23 replies to this topic

[TigressFlameroseX39]

I've also been having a difficult time with this photo and its mysteries. One thing that bothers me is the front legs and shoulders--something seems off. In particular, the angle of the front right leg as opposed to the left and the positioning of the chest and shoulders. It seems too stiff, especially compared to the hindquarters, which seems more sloped and catlike. Ooohh, if only it weren't in black-and-white, we wouldn't be having so much difficulty! I would like to believe that the photo is legitimate, and I don't know how people in that time period could alter a photo, and researchers have proven there are still plenty of undiscovered species on this planet, and the possibility of prehistoric species surviving to the present has also been affirmed, and what of the chances of inter-breeding between older species and newer ones? Arrg too many questions, sorry for ranting, folks!

[DKO]

Never heard of or seen this before. The body sort of looks like that from a horse, with something done to its tail. And painted.

Any photo experts here? How hard is it to double impose a photo with the old film? I mean something like you take a photo of some bushland, then take a photo on the same negative of a possibly painted horse, with a plain-ish sort of background and a little bit of bush in front of it. And the horse turned it's head during the photo and got lost in  the process somehow.

For some reason the animal and the bush below the animal in the photo looks a little different than the background at the top of the photo. Could mean nothing just something I noticed. I'm no photo expert.

[Night Walker]

DKO, on 16 September 2012 - 04:47 AM, said:

The body sort of looks like that from a horse, with something done to its tail. And painted.

I agree. Except I can't quite figure if it was painted in stripes (you'd be surprised the lengths people go to for a lark) or if it is a shadow effect from the foliage; whether the tail has somehow been tampered with (if painted with stripes why not do something to the tail?) or if it is a photographic motion-effect:



http://home.yowieoca...ola_Tiger_1968/

I second the call for the opinion of those with any photographic (or even any equine) knowledge...

[DieChecker]

I think the tail still causes issues with the identification relating to a horse.

I guess if it was a show horse, maybe the tail was bound up??

[DKO]

Yeah the tail might have been bound/braided. The stripes are confusing, if this guy was going out to make a hoax then he could have easily painted them on. To me it doesn't really look like light coming in through the bushes. But like I said earlier i'm no expert.

[SpiritTraveler]

Night Walker, on 16 September 2012 - 11:32 AM, said:

I agree. Except I can't quite figure if it was painted in stripes (you'd be surprised the lengths people go to for a lark) or if it is a shadow effect from the foliage; whether the tail has somehow been tampered with (if painted with stripes why not do something to the tail?) or if it is a photographic motion-effect:



http://home.yowieoca...ola_Tiger_1968/

I second the call for the opinion of those with any photographic (or even any equine) knowledge...

I'm not a photographer but I am an artist and I think that superimposed horse's head is way smaller than the one in the original photo. I think the one in the photo, even though some of it is hidden, is a large robust head like a tiger. You left out the large chin and jaw under your horse's head. And the foliage does not correspond with the stripes/shadows on the creature.  That is what my eyes see anyway.

Edit: I think you made a good depiction with the horse. The right front leg of the creature looks a lot like a horse's, along with the neck and withers.

Edited by SpiritTraveler, 17 September 2012 - 04:47 AM.

[The New Richard Nixon]

Hasn't this animal already been discovered

[The New Richard Nixon]

[Sir Wearer of Hats]

The New Richard Nixon, on 17 September 2012 - 06:53 PM, said:

Well, if there's one of those on the loose in Australia, even in the 60s, it's worthy of comment and investigation.