Nahuel Huapi monster is back and shows his face. (PHOTO)

reply to post by liesnomore


Not so quick.....there are no visible shadows cast by the subjects in the photos I posted either. I'm confident those haven't been manipulated.

I'm trying to find the full size photograph, but until now nothing. I only found a little size version of it in a small Patagonian newspaper, but that's all. I mailed them to see if I they can provide it to me, but I'm still waiting. Until then, here it is. I don't think this would be much usefull, but is something, and I wanted to share it though.

reply to post by drock905


Agreed. Without something to check scale, there's no way to tell the size. Could be an unknown species, but may be the size of a teacup.

reply to post by MajesticJax


Hey MJ, I am with you on this one, I searched and searched till I was able to find the best or biggest quality shot of this on the internet. After examining the EXIF metadata on that picture, low and behold to my surprise, photoshop had been used in its creation. Now that in itself just says it was ran thru photoshop(maybe the creature had redeye and someone wanted to remove it) lol. Now as I got in closer around the eyes and mouth i found significant different types of noise, proving to me that some manipulation had taken place on the face, possible the whole upper half of the creature. So i say with the preponderance of the evidence that something has been altered with this photo, however without the real photo or having been there myself we can never say exactly how much of it is faked. However if you will accept my humble conclusion I would lean on the fact that this is a ficticious creature.

This is a cresting humpback whale that has been photoshopped....

To me, it's a breaching whale, and probably a humpback...

flickr.com...

Throw in some bad lighting/poor camera/poor photoshoping, and viola you have a lake monster..

Here's another of a breaching sperm whale...

flickr.com...

Originally posted by muzzleflash

you cant put your finger on it, and your "no photo expert" , but your so sure its faked eh?

i usually dont make brash assumptions of that level of ignorance but hey thats your choice lol

Well, you are assuming that I am wrong, and you are no photo expert either, so you DO make brash assumptions when you are in ignorance.

Besides, not being a photo expert doesnt mean I have no experience looking at creatures, rocks, logs and water. There are real visual problems with that photo that even someone who cannot tell you the technical photoshop reason for can see.

The eye are teeth are in sharper contrast than the rest of the photo. The lines on the chop in the water and on the rest of the object are blurrier. There is something amiss about how the eyes and teeth stand out in terms of light and shadow compared to the rest of the "face" area.

Not to mention the problems with a heretofore unphotographed reptilian creature, (the eye is clearly reptilian) that would have to breath air, (because reptiles do) and that would be coldblooded and thus you would expect to find this creature sunning itself regularly, (because reptiles do.)

You arent attacking all the people who are saying clearly this looks like and eel when it doesnt if you are familiar with eels. Eels arent reptiles and do not have reptilian eyes, read the whole thread, look at the pictures of eels people have posted.
(Lol you are one of the people claiming it looks like an eel. )


You dont need to be a photo expert to have your eyes look at something and then have your brain tell you it isnt adding up properly. You are likely able to look at a lifesize photo of a person and know it isnt real as well by the way the light hits the image and its lack of three dimensionality. Well, thats what the face looks like to me. The light it wrong, and the sharpness is wrong, it has the wrong kind of eye for a lake monster that lives below water all the time, and I dont need to be able to do the analysis of the pixels to see that.

Edit to add;

The term, after researching it, is ectothermic, not "coldblooded" as I had said. But even the most aquatic of aquatic reptiles, the sea snake, lies motionless at the surface to sun itself.

books.google.com... Er4bI&hl=en&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=2&ct=result



[edit on 7-1-2009 by Illusionsaregrander]

Perhaps we could throw in the previous pic(s) of the Nahuel Huapi monster for comparison (or rather laughs and giggles)?

Clearly, very few people are actually reading the posts in this thread. I would like to refer the readers to this post.

The resemblance to a "spy hopping" humpback whale is, in my opinion, remarkable.

reply to post by liesnomore


Well as a photographer you should know that shadows do not appear normally in either air or water and usually need an opaque surface plane to appear.
One thing that strikes me in this picture as a biology student is a brow ridge above the eye and a feature that seems to stick out to reflect the light source directly behind the eye which is anatomically similar to an upper portion (Condyle?) of the mandible (lower jaw) that articulates with the temporal bone. It is a feature that is evident particularly in alligator and crocodile skulls of today....but can someone with a larger biology background help me out with this?

reply to post by Peronemlin


I brought it into Photoshop and played with the filters and size and it is my opinion that this is a photoshopped picture.

There is too much blurriness around the creatures contact points with the water and the nose or top front of the creature was clipped a bit to make the bottom jaw stick out too much. The lighting seems to only be on the creature and the water around it and does not appear to reflect so intensely on any of the other waves that should have lighted highlights. The pattern of the creature's skin changes from front to back and top to bottom. Even taking refraction into account the portion of the creature underwater does not align nor is it big enough to be the same one as out of the water.

If I had to guess I would say this is a picture of a fish jumping out of the water that was caught just as the fish was back under the surface, and this thing was added to that picture.

reply to post by Peronemlin


This is obvious. Its a photoshopped whale. Bluewhale if my eyes recognised it.

I see neither eyes nor teeth.
What are you looking at?
It looks like a porpoise.

reply to post by soulcrusha


Similar life forms in similar situation develop similar physical attributes!

Its not a cresting humpback whale, but most likely a giant tortoise like the one down...and unless the area has giant tortoises, its a plausible that one was introduced into the area or it is photoshopped.

Originally posted by bvproductions


But, photo evidence is hard to come by...because anyone can photoshop an image these days.
Hard to say!

Not anyone. I dont know how to use photoshop, haha.

But anyways, it looks too smooth to be a log of some type but you dont see much of its lower body for it to be a definate yes. The thing looks amazing though, albiet not something you'd want swimming next to you.

Originally posted by Azazelus
To me, it's a breaching whale, and probably a humpback...

flickr.com...

Throw in some bad lighting/poor camera/poor photoshoping, and viola you have a lake monster..

Again.

Similar life forms in similar situation develop similar physical attributes!

reply to post by Peronemlin


dude thats totally fake unless he's made out of wood