ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » General Skepticism and The Paranormal
 

Notices


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags bigfoot

Reply
Old 5th June 2018, 06:50 AM   #1761
LTC8K6
Penultimate Amazing
 
LTC8K6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Directly under a deadly chemtrail
Posts: 19,961
Originally Posted by Axxman300 View Post
We get one more season on Animal Planet starting soon.
Do they find the Samsqanch this time?
__________________
What a fool believes, no wise man has the power to reason away. What seems to be, is always better than nothing.

2 prints, same midtarsal crock..., I mean break?
LTC8K6 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th June 2018, 07:05 AM   #1762
William Parcher
Show me the monkey!
 
William Parcher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 20,182
Originally Posted by kali1137 View Post
While I am no expert at all Native American traditions and stories, I am Iroquois and spent a lot of time with my Lakota friends. There are no stories that I was ever taught or am aware of about bigfoot or even anything like it. While we are good at spinning a yarn or two, all those stories were meant to teach a lesson, not to be taken literally. At no point did I believe that Deer Woman or coyote the trickster were out running about. I find most BF's laughable but exploiting his native background is sad at best and at worst, deeply offensive to native culture.
I think my writing confused you. Matt Moneymaker isn't claiming to be Native American. His proposed TV program will include two female police officers who are Native Americans. But the show might not happen.

Your Iroquois Nation does have an old legend which now lends itself to being about Bigfoot. It's the Ot-Ne-Yar-Heh, or "Stone Coat".

http://www.native-languages.org/stonecoat.htm


Lakota Nation also has a legend that is now being linked to Bigfoot. It's the Chiye-Tanka, or "Big Elder Brother".

http://www.native-languages.org/more...hiye-tanka.htm


You just haven't met any NA Bigfoot believers who insist that their ancestors were also seeing Bigfoot and they gave it a name.
__________________
Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot.
William Parcher is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th June 2018, 07:50 AM   #1763
kali1137
Muse
 
kali1137's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Purgatory, PA
Posts: 558
Originally Posted by William Parcher View Post
I think my writing confused you. Matt Moneymaker isn't claiming to be Native American. .
What a relief! Interesting links, thank you for those. I am going to read up on those as I am not familiar with them.
kali1137 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th June 2018, 04:14 PM   #1764
Northern Lights
Muse
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 747
Originally Posted by LTC8K6 View Post
What does he mean by "merge"?

Is he going to "stack" the copies in an attempt to get (create) more detail?
Here is what was said. Someone recently passed away, they said his name but I didn't recognize him. It wasn't Bindernagel or Hodgson, but apparently he was connected with the Bluff Creek crowd enough that in his belongings, he had a first generation copy of the PG film. Bill only recently obtained it and had only been able to scan a couple of frames.

This is the 4th first gen copy and Bill has all 4, so he is overlying each frame from all 4 copies basically stacking them on top getting better resolution with each copy. He showed the look back frame with all 4 copies stacked and it is a clearer version. I saw it posted either on Facebook or Twitter but can't find it now. I will keep looking and see if I can post a link.

It's pretty cool, but that's about it. It will be interesting to see when/if Bill gets a chance to do the whole thing. I think that episode was filmed in October, so no clue if he is making any progress or not.
__________________
Honorary Deluded Fool
Northern Lights is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th June 2018, 05:34 PM   #1765
eerok
Quixoticist
 
eerok's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 1,629
Originally Posted by Northern Lights View Post
This is the 4th first gen copy and Bill has all 4, so he is overlying each frame from all 4 copies basically stacking them on top getting better resolution with each copy.
I was a photographer at one time, and this is not possible.
__________________
"Every saint has a past and every sinner has a future." - Oscar Wilde
eerok is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th June 2018, 05:55 PM   #1766
William Parcher
Show me the monkey!
 
William Parcher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 20,182
Originally Posted by eerok View Post
I was a photographer at one time, and this is not possible.
My guess is that he digitally scans the celluloid frames and then digitally "stacks" the scans.
__________________
Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot.
William Parcher is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th June 2018, 06:55 PM   #1767
Squatchy McSquatch
Thinker
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Canada
Posts: 181
Originally Posted by GT/CS View Post
Munns was on Finding Bigfoot talking about how he’s merging four copies of the PGF into one super copy.
He was also on BFF last week with the usual 'Munns needs funds' speech so we all know how this will end.

