Bizarre Objects Caught by Illinois and Missouri Game Trail Cameras

I have just emailed Heartland studios where the images were sent asking whether better resolution images are available and if there is any exif data.

We will have to wait and see.

I have several game cams but none of that brand. Most of mine can take up to 3 pictures back to back. I also have 2 infered video cameras that work the same. It really depends on what settings he used. Generally you used to take a picture then make it wait 5-10 minutes before taking another so you dont waste film. Digital cameras now days I can take hundreds of pictures and videos on a 1 gig card so I let it just snap away.

mikell

Game cam site

Edited to ad Cuddeback link

[edit on 11-4-2008 by mikellmikell]

It would appear there are 3 models of the Cuddeback camera:

Cuddeback™ Excite Game Camera:

Cuddeback™ performance without all the extras. Ideal for the hunter who wants multiple cameras to scout several different spots. This 2 megapixel color camera comes complete with night strobe flash with a 40' range, EZ mode operation with intuitive LCD/keypad operation, fast 3/4-second trigger speed, 24-hour operation, 1-minute to 1-hour delays, and a date/time stamp on every image. Easy access to your compact flash card (not included). Compact size is easy to carry and convenient for use in multiple locations. Theft-resistant design.
Cuddeback Excite Game Camera features:

2 megapixel resolution
Night strobe flash
40' flash range
EZ operation mode
fast 3/4 second trigger
Compact flash card storage for easy transfer to home PC
Theft resistant design

Cuddeback™ Expert Game Camera

More compact design. This 3 megapixel color camera come complete with night strobe flash with a 60' range. Compact Flash card not included. Theft-resistant design. User name/phone number programming.
Features:

EZ Mode operation with intuitive LCD/keypad operation
3/4-second trigger speed
24-hour operation
Advanced mode, TheftStop™ password protection
Heat-in-motion sensitivity adjustment
Time-lapse mode
Time-of-day operation
10- to 60-second daytime video clips
1-minute to 1-hour delays
Date/time stamp on every image
Cuddebacks are theft-resistant!
Attach the Cuddeback to any tree from the inside with a screw. A padlock (not included) secures your Cuddeback by eliminating access to the screw. Designed to hide the padlock shackle, making it difficult to cut.

Cuddeback™ NO Flash Game Camera

The perfect scouting camera for hunters who believe traditional flashes scare deer. Takes 3 megapixel images during the day and 1.3 infrared megapixels at night. Invisible flash has a 30' range. Compact Flash card not included. Theft-resistant design. User name/phone number programming.
Features:

EZ mode with intuitive LCD/keypad operation
3/4-second trigger speed
24-hour operation
Advanced mode, TheftStop™ password protection
Heat-in-motion sensitivity adjustment
Time lapse mode
Time-of-day operation
10- to 60-second daytime video clips
1-minute to 1-hour delays
Date/time stamp on every image

I am not sure which one was used in this case.

reply to post by mikellmikell


Thanks mikellmikell,

I should have waited another few minutes and your link would have saved me lookin up a supplier to find the details on these cameras.

So because it looks like the setup is adjustable then the exif and other variables would be useful.

As others have said, its nothing but bugs flying in front of the camera which has an exposure which is too long.

If they changed the exposure time, then they would clearly see what the objects are.

reply to post by Flyer

I'm not sure what it is, but I don't think it's bugs. I live up north where there are TONS of bugs flying around in the woods, and if the game cams takes pictures of bugs, they'd fill up rather quickly and would defeat the purpose of it entirely. I work with a guy who has about 6 of these set up, he's always showing me pictures of deer, bear and various other animals, but never any bugs, and he flips through all the images on the card.

I'm going with the bugs wings theory. Although it does seem strange. However a large dragonfly is a possibility. As was stated earlier, in the animated shots you can spot a good few similar, smaller objects.

reply to post by Ecidemon


Do a search on here for rods, they look exactly the same except they are in the daytime.

The flapping of the wing produces exactly the same effect.

The fact that one of these things cant be more than a few feet from the camera proves it.

The picture look great. However I have to suspect Bob Coine since he ownes Heartland Studios. Also when he tell his story the first thing he does is a promo for his company. Just seems a little fishy

I live 5 minutes from Sarcoxie. This is really cool. I saw something in February that was green and hovered. I thought it was a star then looked again and it zoomed off leaving a green trail(Tron like)



[edit on 11-4-2008 by Optix]

I have had a reply to my email to Bob Coine the contents of which is below :

"Thank you for taking the time to contact us regarding the photos, and the
assistance in expanding the opportunity for explanations and/or similar
events.

I have attached original files for your analysis. Should you have any luck
with solid additional info, please keep me posted. Also please post our
website for contact info. www.Heartlandillinois.com

As for your exif data question, I don't believe so. My cameras are a
different brand than the MO cams, and other than resolution no data is
given for mine. However game cameras shutter speed is fast, as flash
photos do not show blur on moving game.

I would appreciate your help with any attempt to locate similar pics or
info relative to my IL pics also.

Thank you again,

Bob"

So there you go no exif data but some slightly better resolution images.

I would like to thank Bob for responding to my email and supplying the images so promptly.

