93 Responses to “Bahia Horned Bipedal Beast Photo”

1. brineblank responds: August 9th, 2007 at 3:42 pm

   Looks like the creature has a different lighting reflection as compared to the rest of the items (think of how computer generated images on Sci-Fi network movies look as compared to the rest of the environment, although I don’t think this is computer generated but pulled from a different source). But the awkward posing (center of gravity) and the way the legs ‘merge’ into the mud looks like the creature was matted in from a different source pic.

2. greenmartian2007 responds: August 9th, 2007 at 3:44 pm

   Too far away, not enough detail.

   Looks like a person wearing a cat mask.

3. showme responds: August 9th, 2007 at 4:06 pm

   Very interesting photo. It doesn’t look altered (the reflection in the water seems to be consistent with the subject).

   Perhaps this is a local tribesman engaged in some sort of ritual, which includes a symbolic mask.

   What’s that he’s holding? It’s almost as if he is cradling a baby.

4. elfis responds: August 9th, 2007 at 4:08 pm

   Looks like one of Peter Jackson’s LOTR Goblins clutching a baby that has been placed in a mud bank on the shores of some Disney river adventure ride.

   SMiles

5. samguzman responds: August 9th, 2007 at 4:14 pm

   I think it is a fake. If you look at where the legs merge into the mud, you can see faintly that there appears to the outline of complete legs. It is almost as if someone pasted the whole “monster” on the photo, and then decided it looked too fake with the monset walking on water and so removed the legs. Here is an image of what I’m talking about.

   http://img75.imageshack.us/img75/5997/photoym9.png

6. Tobar responds: August 9th, 2007 at 4:36 pm

   Two possibilities here. One, it’s someone in a mask. Two, it’s an unusually shaped tree trunk.

7. chabuhi responds: August 9th, 2007 at 4:44 pm

   Blow it up in Photoshop … the creature does not appear to be original to the scene.

8. chabuhi responds: August 9th, 2007 at 4:48 pm

   It’s a person covered in mud.

9. windigo responds: August 9th, 2007 at 4:49 pm

   My initial supposition is that it is some type of scultpture or statue. The photo needs to be processed for better resolution.

10. chabuhi responds: August 9th, 2007 at 4:52 pm

    Correction: After reading the remainder of the post I would like to change my opinion to “It’s a child-molester covered in mud.”

11. Loren Coleman responds: August 9th, 2007 at 4:55 pm

    Yes, indeed, elfis, that is what was so familiar. It looks like a Lord of the Rings’ orc.

12. giantchaser responds: August 9th, 2007 at 4:58 pm

    Well, i’m not an expert, but i seem to think its real, because i almost think that I see a water spot that got on the lense and its part of the creature, if the picture was posted over the water spot, the spot wouldn’t be there. and the water reflection seems consistent, but the mud/leg merging seems odd.

13. TheGoodReverend responds: August 9th, 2007 at 4:59 pm

    Is it just me, or does the area immediately around and including the subject look a bit blurrier than the rest of the photo? If you divide the photo into nine imaginary rectangles, that center rectangle seems to be blurrier than the rest.

14. mauka responds: August 9th, 2007 at 5:09 pm

    At first it looked 100% fake, but as I looked it I noticed it was very very legit. It looks like a good picture. Could you see if the picture quality could be improved.

15. mauka responds: August 9th, 2007 at 5:10 pm

    Oh and its just you, or just me…

16. michaelm responds: August 9th, 2007 at 5:16 pm

    i like the local tribesman/ritual explanation…but who knows, maybe it is an orc that mistook the little girl for juicy hobbitses…

17. fmurphy1970 responds: August 9th, 2007 at 5:21 pm

    I once worked in Brazil for some time and visited Salvador de Bahia on the Bahia coast. One of the things that struck me about this area was the strength of the Macumba cult. Macumba is a mixture of voodoo and Roman Catholicism, and grew out of the slave culture of that area. (Salvador was a major slave trading port). I remember going into a store where a Macumba witchdoctor was offering his wares and selling various paraphenalia. There were masks in that shop that closely resemble the skelton like face in this photograph. These masks are aparently used uas part of Macumba ritual. I notice the creature/humanoid is carrying something that looks like a fish, perhaps part of a sacrificial ritual?
    In my opinion, it’s a Macumba witchdoctor.

18. giantchaser responds: August 9th, 2007 at 6:03 pm

    the mud did looked blurred around the object, a common sign of a fake, but i still lean towards the legit photo theory

19. Craig York responds: August 9th, 2007 at 6:17 pm

    Well, its a part of the world where nothin’ would surprise. The photo looks real enough to me, and
    while I can see the ‘orc’ comparison, I don’t think its
    a lift from LoTR. The reflection of the creature in the water is fairly exact to my eye-though maybe thats
    a snap in photoshop. I freely admit to being fairly
    ignorant of the higher forms of photo-manipulation.

    What is interesting to me is the high strangeness
    of the report. That the ‘attack’ consisted of trying
    to rub mud on the young woman is a detail just odd
    enough to make me wonder. I hope that Mr. McClaren
    will be able to provide more details of the story.

20. MattBille responds: August 9th, 2007 at 6:22 pm

    It’s leaning slightly backward, seemingly calm, while up to its knees in mud. I can’t make any sense of that pose. If the mud is really that soft and deep, it should be struggling to free itself.

21. Valen responds: August 9th, 2007 at 6:31 pm

    Horns or ears? It resembles descriptions of the dogmans (or for lack of a better term, werewolf) seen in the US. Also, are there any native legends of this type of creature?

22. Bob K. responds: August 9th, 2007 at 6:49 pm

    As Bugs Bunny used to say: “Gruesome, aint he?”

23. crypto-hunter465 responds: August 9th, 2007 at 7:03 pm

    first glance: OMG! An orc! second glance: a creature w/ horns and teeth walking(which might explain odd center of gravity?) through knee deep mud. looks 2 me legit…..

    Put another monster up on the Goblin Universe board.

    As showme and a few others have said, tribesmen?

    Legends? Folklore? If any please post.

24. cmgrace responds: August 9th, 2007 at 7:05 pm

    Wow freaky. It looks like the mouth is open as if screaming or something. I can’t tell whether fake or not. But I lean towards it being a real photo (as in not photoshopped.) The shadows and reflection in the water seem consistent with the rest of the pic. So maybe a guy in a mask as some of the others have said. The only thing is the legs seem stuck in the mud (the mouth being open as screaming would then make sense.) What is it holding though?

    How about the girl’s story? That must have been frightening for her if it really happened. I would love to hear more from the other witnesses to the supposed attack.

25. CrimsonFox79 responds: August 9th, 2007 at 7:44 pm

    samguzman, if someone pasted and then erased the legs though, there wouldnt still be an outline left. Erasing in photoshop is not like erasing on paper where traces of what was there before are left behind.

    Whether it’s real or fake, it’s pretty darn cool looking though!
    It looks more like a real photo than a photoshopped image- though someone could just easily be posing in some kind of costume.

26. DARHOP responds: August 9th, 2007 at 7:50 pm

    Look’s like the creature from the movie Jeepers Creepers minus it’s wings…

27. spock82 responds: August 9th, 2007 at 7:57 pm

    My first thought is that this is from the old TV movie Gargoyles. The creature looks vey much like the ones in that movie.

28. youcantryreachingme responds: August 9th, 2007 at 8:21 pm

    This thing attacked the girl? What, and then she ran away and decided to turn around and take a photo? Or did she take the photo and then somehow it got from where it was, knee-deep in mud, across the mudflats, through the water and managed to reach the girl?

    Oh - and it grabbed, her, covered her in mud, and she managed to get the camera out and not get a single blemish on the lens.

    Oh - and also - there are any number of other hoax photos on the web showing exactly the same concept - a humanoid figure near the water’s edge, sometimes drinking from hands and knees.

29. sschaper responds: August 9th, 2007 at 8:29 pm

    Still from The Island of Dr. Moreau? Statue sunk in the mud?

30. Darla KnD responds: August 9th, 2007 at 9:14 pm

    Looks like someone is playing in the mud and made horns out of their hair. It is the same color as the mud.

31. Bob Michaels responds: August 9th, 2007 at 9:20 pm

    Green creature from The “Black Lagoon”

32. Sunny responds: August 9th, 2007 at 10:32 pm

    Does anyone see where the tracks would as to how this (whatever it is) got to where it’s standing? If the mud is that soft, wouldn’t there be some sort of visible *something* to show where it came from?