It's a Beckjord copy, btw.

Eric Beckjord. An outright looneytune RIP

Last edited by Squatchy McSquatch; 5th June 2018 at 06:58 PM.
Squatchy McSquatch is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th June 2018, 07:15 PM   #1768
William Parcher
Show me the monkey!
 
William Parcher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 20,182
Oh the Beckjord copy. He used to offer it for sale for a million dollars. Certainly was one of the most colorful JREF members. I wonder how it made its way to Munns.
__________________
Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot.
William Parcher is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th June 2018, 08:19 AM   #1769
eerok
Quixoticist
 
eerok's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 1,629
Originally Posted by William Parcher View Post
My guess is that he digitally scans the celluloid frames and then digitally "stacks" the scans.
That still doesn't make sense, because these are supposed to be copies from the same master. Quality between copies can vary due to various factors, especially storage conditions and vagaries in processing, but to get the best result, one would simply examine each frame and pick the best of the four.

The only possible "new information" one could gain from one copy over another would be artifacts introduced uniquely to that copy via aging or processing.

In any case, this "stacking" business sounds like utter BS to me.
__________________
"Every saint has a past and every sinner has a future." - Oscar Wilde
eerok is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th June 2018, 10:08 AM   #1770
Squatchy McSquatch
Thinker
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Canada
Posts: 181
Originally Posted by William Parcher View Post
Oh the Beckjord copy. He used to offer it for sale for a million dollars. Certainly was one of the most colorful JREF members. I wonder how it made its way to Munns.
Parcher I can answer that. See rules 1 & 4 of the golden rules of plumbing (I'm a plumber's son):

1) S*** runs downhill
2) Payday is Friday
3) Never lick your fingers
4) Every a****** is a potential customer
Squatchy McSquatch is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th June 2018, 12:53 PM   #1771
LTC8K6
Penultimate Amazing
 
LTC8K6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Directly under a deadly chemtrail
Posts: 19,961
Originally Posted by eerok View Post
That still doesn't make sense, because these are supposed to be copies from the same master. Quality between copies can vary due to various factors, especially storage conditions and vagaries in processing, but to get the best result, one would simply examine each frame and pick the best of the four.

The only possible "new information" one could gain from one copy over another would be artifacts introduced uniquely to that copy via aging or processing.

In any case, this "stacking" business sounds like utter BS to me.
Right, they are not different images of the same thing. They are the same images, already copied one or more times. There is no extra data in them.

If someone had been standing next to Roger, and had filmed some of the same scenes from approximately the same spot, you could theoretically stack those two sets of images and get some benefit.

The police have had success reading unreadable license plates by stacking sequential frames of a video. But those are different images of the same thing.
__________________
What a fool believes, no wise man has the power to reason away. What seems to be, is always better than nothing.

2 prints, same midtarsal crock..., I mean break?
LTC8K6 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th June 2018, 05:36 AM   #1772
William Parcher
Show me the monkey!
 
William Parcher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 20,182
What I do is take all the various lies told by Patterson and Gimlin and stack them. What you then get is One Big Fat Lie which comes into sharp resolution.
__________________
Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot.
William Parcher is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th June 2018, 07:52 AM   #1773
carlitos
"más divertido"
 
carlitos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 18,005
Originally Posted by Northern Lights View Post
This is the 4th first gen copy and Bill has all 4, so he is overlying each frame from all 4 copies basically stacking them on top getting better resolution introducing more artifacts and noise with each copy.
Fixed.
carlitos is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th June 2018, 12:43 PM   #1774
rockinkt
Graduate Poster
 
rockinkt's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 1,166
Originally Posted by eerok View Post
That still doesn't make sense, because these are supposed to be copies from the same master. Quality between copies can vary due to various factors, especially storage conditions and vagaries in processing, but to get the best result, one would simply examine each frame and pick the best of the four.

The only possible "new information" one could gain from one copy over another would be artifacts introduced uniquely to that copy via aging or processing.

In any case, this "stacking" business sounds like utter BS to me.
You are right. However, facts do not enter into the equation.
Munns doesn't care about facts or the truth. It's all about exploiting the gullible and getting money/fame/flatulence or whatever rocks his boat.
__________________
"Townes Van Zandt is the best songwriter in the whole world and I'll stand on Bob Dylan's coffee table in my cowboy boots and say that." Steve Earle

"I've met Bob Dylan's bodyguards and if Steve Earle thinks he can stand on Bob Dylan's coffee table, he's sadly mistaken." Townes Van Zandt
rockinkt is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th June 2018, 01:08 PM   #1775
Joecool
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 2,161
https://www.animalplanet.com/tv-show...h-for-the-yeti

I recently saw a mini series about a search for the Yeti. They had cameras and all kinds of technology including drones. They even came across a Monastery that allegedly had a Yeti scalp.

Using environmental DNA testing, they tested foot prints, hair, scat and other materials that they though might be from a Yeti.

The hair turned out to be human. The scat came from goats. The foot prints were from brown bears and the scalp and a hair tested for DNA turned out to be inconclusive. The field cameras showed what appeared to be a bear walking past it.

The conclusion made by the researchers was that most bigfoot/yeti sightings are likely to be bears although they could not conclusively rule out the possibility that a yeti exists.
Joecool is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th June 2018, 04:06 AM   #1776
Northern Lights
Muse
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 747
Originally Posted by Northern Lights View Post
I saw it posted either on Facebook or Twitter but can't find it now. I will keep looking and see if I can post a link.
Found it. Here it the link: https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?f...type=3&theater
__________________
Honorary Deluded Fool
Northern Lights is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th June 2018, 06:34 AM   #1777
eerok
Quixoticist
 
eerok's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 1,629
Originally Posted by Northern Lights View Post
"They stacked four prints of the original film (which is missing) and digitally filtered out "noise" for a cleaner image."

As already discussed, they won't get any better quality than the best-produced/best-preserved frame of the four identical copies. Cleaning it up digitally will make it appear cleaner. I don't see the big deal.

Also as already discussed, it's just a guy in a monkey suit, so who cares?
__________________
"Every saint has a past and every sinner has a future." - Oscar Wilde
eerok is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th June 2018, 11:54 AM   #1778
HarryHenderson
Graduate Poster
 
HarryHenderson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: All up in your business!
Posts: 1,755
Originally Posted by eerok View Post
...Also as already discussed, it's just a guy in a monkey suit, so who cares?
Munns apparently.

They "digitally filtered out 'noise' for a cleaner image." I'm not sure they know what noise is or what a filter does, but hey we don't have to sweat it anymore as all that "noise" that has hindered the investigation for 50 years has finally been filtered out by, yep, a "filter". I mean, just look at how amazing that new "enhanced image" that's been Filtered™ is. It's almost as clear as the old ones. We won't get fooled again.
HarryHenderson is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th June 2018, 10:32 AM   #1779
SOdhner
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Arizona
Posts: 1,520
Originally Posted by eerok View Post
"They stacked four prints of the original film (which is missing) and digitally filtered out "noise" for a cleaner image."

As already discussed, they won't get any better quality than the best-produced/best-preserved frame of the four identical copies.
If the four were all copied from the same source (Original -> Copy 1; Original -> Copy 2; Original -> Copy 3; Original -> Copy 4), you could end up with an image that's cleaner than any of the four. If they were copied from each other (Original -> Copy 1 -> Copy 2 -> Copy 3 -> Copy 4) then you're not going to do better than just looking at that first copy.
SOdhner is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th June 2018, 04:37 PM   #1780
HarryHenderson
Graduate Poster
 
HarryHenderson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: All up in your business!
Posts: 1,755
Originally Posted by SOdhner View Post
If the four were all copied from the same source (Original -> Copy 1; Original -> Copy 2; Original -> Copy 3; Original -> Copy 4), you could end up with an image that's cleaner than any of the four. If they were copied from each other (Original -> Copy 1 -> Copy 2 -> Copy 3 -> Copy 4) then you're not going to do better than just looking at that first copy.
Maybe I'm not understanding the premise of "cleaner". Seems to me putting four 1st generation copies of the exact same thing together will not make the final image "cleaner", and in fact it would do nothing but muddy the water further. That's an additive process so any flaw in one would theoretically become a flaw in the combined, yet an area of seeming perfection in one could be overlooked (as such) in the combined because of the imperfections of the three others (drowning it out). Even if all four were virtually perfect copies of an original, one little imperfection on one only "blurs" the lines of the combined.

Keeping in mind "imperfection" means anything all the way down to the microscopic, say the outline (of the suit) is in exactly the same place on two of them, but in two different places on the other two, which one is the correct one? And is that final image of all four really going to be cleaner under those conditions? How could it? Or say a film artifact on one gets put into the whole, how's that's making it cleaner? The entire notion of putting four images together (that all came from the same mold no less) to form a fifth supposedly "cleaner" image is approaching BS in my opinion. It just doesn't follow.

And the question really isn't what version of the unknown copies are they comparing it against, it's why the **** do they care anymore given they (apparently) have at least one first generation copy of the entire filmstrip in their possession? Why not eliminate the middleman and go directly to studying it by itself and shutting the **** up?! The picture's not going to become magically "cleaner" because of their wishful thinking. Munns so needs to quit having these delusions of grandeur where he always ends up being the hero who finds the lost keys to the kingdom.
HarryHenderson is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th June 2018, 05:24 PM   #1781
GT/CS
Illuminator
 
GT/CS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Inland NW
Posts: 4,841
I'm pretty sure the only reason Munns' end result is 'cleaner' is because he's cleaning it up with Photoshop.
__________________
Normal in a weird way.
GT/CS is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th June 2018, 06:48 PM   #1782
Squatchy McSquatch
Thinker
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Canada
Posts: 181
Munns is promising a 4K resolution view of the PGF.

With proper funding of course, a team of monkeys analysts and Bill at the helm.
Squatchy McSquatch is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th June 2018, 07:35 PM   #1783
Skeptical Greg
Agave Wine Connoisseur
 
Skeptical Greg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Just past ' Resume Speed ' .
Posts: 15,057
Last I heard, you still can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear..
__________________
" What if the Hokey Pokey is what it's all about? "

Prove your computer is not a wimp ! Join Team 13232 !
Skeptical Greg is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th June 2018, 11:19 PM   #1784
LTC8K6
Penultimate Amazing
 
LTC8K6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Directly under a deadly chemtrail
Posts: 19,961
Originally Posted by SOdhner View Post
If the four were all copied from the same source (Original -> Copy 1; Original -> Copy 2; Original -> Copy 3; Original -> Copy 4), you could end up with an image that's cleaner than any of the four. If they were copied from each other (Original -> Copy 1 -> Copy 2 -> Copy 3 -> Copy 4) then you're not going to do better than just looking at that first copy.
Have you seen the PGF?
__________________
What a fool believes, no wise man has the power to reason away. What seems to be, is always better than nothing.

2 prints, same midtarsal crock..., I mean break?
LTC8K6 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th June 2018, 06:00 AM   #1785
Cervelo
Graduate Poster
 
Cervelo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 1,439
From what little I've read about this process, this is going to get very expensive. Bills going to first have to invent a time machine in order to get multiple pics of Patty for this process to work. Of course at that point his head will explode when he sees the truth...but oh well.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Focus_stacking
Unless I'm missing something this process only works with multiple photos taken at the same time at different focal points, merge photos and that creates an image that is 'in focus' throughout the photo.
So based on what I know at this point, anything he produces will be a complete fantasy fabrication, but of course why would this be any different than anything else that footers have produced?
Cervelo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th June 2018, 12:27 PM   #1786
SOdhner
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Arizona
Posts: 1,520
Originally Posted by HarryHenderson View Post
Seems to me putting four 1st generation copies of the exact same thing together will not make the final image "cleaner", and in fact it would do nothing but muddy the water further. That's an additive process so any flaw in one would theoretically become a flaw in the combined, yet an area of seeming perfection in one could be overlooked (as such) in the combined because of the imperfections of the three others (drowning it out).
No, that's not how this kind of thing works. It's more like this:

