Nope, that's the one. Silly little thing, ain't it? Regardless, creekfreak claims its real, despite the fact that he cannot present any evidence that would allow us to evaluate that claim.
That's it, which makes this thread all the more ludicrous as it continues. The only reason I am still here is because Creekfreak is using this forum as a vehicle to sell his hoax.
Holy #$@%, you don't need Photoshop or computer science to see what's going on in that picture. Unless Creekfreak or someone else has intentionally altered that picture, all you need to do is look at it with your eyes squeezed together really close. I learned that at art school, kinda like getting the gist of a picture.
Look at the picture and close your eyes more and more, until the point where you will see that this is nothing but a mix of shadow and lack of foliage which creates the illusion of a "gorilla in the woods".
When your eyes are almost close, you will see, for example, that what seems to be the Bigfoot's head bone shining in the sun is nothing but a small branch and leaves of the scrub in front of "Bigfoot".
Let alone that the two bright dots, which of course look like animal eyes to our human brain, would never look like two bright dots if this was a real creature.
However, all this smart-ass analysis is based on nothing but that low-resolution JPEG image.
If Creekfreak could supply me with a higher resolution picture, I'd gladly analyse it for him. And I certainly don't care about the money he could make off it, I am not interested in that money. I'm a business man running my own company here in Europe, and the copyright law over here would seriously kick my butt if I would fool around with other people's photographs without their written consent.
Creekfreak, are you interested in showing me a higher resolution picture? If so, please send me a PM. European law does not permit me to publish any of it without your consent. Even the worst hack lawyer in the US could sue me into bankruptcy if I did.
