It would be terribly sad not to mention ironic if the first photo taken was of one (or two) of the last living specimens. There are however still a few sightings per year, as well as tantalizing if not definitive sonar contacts from time to time. There's a lot more traffic and noise around the Loch than in former times, and perhaps that keeps them from showing themselves as often when near shore. It's also possible sightings were normally this infrequent, and the 1930's were the exception for a number of possible reasons, including a hypothetical infusion of wels catfish washed into the Loch from private estate ponds during flooding in the mid 19th century; catfish aren't indegenous to Scotland and can't reproduce at the water temperature of Loch Ness, but under such circumstances any that got into the Loch would have reached enormous sizes by the 1930's, and could account for some of the hump sightings in that period (but not for long-neck or any of the land sightings). Those catfish would be dead and gone now, reducing the number of "false positive" sightings. I think what may be more telling is that land sightings have become more infrequent (only one in the last two or three decades) which certainly implies a change has occured. Worlwide, amphibian populations have crashed during the last couple decades, which is very alarming.
Like I said originally 'The power of suggestion is strong with this one'.
And here is a link to the larger (unaltered?) original image. (http://1.bp.blogspot...Allen+Image.jpg)
That's the real deal alright. Working backwards, author Roland Watson discovered the Fortean Picture Library held this original version of the photo and obtained it for his research. It had been donated to the FPL by Steuart Campbell (according to Aleksandar T. Lovchanski). It was given to Campbell by Maurice Burton, who had obtained it in the 1960's, made from a glass lantern slide that E. Heron-Allen had made from the original negative in the 1930's. The Heron-Allen image contains all the detail lost in the press reproductions and their overwhelming contrast adjustments throughout the years; what's in most of the books are photographs taken of old newspapers, then turned into half-tones for reproduction by printing press.
And what a difference it makes it terms of clarity and detail. It was working from this that R. Watson discovered the true head appears at the right-hand end of the "object". You can also see how the motion-blurred spray tossed up by the rear appendage gives us the "ear" of the "dog". The humps of the two animals have moved relative to each other since a dowsing, so that the line between shiny wet skin and darker drier skin has become disjointed; the darker spots being out of alignment gives us the "eye" of the "dog" (darker spot on the side of the further animal) and "snout" (darker spot on the side of the nearer animal).
Edited by Steve Plambeck, 05 October 2012 - 05:14 PM.