33. mystery_man responds: August 9th, 2007 at 10:43 pm

    Well I’m comparing the account given to the photo we see and I have some questions. So where did the girl allegedly take this photo from? A boat in the river? That is what it looks like to me. Or was it another bank, in which case what was the tour group doing there? Was it the same girl who took this photo that was attacked? Was this taken before or after the thing attacked her? So did the thing drag her from a boat or come across the river to another bank from where she took this photo? Where were the other people from her tour group at the time? In my opinion, this photo’s vantage point just doesn’t jive with the rest of the story, and there are too many inconsistencies with the story itself to make me think this is anything other than a probable hoax.

34. Scarfe responds: August 9th, 2007 at 10:47 pm

    I don’t see any tracks indicating the subject walked to the area. Furthermore, I don’t see any legs from the knees down, suggesting to me that whatever this object is (if it is actually in the image and not photoshopped), it was planted there. Perhaps a statue of some kind. The skull looking design of the eyes and mouth also seem to suggest a mask or some kind of carving to me.

35. NightFlight responds: August 9th, 2007 at 11:01 pm

    Intriguing. There are tracks behind it to the left, looks as if it waddled to the waters edge. But it must be a ninja orc with the nun chucs (sp?) attached to its belt. Or maybe they be bolt cutters. ?

36. Ursawolf responds: August 9th, 2007 at 11:13 pm

    I scrolled through the comments here to see if anyone mentioned the 1972 TV movie Gargoyles–yes, Spock82 did bring it up. This photo instantly reminded me of the Bernie Casey character, the head gargoyle. The flick is out on DVD…guess I’ll have to rent it now.

37. Ursawolf responds: August 9th, 2007 at 11:19 pm

    Oops! Correction: Netflix doesn’t have Gargoyles and Amazon is selling used DVDs of it for for at least $60! Someone else will have to check whether this is a still taken from the movie. It was a pretty good little horror film as I recall, but then I was a whole lot younger in 1972.

38. hongo responds: August 9th, 2007 at 11:26 pm

    I’ve been reading this great great blog for years and acting pretty much like a lurker, but since things turned up brazilian style, I guess I feel the civic obligation to step in. I’m into cryptozoology and general forteana. Much like a considerable part of you guys, I feel the necessity to get updated quite frequently on local cases. Said that, I have NEVER heard about this particular case or horned bipedal creatures whatsoever.

    Considerations on the landscape where the picture was taken: although it surely looks like a typical Brazilian background, it could be part of any South American country with a coast line.

    I feel very suspicious about the veracity of the subject, if anyone cares.

    p.s.: sorry ’bout my english, I’ve learned it from marvel comics.

39. Jason P. responds: August 10th, 2007 at 12:29 am

    Gargoyles was my first thought, as well. Here are links to sites that show stills from the movie. You can definitely see the similarity between that film and the figure in the picture Loren posted:

    http://www.terrortrap.com/reviews/gargoyles/

    http://www.mondo-digital.com/gargoyles.html

    http://www.videosewer.com/Reviews/Gargoyles.htm

40. mrdark responds: August 10th, 2007 at 12:50 am

    My observations, for what they’re worth:

    Not a photoshop job or other manipulation. The story behind it is very specific. That leaves, logically, only a few possibilities.

    1. It’s a hoaxed photo, staged physically.
    2. It’s a hoaxed premise of an odd-looking photograph of unrelated circumstances.
    3. It’s a photo of something real, whether the story is 100% accurate or possibly dramatized by the frightened mind of an imaginative teenager.

    Staged? I doubt it. If you stage something, you tend to do it in either a rather intentionally garish way (such as the photo earlier on CM of a guy or statue in a suit, face on, supposed to be a bigfoot) or you get SO subtle that it’s clear you’re mucking things up trying to be realistic. This is a straight-on shot of…well, something humanoid…doing something odd…in an odd location. The face appears to be in distress, the body covered from head to toe in mud, and it’s sunk knee-deep in water or mud while cradling something in it’s arms. That’s a really, really bizarre staging for a hoax. Doesn’t mean it isn’t possible, but it does draw doubts on this possibility.

