now. This monster looks very photoshopped. Just look at the bad blend of pixels on the right side of the creature. From what we're hearing on the net, this image probably originated from studiodrome.com, an art projects website.
Uncropped Image Of Whiteshell, Manitoba Bigfoot:
On September 15th, John Marsden sent a cropped image of a possible Bigfoot to Matt Moneymaker on Twitter. According to John, the photograph was taken by him a few years ago in Whiteshell, Manitoba Canada.
Facebook user Candy Sasquatchwatch Canada contacted Marsden about the cropped image and managed to obtain the full-uncropped photograph above.
Looks like a rock, with a few leaves giving the impression that there is spacing between an "arm" and the "body".
ReplyDeleteStudiodrome also made 2 hoaxed videos in 2005 of a man in a very baggy suit.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xZA_LR-AYnY
SasquatchAlliance (who re-posted one of the videos), mysteriously disappeared in early 2009 from the face of the cryptozoological world.
This is the real deal folks.
ReplyDeleteIs this town hall worthy?
DeleteIt is! lets all get over there for a town hall meeting!
DeleteYour small penis is "the real deal"!
DeleteI don't really see why this obviously hoaxed photo from seven years ago is making big news through out Sasquatch pages on Facebook. I guess it might have something to do with the photo's astonishing clarity. But as we know, when a video/photo showing an alleged Sasquatch is clear, it's most likely a hoax.
ReplyDeleteShawn, you guys having a pod cast today?
ReplyDeleteman. really stretching it to make something let alone a mythical creature out a tree shadow.. pheww..
ReplyDeleteI bet there are turd boys who believe both of these are real.....
ReplyDelete^ You're such a fag.
DeleteOnly a turd boy would respond to his post like that. ^^^^^^^Exposed!
DeleteThat's a shadow on grass. Quite pathetic, actually.
ReplyDeleteA shadow of...what exactly? That's right, of a bigfoot.
Deletebeen monitoring this blog for months. still waiting for something not shopped, faked, blured, or b.s. some thing even mildly iteresting would be nice.
ReplyDeleteHold your breath.
DeleteIf this is a hoaxed photo it is the worlds best photshopper, I have been using the software for over 15 years now and to get the image behind grass stems and the tree would take weeks of work. Now if it was a suit made then the guy/gal walked behind the tree whilst someone photographed it, that's a different story. You would not get the level of detail in the grass and have the colours of both the foreground (Grass and sapling) and the mid ground (squatch) making a good match as they do. I say not shopped possibly hoaxed. That is not to mention the lighting of both are from the same source point. Ask someone who knows how to use shop first.
ReplyDeleteLMFAO, 15 years and you can't tell that's shopped? Good grief, quit now because there is ZERO hope for you. Furthermore, it doesn't take any experience with the program itself to be able to figure out what pics are shopped. You just have to have a little bit of common sense and not have your head square up your own ass.
DeleteReally, well coming from you, an obvious expert, pray tell then have you examined the picture closely? If you would have done and used the software I have then you would know. You are clearly an amateur not worthy of this reply but you have got the better of me. USe the software, examine what I have said, try to do the same yourself with another image and post it. Or just STFU! I wasn,t saying this was Bigfoot by the way, this just isn't shopped.
DeleteThis to me looks like three primary Photoshop layers.
DeleteThe Backgound Layer
The Figure Layer
The Foreground Branches Layer.
It looks a bit "wrong" as they forgot to add sun highlights as seen in the branches.
To me, this one is not worth our time folks.
...for whats its worth, I have been using Photoshop since it was called Photoshop 4.0
~D
5:17,
DeleteYou mad because you are too damn stupid to be able to figure out that's a shopped photo? Be mad at your own Forrest Gump intellect.
You're a slow learner, you've wasted 15 years, how does that feel? I've been tinkering with the program on and off for 5. What's sad is that you exclaim "15 years!" yet its clear to just about everyone (those who even have no experience with Photoshop programming) who has looked at photoshopped images for years and years that this is a PATHETICALLY DONE pic. I've seen better from 10 year Oldsmobile, period. You're a joke man, give it up Gump, you're clueless.
Auto-correct strikes again: "olds"
Delete"to get the image behind grass stems and the tree would take weeks of work"
DeleteMaybe even years!
Another thing, if these Bigfoot people are discovered will that make the first nation actually the second nation?
ReplyDeleteWhy does bigfoot have an old lady dowagers hump?
ReplyDeleteit's not photo shopped, but it is fake.
ReplyDeleteIt's a statue, this was debunked when it 1st came out.
they showed the statue and it was an exact match.
Help Shawn out with his confusion and show the supporting info.
DeleteYes, it IS photoshopped and its terrible. You do realize a statue can have a picture taken of it and then photoshopped into another image, don't you?
DeleteWell fake yes but it looks more realistic than those stupid tracks in elbe.
ReplyDeleteIf that first one wasn't a hoax, could you imagine turning a corner and coming face to face with that beast? That would be the most intense and intimidating situation on Earth...
ReplyDeleteThe top photo looks like a craving I have to agree. The uncropped photo is shadow. Looks at the downed tree and the leaves. Compare it to the shadow figure. It makes the shadow figure pretty small. Like child size. It is no bigfoot.
ReplyDeleteI've seen that "creature" photo on another site. It is fake.
ReplyDeleteThe first one has Chewbacca's face, so let's toss it out for that alone. Mask, photoshop, whatever.
ReplyDeleteThe second is just a humanoid-looking dark spot on a photo. Most likely just foliage or grass and shadow. Even if it were a bigfoot, it's so indistinct there's no point in looking at it. It gives us nothing of value.