Latest Bigfoot "evidence"

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jodie said:
Wouldn't everything look like a white blob if that were the case?
Click to expand...

Nope. Make an analogy with photography. Assuming you can't increase ISO, what do you do if you want to take pics of a dark area? Increase exposure time. You'll grab more photons, thus registering more detail and weaker light sources. Stronger light sources, however, would become overexposed blobs. You can test this effect with a standart or a low-light camcorder.

So, if you increse sensibility to grab subtle heat differences at a cold night, a person or any mammal may become a white blob.

Sure, clothes can block body heat. But all it takes to turn a person (even with heavy winter clothes) in to a generic red or pink humanoid IR figure is to place him/her close to a bonfire. Heat will warm the outer layers of the clothes. Film and show your bigfoot, claiming "If it were a person, only the exposed areas would be bright! Who would be wandering naked at such a cold night so far from camping sites?" Footers will buy it all.

Follow-up: you may sell DVDs, footprint casts, maybe even field trips to your top-secret bigfoot hot spot, where your disciples will surely experience "activity". I'll have to give me 25% of the money you'll make, BTW, since I have intellectual property of the scheme.
 
tsig said:
Humans are warmer than vegetation.
Click to expand...

Even with clothing on? I have no idea, it's a legitimate question on my part.

Ahhh I see Corea answered as I read down further.
 
Last edited:
Jodie said:
Wouldn't everything look like a white blob if that were the case?
Click to expand...

Correa Neto said:
Nope. Make an analogy with photography. Assuming you can't increase ISO, what do you do if you want to take pics of a dark area? Increase exposure time. You'll grab more photons, thus registering more detail and weaker light sources. Stronger light sources, however, would become overexposed blobs. You can test this effect with a standart or a low-light camcorde
Click to expand...

Jodie

By way of a simple example to further explain what Correa Neto is saying, here are three versions of the same image; a photo NOT a thermal image, but the principle is the same

normal.jpg

This photo is the original, a trail camera photo of a person taken at night using
the flash. Its obviously a clothed person, walking past the camera. You can
clearly see that he wearing glasses and a wristwatch/band on his left arm.



under.jpg

I have now cranked the exposure down using Photoshop. The detail clearer than
it is in the first photo.




ultraover.jpg

Now I have cranked the exposure right up so that the image is "blasted out" and
there is "blooming" of the bright areas into the surrounding dark areas, and,
hey presto BIGFOOT, and I didn't even have to dress the man in a monkey
suit. I have made NO alterations to this photo other than to over-blow the
exposure.
 
Your demonstration whites out more than what I usually see on the thermal images, when I bother to look at them. Are we just going to ignore the fact that not everything in all of those thermal images is overexposed?
 
Jodie said:
Your demonstration whites out more than what I usually see on the thermal images, when I bother to look at them. Are we just going to ignore the fact that not everything in all of those thermal images is overexposed?
Click to expand...

They have set the camera to emphasize rather subtle variations in temperature and relatively cool plants will still be dull but a warm human being will overload that part of the image, what's so hard to understand?
 
Jodie said:
Your demonstration whites out more than what I usually see on the thermal images, when I bother to look at them. Are we just going to ignore the fact that not everything in all of those thermal images is overexposed?
Click to expand...

Please post one so we have something to reference.
 
Jodie said:
Your demonstration whites out more than what I usually see on the thermal images, when I bother to look at them. Are we just going to ignore the fact that not everything in all of those thermal images is overexposed?
Click to expand...
Because that image is not IR and seems to have been acquired using a flash; the flash illuminated the ground underneath the guy and both areas bloomed when the exposure was cranked up in Photoshop.

In IR, the guy would be the "light" source; the heat from his body probably would not warm enough the ground undeneath him to generate the effect when sensibility is cranked up.

Jodie, would you happen to have a better explanation than the ones we proposed?

Do you think we are proposing all the alleged bigfoot thermal images are result of overexposure?

Do you think we are somehow dismissing the thermal images too fast?

Do you think there's a chance any of the alleged bigfoot thermal images actually show a bigfoot?
 
Jodie

The subject in the photo is wearing light pants and a dark shirt, so I had to push the exposure high enough to overcome the difference in contrast between them, resulting in the overbrightening you speak of.

A thermal image can be manipulated in much more sophisticated and subtle ways across the full range of the IR camera's dynamic range, i,e,, it can be set to be more sensitive to heat in the approximate range of human body temperature, in much the same way that a coloured filter over the lens of the camera can limit the spectral range of an image,

This was just a simple demonstration of what can be done with a "flat", monochromatic image by applying a blanket increase in exposure. I just used an existing photo that wasn't taken in order to fake figboot. Shame you found this too difficult to understand.
 
Garrison said:
They have set the camera to emphasize rather subtle variations in temperature and relatively cool plants will still be dull but a warm human being will overload that part of the image, what's so hard to understand?
Click to expand...

I'm not misunderstanding what is being said, I'm saying not all of the thermal images match what is being demonstrated.
 
Jodie
I have darkened the ground to take away the flash illumination, mentioned by Correa Neto and then performed the same procedure I did on the first photo

normal2.jpg
ultraover2.jpg


A better result IMO, as only the subject is blasted out

Here's an inverted (negative) one with reduced contrast if that makes you happier.

ultraover2invert.jpg
 
Correa Neto said:
Because that image is not IR and seems to have been acquired using a flash; the flash illuminated the ground underneath the guy and both areas bloomed when the exposure was cranked up in Photoshop.

In IR, the guy would be the "light" source; the heat from his body probably would not warm enough the ground undeneath him to generate the effect when sensibility is cranked up.

Jodie, would you happen to have a better explanation than the ones we proposed?
Click to expand...

I don't know Correa, but I'm not going to accept the explanation as 100% if it doesn't match what I see on IR.

Do you think we are proposing all the alleged bigfoot thermal images are result of overexposure?
Click to expand...

That's what it sounds like to me, are there other possiilities?

Do you think we are somehow dismissing the thermal images too fast?
Click to expand...

I think I'm irritating people simply because I pointed out that what was described doesn't match what you always see in the thermals. If you are going to do it right, do it right, don't half ass it like footers.

Do you think there's a chance any of the alleged bigfoot thermal images actually show a bigfoot?
Click to expand...

No, so if not bigfoot, then what is it? It would have to be a person most likely.
 
Last edited:
Jodie said:
Your demonstration whites out more than what I usually see on the thermal images, when I bother to look at them. Are we just going to ignore the fact that not everything in all of those thermal images is overexposed?
Click to expand...
Because it's an example, not an actual thermal image. It's only to provide an example of the changes in the image. In an actual thermal image, only the warm body "glows" white. The cold ground and trees are dark.

For example, Bigfoot?

 
Jodie said:
I think I'm irritating people simply because I pointed out that what was described doesn't match what you always see in the thermals. If you are going to do it right, do it right, don't half ass it like footers.
Click to expand...
Do you have an example? Do it right. Otherwise, you're just half-assing it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom