Bigfoot on Game Cameras: Why is this so hard?

A game cam photo of a supposed Bigfoot came up in my email yesterday and I saved it in my 'anomalous BF image' folder where it joins numerous other inexplicable images of 'something' that triggered one of the increasingly fancy strap-on tree cameras.

For the bulk of us who are interested in unmasking the critter we call Bigfoot, a good, clear photograph is worth quite a bit in terms of solving the riddle.  So, a quick trip through SportsmansWarehouse or Cabelas with a credit card will get you pretty high-end digital unit, some with night vision, some with video capability and most with nylon straps to secure it to a tree at what we think is an appropriate location and height to get that holy grail of images. 

And there has been some interesting results. 

From a cellphone photo of a computer image of a game camera located in Mossy Rock, Wa.
(Note: Click on the images to make them larger.)

This is what we get, routinely. A thrice watered down, blurry blobshot, which even a 12 year old would say, 'that sucks.'

                                            What we WANT is a photo like the one below:

Now this is a great photo. A centered, clear daylight photograph.

Too bad it is an awful hatchet job, fake.

And this brings up the problem of photo fakery, which is not a new problem. People have been manipulating photographs ever since photography was invented. 

If you were unaware, this is how Osama Bin Laden was really taken out. 

But us Bigfooters are intrepid and stubborn and we keep hanging cameras in the woods anyway and 

if a photo we obtain is even just a tad out of the ordinary, say, like this...

then the blogosphere goes into high gear with all manner of new experts eager to tear the image

apart. And this is good to a large extent. Extraordinary claims, extraordinary proof, etc.,blah, blah, blah. Call Bill Munns, call Phil Poling, Call Thinkerthunker, and we'll get to the bottom of this.

So is this a dude in a fur suit? 

The problem is, no matter how highly-regarded your skills as a photo/video expert are, no photographic image will ever be enough to convince the public at large of the existence of a living creature. 

The P/G film, as our gold standard, has been dissected and re-enacted ad infinitum and still no consensus of agreement from credentialed scientists that huge hairy hominids truly exist.

Once this has been achieved, then new reference books can be written to update the taxonomy,

and that will be a beautiful day, but it won't happen from those scientists pouring over an image 

on a computer screen.  We need bones. Fossilized or fresh, or so fresh they're still inside a living 

creature, but we must have something so tangible we can personally hold it in our hands.


Talk to the back

Until that day comes, we can expect to a lot more weird photos, as the sale of very good video
equipment increases each year.

He's big, he's bipedal. What the hell is it?


I like this one. Look close. It has claws.

But what in tarnation is this blobthing? 


Or this? 

Is that a BOOB? 

Gotta be a guy in a suit. Amazon sells nice ones now.

This is a fairly recent offering. 



This is just a mangy bear, right?

There are enough terrible, fuzzy photos to keep us busy for years now, and new ones added monthly. And sadly, video footage will now be suspicious no matter what, since we have stuff like this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PjR6Mbsf-fQ

It is admittedly a phoney documentary of a captured Bigfoot, but it's so well done that it's easy to see how the general public could be fooled. Think the man on the street is smarter than that?

Judge, I rest my case.