The images are available here :

i187.photobucket.com...

i187.photobucket.com...

i187.photobucket.com...

i187.photobucket.com...

i187.photobucket.com...

i187.photobucket.com...

i187.photobucket.com...

i187.photobucket.com...

i187.photobucket.com...

i187.photobucket.com...

i187.photobucket.com...

i187.photobucket.com...

Ok I have just run the first image through jpeg snoop to extract the EXIF data and here is the first part :

EXIF IFD0 @ Absolute x[00000014]
Dir Length = x[0008]
[Make ] = C1000
[Model ] = CUDDEBACK
[XResolution ] = 72/1
[YResolution ] = 72/1
[DateTime ] = 2007:11:05 21:34:00
[ResolutionUnit ] = 2
[YCbCrPositioning ] = 2
[ExifOffset ] = x00A6
Offset to Next IFD = [00000162]

EXIF IFD1 @ Absolute x[0000016E]
Dir Length = x[0003]
[Compression ] = 6
[JpegIFOffset ] = 396
[JpegIFByteCount ] = 2912
Offset to Next IFD = [00000000]

EXIF SubIFD @ Absolute x[000000B2]
Dir Length = x[000A]
[ExifVersion ] = x30303230
[ComponentConfiguration ] = x00030201
[FlashPixVersion ] = x30303130
[ColorSpace ] = 1
[ExifImageWidth ] = 1280
[ExifImageHeight ] = 1024
[DateTimeOriginal ] = 2007:11:05 21:34:00
[DateTimeDigitized ] = 2007:11:05 21:34:00
[UserComment ] = 1 ATTEMPT G-1
[ShutterSpeedValue ] = 3222855/809120088

This indicates to me that this image has not been through any kind of image editing software so is probably the original image.

The date and time match the date stamp.

I have done this with every one and they all show the same make and model, ie CUDDEBACK and C1000

Interesting thread I did some level changes to the first pic on i187. photobucket.com and see that the object is in fact in front iof the tree line. Measuring the distance from camera to tree line using the leaves as scale I surmise that the object is 15-20 foot away and is about 3 foot in size. I Dont buy the slow exposure idea, reasons : the object is not totally paralel to the ground so if a slow shutter speed and bugs were the cause, the object would be blurred vertically as well as horizontally. Hope you take my meaning.

I'm now quite suspect of this and the previous event. Two anomalies photographed? I would need some heavy convincing at this point to believe it happened more than once.

Originally posted by want2believe
The picture look great. However I have to suspect Bob Coine since he ownes Heartland Studios. Also when he tell his story the first thing he does is a promo for his company. Just seems a little fishy

Upon the receipt of the images I invited Bob to participate here if he so wished and I would welcome that.

He has read the posts so far and was impressed with internos's analysis, regarding your concern want2believe he has asked me to post his response that was received in an email to myself.

What this person may not realize is that I have produced all my DVDs in
the series without sponsors, allowing me to educate fellow hunters & land
managers with real information without an editorial slant (not very common
these days in ANY field). I did not set out to find strange images on my
cameras in order to promote my business, but rather to census my deer
herd. If in the process of asking the public to help me understand what
these pictures are, or caused by I builds awareness of my business, I see
nothing wrong with that at all.

That said, I appreciate his healthy skepticism and share it as well! Feel
free to put up my response if you'd like.

Thank you again for the help!

Bob

Originally posted by Frith
I'm now quite suspect of this and the previous event. Two anomalies photographed? I would need some heavy convincing at this point to believe it happened more than once.

If you don't know what something is, or what is causing it, then the fact that it happened twice in the same location is just another piece of the puzzle. Since the pictures, and the reason for them in the first place, seems sound, the repeat appearance is not, IMO, a reason to be skeptical. For all we know now, this could be some natural event.

You're reacting like Old Faithful is a hoax because it's faithful.

Flying bugs, or some how reflective light off a dew ridden spider web....

I can tell you, being someone working in the scouting cam industry, that Cuddeback cameras utilize a passive infrared sensor. This means in in order to be triggered they need not only motion, but heated motion. Generally, animals (birds, bugs, etc.) 14lbs and under don't not set it off as they give off very little to no heat signature whatsoever. This object had to be giving off some type of heat in order for the cam to take pics.

[edit on 11-4-2008 by rivos]

[edit on 11-4-2008 by rivos]

[edit on 11-4-2008 by rivos]

and yet once again the "fuzzy light" photos waste time for the experts here.it seems pointless to debate the mabeys of the "fuzzy light" photos. don't get me wrong you guys are great researchers and it does keep me coming back, because of the knowledge base of the members. i just wish the photos were as clear as the answers for what this and that are in the photos. oh yeah 1 more thing how do i put a signature on here?

Originally posted by Nohup
It's funny how there are little reflections or flares of the lights also shown in the ground and in the leaves. Which I guess could indicate something, although I don't know exactly what.

These automatic cameras are quite the deal, huh? Glad somebody was able to figure out a decent system for that. UFOs, Bigfoot, naked people traipsing through the woods. Good stuff.

It would indicate the source is emitting light as that's probably a lense reflection of the same object. Apart from fireflys what else can float like that and emit light with the same length 'object' in each exposure? I don't like over in the states so not sure...

edit: the closeups look like similar to the anomoly in google sky that was posted this week.

[edit on 11-4-2008 by GhostR1der]

[edit on 11-4-2008 by GhostR1der]