□he □u□ck brow□ fo□ ju□□s over □he □azy □□g
T□e qui□k bro□n fox □ump□ ov□□ t□e la□□ d□g
□h□ quic□ b□own □ox j□mps □ver th□ laz□ do□
The □□ick □rown f□□ ju□ps □ve□ □he lazy □og

Because the errors are going to be different each time but the orignal is the same, you can look for anything that matches. Now obviously with video it's way way harder than text and you need actual professionals using some serious tools to do it right. Also obviously you're never going to get it perfect and even if it did you can't eliminate any errors that were in the original.

And for the record, I'm not saying this isn't a huge waste of time and energy or that it will work in this specific case or anything like that. I'm just saying that, in theory, this process absolutely can work.
SOdhner is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th June 2018, 12:33 PM   #1787
eerok
Quixoticist
 
eerok's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 1,629
Originally Posted by GT/CS View Post
I'm pretty sure the only reason Munns' end result is 'cleaner' is because he's cleaning it up with Photoshop.
That's what I think, too.
__________________
"Every saint has a past and every sinner has a future." - Oscar Wilde
eerok is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th June 2018, 01:44 PM   #1788
HarryHenderson
Graduate Poster
 
HarryHenderson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: All up in your business!
Posts: 1,755
Originally Posted by SOdhner View Post
No, that's not how this kind of thing works. It's more like this:

□he □u□ck brow□ fo□ ju□□s over □he □azy □□g
T□e qui□k bro□n fox □ump□ ov□□ t□e la□□ d□g
□h□ quic□ b□own □ox j□mps □ver th□ laz□ do□
The □□ick □rown f□□ ju□ps □ve□ □he lazy □og

Because the errors are going to be different each time but the orignal is the same, you can look for anything that matches. Now obviously with video it's way way harder than text and you need actual professionals using some serious tools to do it right. Also obviously you're never going to get it perfect and even if it did you can't eliminate any errors that were in the original.

And for the record, I'm not saying this isn't a huge waste of time and energy or that it will work in this specific case or anything like that. I'm just saying that, in theory, this process absolutely can work.
Okay, fair enough. Though I would not call that type of process 'physically overlaying 4 images on each other to make a combined 5th image', which is what I thought Munns was claiming to do and is SPECIFICALLY what I was objecting to. What you're saying is it's more an analysis of the individual images and comparing them individually to a known master.

Which is where my second set of questions came in (directed at "them"), if they now have a "master", who the **** cares anymore what the other later generation copies are showing? Worse, the differences between that master and even 2nd generation copies would be so minimal anyway as to essentially not exist to the average Bigfooter playing along at home. And none of it in any way changes the fact there is no Bigfoot either. They're like a bunch of bad actors faking masturbation scenes. "Here's how I do it." "CUT!"
HarryHenderson is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th June 2018, 02:00 PM   #1789
Cervelo
Graduate Poster
 
Cervelo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 1,439
Originally Posted by SOdhner View Post
No, that's not how this kind of thing works. It's more like this:

□he □u□ck brow□ fo□ ju□□s over □he □azy □□g
T□e qui□k bro□n fox □ump□ ov□□ t□e la□□ d□g
□h□ quic□ b□own □ox j□mps □ver th□ laz□ do□
The □□ick □rown f□□ ju□ps □ve□ □he lazy □og

Because the errors are going to be different each time but the orignal is the same, you can look for anything that matches. Now obviously with video it's way way harder than text and you need actual professionals using some serious tools to do it right. Also obviously you're never going to get it perfect and even if it did you can't eliminate any errors that were in the original.

And for the record, I'm not saying this isn't a huge waste of time and energy or that it will work in this specific case or anything like that. I'm just saying that, in theory, this process absolutely can work.
While I kinda follow your point....explain how different focal points are achieved when there's only one original and all others are copies of that original?
Cervelo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th June 2018, 02:31 PM   #1790
SOdhner
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Arizona
Posts: 1,520
Originally Posted by Cervelo View Post
While I kinda follow your point....explain how different focal points are achieved when there's only one original and all others are copies of that original?
The idea, if I understand correctly (and I might not because I don't actually care enough to read up on the specific details of Bigfoot videos) is that they don't have the original but they do have four imperfect copies of it.

