UK Man Has Photographed Something Strange...

Originally posted by ZeroGhost

These creatures skip through our reality (narrow human bandwidth of perception) and can be caught by non-conscious mechanisms like cameras and video surveillance systems.

When you look at the whole of the light spectrum versus what our senses can perceive ( heat, "visible" light and sound ) I think it safe to say we miss more than we see.

Heck, we are still finding new life forms on Earth, in this age of extinctions... We are only beginning to scope the Universe around us with tools that allow to "see" what our senses can't. We should NOT be surprised to discover new finds, as exotic as they may be.

To be close minded is like not using the tools at your disposal...

I'm skeptic about this image, but experience has proven me wrong at what was first perceived as false. It's all in the details. And the details of the details. And that takes time to analyze.

Pretty cool, in a faked sense I guess...as it seemed propped against the wall and possibly a metal, or plaster looking statue. I'm not fully dismissing but...
I have a latex bendable legs and arms alien, about the size of the one shown, which I propped up on the lawn(and not against a wall!) and took a picture during the night with a light beam to show it. This capture reminds me a lot of the faked alien picture taken for fun. Which I'll see if I have a copy of for comparison.

reply to post by ElectricUniverse


Do you mean that you think that it is a statue that could have been executed by a 12 year old? Or do you think that the photo was altered by a 12 year old.
There is no proof that the image is faked. I see none anyhow. So you must agree that it is a photo of a real object but you think a 12 year old made it. OK. Talented 12 year old.

reply to post by dreamingawake


Please, please. Post this photo. It would be very helpful. Thank you for your input.

Just ran the pic through a photoshop detection process...the pic appears to be digitally edited.

Not 100% reliable though.

I must say that, if this is the real thing...

I feel even better about my ability to fight one if need be.

I just HAD to put this here, for those who say it is a hoax simply because it was posted on April First...

www.hisdates.com...

1578 William Harvey of England discovers blood circulation on this day in history.

The first line you will see... This is no joke!

Anyone can confirm what Cynicaleye posted?

Originally posted by Cynicaleye

Just ran the pic through a photoshop detection process...the pic appears to be digitally edited.

Not 100% reliable though.

All that means is that one of those pieces of software was used to modify the photo in some way, such as cropping or reducing the size of the photo. My camera is very high megapixel quality, and I have to reduce the size of all my pics before I put them on the net.

What we need is the debunking software like the OP mentioned. I ran my own, and couldn't find anything. It appears to be a real pic of *something*.

I find it strange how he calls it an "object". It just sounds like someone who has researched UFO related material, though I admit that it is not out of the question for something genuine to happen to someone who has delved in the paranormal. I just think that it is a slight signal of someone who is knowledgeable about this stuff, and therefore, much more likely to perform some kind of hoax.

I will also like to point out that there is no ROOM for the creature. It appears to ve embedded into the wall. Were it not for the front leg, I would say it was painted onto the wall itself. As it is, the front leg only barely protrudes, while the back leg apparently disappears into the wall itself.

I'm just sayin'

reply to post by Frater210


What I find interesting in this photo isn't the little creature that looks like its walking, but rather what is in front of it. If you zoom in and look at the picture, you will see what looks like either a board sitting vertically or a mirror that could be reflecting an image that is sitting off to the right. I am a very open minded person and have seen some strange things in my day that cannot be explained, but I always try to eliminate the obvious answers first. I am not a video or special effects pro, so I would say the best way for someone to determine if it is a hoax is to try and recreate the image in your own back yard and then study/compare the results. The photo looks cool though. One final question, how come the sunshine in the photo isn't the creature to cast a shadow that would normally result if it was standing in the sun.

reply to post by woghd


I pointed to the same thing in my first post. It seems to be partly inside the wall. That could account, IF real, for it going to a place where there is no hole because it would be kind of intangible...

reply to post by Cynicaleye


Actually, I don't see where that is a factor. The "footsteps" could be days old, depending on how hydrated the grass is. If dry, grass cannot re-stand rapidly and rebuild the cells to replace damage, they can stay compressed for days.

Such a factor needs some logical time indexing. We can only assume the conditions for these compressed grasses. I have seen species of grass that looks like this even without trampling. Arid origin grasses are less able to rebound without sufficient water.

An assumption could be the owner, thinking he is going to landscape anyway is saving water and has not watered. But that is one of the thousands of assumptions you can make. In a scientific model it is a foot note until data from the scene can be gotten.

Occam's Razor. If it is not a doctored photo, which we have no reason yet to believe has been modified, what are we seeing?

Other sharp thinkers here said it right. Exif Data, interviewing the home owner, photographer and any others present is the only sure way of getting this image to a solid photo we can then assess for its content.

ZG

reply to post by Frater210


Hi, thanks for your vote of confidence. I have around four decades in Forteana and three and a bit in various media.

Was just trying to assist the process, but after reading the rest, (your post gained 6 pages in my absence), I should have looked at the full frame as well.

Those footprints are, to me as well as others here, a rather telling feature, being aimed directly at our little buddy as they are.

Yes, I realize the photographer's a landscaper, but, seriously, one would think there'd be other tracks. One of my web clients is a landscaper, and they're always documenting their work. I am not thinking that that is what this is at the moment.

Indeed I get somewhat of an impression that it might be moving, but, having said that, digital cameras are not known for their ability to capture subtleties within the limited amount of pixels they have to deal with. Also a factor is the level of sophistication in the processing circuitry of the camera, dynamic range, color capture ability, stuff like that. Your mileage may vary, as they say...

Being a Fortean, though, and against all odds, I'll wait for the other pictures in the series and the EXIF data before my hand, currently poised precariously over the hoax bin, lets go it's grip.

Thanks for posting, it's been fun so far.

Peace,
Pixel

reply to post by Frater210


It's nice to know that you like the UK buddy and I mean that seriously, it's obvious you have an interest the country I live in for a variety of reasons which is great.

However, that aside, it doesn't change my opinion about your opinion on a little statue in a garden.

Originally posted by just_julie

Originally posted by ChildoftheAnnunaki
LOL


Well.... this photo screams fake.

More then likely one of them iphone apps where you can add thing to the original image?

I mean, why would you take pictures of a brick wall?

Because he is landscaping.

I don't know you, but whenever I "landscape" or clean up my dogs...droppings, I don't generally take photos of it. Especially something as unimpressive as that. Looks like a statue to me.

reply to post by woghd


I saw your post and thought I would test it, so I downloaded jpegsnoop and loaded in a picture that has never been edited, and it returned the exact same summary of having a high probability of being edited...

No offence but this is not an alien and it certainly is not a UFO.
Nothing to see here...

I do photo retouching and CGI and have professionally for 25 years. Retouching this, aside from the exif data loss, would be a bitch. Hiding artifacts from brushes or localized modifications would take time and be noticable from other photos from the same camera.

Each camera has it's own CCD's granular detail fingerprint. When you look at the pattern of the pixels they have caharacter that is unique to not only the CCD, but also processing programs interpreting the color and light data. Clone brush works, but unless you use a % of brush solidity you can see demarcations for the brush.

I saw the original and see no manipulation, but detail evaluation is yet to be determined.

By the way, can anyone articulate a motive? Why fake it? Just street cred that has people thinking you are strange? I don't see any motive except a guy that wants answers.

ZG

What was the original reason for taking this pic? Was it for a new photo book called Brick Walls in the UK or perhaps to illustrate when a lawn is in need of a good trimming?