So this process could compare the copies to each other in order to remove imperfections and arrive at something way closer to the original in quality.

Originally Posted by HarryHenderson View Post
Though I would not call that type of process 'physically overlaying 4 images on each other to make a combined 5th image', which is what I thought Munns was claiming to do and is SPECIFICALLY what I was objecting to. What you're saying is it's more an analysis of the individual images and comparing them individually to a known master.
Not to a known master, to each other. Picture it with an individual image, a single frame of a film. (Disclaimer: this still isn't literally how it works, these are all just non-technical illustrations to make a point.) Layer all four over each other and reduce opacity of each layer to 25%. Now all the pixels they have in common are at 100% opacity, and the errors that were only in one version kinda fade away because they're only at 25%.
SOdhner is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th June 2018, 02:44 PM   #1791
Cervelo
Graduate Poster
 
Cervelo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 1,439
Originally Posted by SOdhner View Post
The idea, if I understand correctly (and I might not because I don't actually care enough to read up on the specific details of Bigfoot videos) is that they don't have the original but they do have four imperfect copies of it.

So this process could compare the copies to each other in order to remove imperfections and arrive at something way closer to the original in quality.



Not to a known master, to each other. Picture it with an individual image, a single frame of a film. (Disclaimer: this still isn't literally how it works, these are all just non-technical illustrations to make a point.) Layer all four over each other and reduce opacity of each layer to 25%. Now all the pixels they have in common are at 100% opacity, and the errors that were only in one version kinda fade away because they're only at 25%.
Hmmmm....maybe I'm missing something, as I understand the process one must have multiple focal points, hence multiple pics/vids that each have different points that the camera is focused on, for this process to render a clearer image, is that not the case?

There is only one orginal in this case and then copies of that orginal, hence only one focal point, comparing/overlaying copies to the original would certainly reveal artifacts, damage and such, but it certainly isn't going to bring the image into focus.

Last edited by Cervelo; 16th June 2018 at 02:59 PM.
Cervelo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th June 2018, 02:56 PM   #1792
SOdhner
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Arizona
Posts: 1,520
Originally Posted by Cervelo View Post
Hmmmm....maybe I'm missing something, as I understand the process one must have multiple focal points, hence multiple pics/vids that each have different points that the camera is focused on, for this process to render a clearer image, is that not the case?
I thought they were talking about using four different copies all made from the same (unavailable) original, not four different camera angles. I'm not sure how it would even work with different angles honestly, unless they were carefully set up to be used that way in the first place.
SOdhner is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th June 2018, 03:11 PM   #1793
Cervelo
Graduate Poster
 
Cervelo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 1,439
Originally Posted by SOdhner View Post
I thought they were talking about using four different copies all made from the same (unavailable) original, not four different camera angles. I'm not sure how it would even work with different angles honestly, unless they were carefully set up to be used that way in the first place.
You got it right, it's copies of the original which all have the same focal point of a moving target and the photographer is moving as well.
Cervelo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th June 2018, 03:12 PM   #1794
eerok
Quixoticist
 
eerok's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 1,629
Originally Posted by HarryHenderson View Post
Okay, fair enough. Though I would not call that type of process 'physically overlaying 4 images on each other to make a combined 5th image', which is what I thought Munns was claiming to do and is SPECIFICALLY what I was objecting to. What you're saying is it's more an analysis of the individual images and comparing them individually to a known master.
Yeah, the whole "stacking" thing is questionable. If the four copies were digitized and an algorithm used that took out possible artifacts through comparison and guesswork, it could look "cleaner." It wouldn't necessarily produce any improvement, since there's always a chance that removing purported noise could actually remove legit detail uniquely preserved in a better copy.

Originally Posted by HarryHenderson View Post
Which is where my second set of questions came in (directed at "them"), if they now have a "master", who the **** cares anymore what the other later generation copies are showing? Worse, the differences between that master and even 2nd generation copies would be so minimal anyway as to essentially not exist to the average Bigfooter playing along at home. And none of it in any way changes the fact there is no Bigfoot either. They're like a bunch of bad actors faking masturbation scenes. "Here's how I do it." "CUT!"
Do they really have an original print of the film? Then what's the point of all this other crap?
__________________
"Every saint has a past and every sinner has a future." - Oscar Wilde
eerok is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th June 2018, 11:34 AM   #1795
Squatchy McSquatch
Thinker
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Canada
Posts: 181
No they don’t have an original print. The original has been lost/missing/stolen since the late 80s iirc. It’s also my understanding that the original had become very heavily scratched.
Squatchy McSquatch is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th June 2018, 08:47 PM   #1796
DennyT
Master Poster
 
DennyT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Michigan
Posts: 2,971
Originally Posted by eerok View Post
I was a photographer at one time, and this is not possible.
I am QUITE certain that Bill does not have 4 1st gen copies.
DennyT is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th June 2018, 11:58 AM   #1797
William Parcher
Show me the monkey!
 
William Parcher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 20,182
Originally Posted by Squatchy McSquatch View Post
Munns is promising a 4K resolution view of the PGF.
How is it expected that the viewing audience will see it in 4K?
__________________
Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot.
William Parcher is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th June 2018, 03:18 PM   #1798
HarryHenderson
Graduate Poster
 
HarryHenderson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: All up in your business!
Posts: 1,755
Originally Posted by Northern Lights View Post
Here is what was said. Someone recently passed away, they said his name but I didn't recognize him [Beckjord]. It wasn't Bindernagel or Hodgson, but apparently he was connected with the Bluff Creek crowd enough that in his belongings, he had a first generation copy of the PG film. Bill only recently obtained it and had only been able to scan a couple of frames.

This is the 4th first gen copy and Bill has all 4, so he is overlying each frame from all 4 copies basically stacking them on top getting better resolution with each copy. He showed the look back frame with all 4 copies stacked and it is a clearer version...
Originally Posted by Squatchy McSquatch View Post
No they don’t have an original print. The original has been lost/missing/stolen since the late 80s iirc. It’s also my understanding that the original had become very heavily scratched.
I knew I wasn't dreaming all that up. There's definitely some confusion. As far as I've known going way back, there was the film in the camera (the original) from which Patterson initially made ONLY FOUR 'master' copies. These were the ones to be used to make any and all future copies. And of those initial four, Patterson had one, Dahinden had one, Green had one and Beckjord had one. Is that incorrect? Anyone?

And if in fact the frames or plates or whatever it is he's "comparing" aren't taken from only those four first gen copies or the original itself, what's the point? Almost comically, Munns has totally overlooked the notion that the PGF not being 4K is one of the reasons for its longevity. A supposed "clearer picture" would likely only serve to confirm to the fence sitters what's already well known to everyone else.
HarryHenderson is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th June 2018, 03:47 PM   #1799
Cervelo
Graduate Poster
 
Cervelo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 1,439
I'd suggest an internet search on the process Munns is talking about, maybe Bill needs to do alittle more as well. It doesn't really matter what version of the dude in a suit they use.

The stacking process is used to create a very clear picture that has multiple focal points, and the key is multiple focal points....as an example your sitting behind home plate and take a picture focused on the batter, then a second picture focused on the pitcher, then one focused on the centerfielder, then the crowd behind the players. These four pictures are then "stacked" to create one photo that renders a very clear photo incorporating the four different focal/focused points.

Can't see how this process would work with a film, but I can certainly see the opportunity to fabricate all sorts of new PGF breakthroughs, just as we've seen before.

Last edited by Cervelo; 18th June 2018 at 03:58 PM.
Cervelo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 08:49 AM   #1800
CORed
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Central City, Colorado, USA
Posts: 7,988
Originally Posted by William Parcher View Post
How is it expected that the viewing audience will see it in 4K?
A blurry image at 4k will still be blurry. I think Roger intentionally made it blurry, so the suit wouldn't be too obvious.
CORed is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » General Skepticism and The Paranormal

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:30 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.