    How about #2? I’d love for this to be the case, but man that’s an odd photo to have just ‘happened’ via other circumstances. The details of the photo, what few are completely legible, seem to rule this out. Here are the details as I can tell via my very limited viewing:

    - The head is completely smooth. If it’s human, it’s freshly shaved or covered by latex or some sort of helmet. Considering the next detail, I’d say the latter, if it’s a hoax.
    - The ‘ears’ don’t resemble any ears I’ve seen, even in fiction. They do NOT resemble either the ears in Gargoyles from the 70’s or in the LotR movies. Look closely: the ridge of the right ear curves around to almost above the -eyebrow-. They’re more like fins than ears. The closest I could come to would be some of the headgear worn by Ming the Merciless from the 80’s version of Flash Gordon, or perhaps Merlin in Excalibur…but I don’t think either had such large, pronounced fins.
    -The face is clearly contorted in rage or sorrow, but I don’t think it varies -that- far from human proportions, unlike the truly monstrous Gargoyles and Orcs.
    -The arms appear to be bare at least from just above the elbow on down, though caked in mud. You can see musculature, and it appears to be identical to human. He could be completely topless, but again, is totally covered in thick river mud.
    -There is -some- anomalous mass below the left elbow, seemingly part of the back of him. Could be a backpack, some malformed (or at least non-human) anatomy, perhaps even (here we go down the rabbit hole) folded wings.
    - The two dangling objects could be tools on a belt, signifying intelligence…but they could also be part of what he’s holding. If you step back and look at that object, you may be able to ‘matrix’ in a small head, a dangling arm…which would make those objects two oddly long, dangling legs. A child? A child of completely inhuman proportions?

    Which leads us to option #3: that this might be a real, unidentified humanoid creature.

    As commenters above, I don’t like the story. The story doesn’t make sense on many levels. This frustrates me, because I’ve already thought of ten others that make a MUCH more convincing tale and would have me on Coast to Coast within 48 hours. The tale does NOT jibe with the photo, which really presses me to #1, no matter how unlikely it seems, or #2, which would make me VERY interested in what this is actually a photo of.

    Not to give the hoaxers any ideas, but what if this is a picture of something completely paranormal, but from a circumstance they can’t ‘fess up to? If the creature is cradling a dead young and crying in rage and anguish…what if the real source of the photo is a group or individual who was engaged in illegal activity and killed the youngling, thus unable to tell the truth behind it yet unable to sit on such a photograph. That might explain the terrible backstory.

    We’re in Blair Witch territory, folks. If it’s real, oh man, this is really BIG. If not, well, it’s an entertaining ride.

41. CrimsonFox79 responds: August 10th, 2007 at 1:29 am

    Whatever he/she is holding looks almost like it has a flipper. You see a round head, and then a triangular limb hanging down that looks like either flipper or a wing of some sort.

    Or it could just be flopped over fabric from a blanket that it has it wrapped in.

    Also, if this is a real photo, would the water/mud be that deep that close to the land?

    More than 1/2 the creature’s legs are submerged, yet it is right off the shore. I guess if it’s muddy & wet enough he could be sunken deep. I’m not sure how different swampy water is than the woodland or mountain lakes i am used to that have a very gradual decline in depth.

42. Pvolitans responds: August 10th, 2007 at 1:37 am

    Remake of Predator. Agent is covered with mud in an attempt to evade thermal detection.

43. john5 responds: August 10th, 2007 at 2:14 am

    I lightened the pic with Ulead Photo Explorer and it looks like it is holding the body of a spider monkey or some other critter with long thin arms and legs!

44. twblack responds: August 10th, 2007 at 3:45 am

    I do think it is a real pic. although I think it was staged for this type of disscusion. Or maybe they caught someone in a ritual of some sort.

45. proriter responds: August 10th, 2007 at 4:54 am

    Well, if this is a Photoshop effort, you’ve got to give credit to whoever did it for adding the reflection in the water immediately in front on the figure. On the other hand, the mud is curiously undisturbed in the area where the thing is standing. And that object it’s holding is probably a Thermos full of hot coffee. How would YOU like standing in the mud all day?

    This is obviously a row of swimming otters.

46. cromcrom responds: August 10th, 2007 at 6:28 am

    I think one question we have to ask ouselves is: “will a picture EVER be a proof of anything?” considering the hoaxes possibilities (photoshop, make-up…..)

47. Kitopila responds: August 10th, 2007 at 8:27 am

    This could very well be an authentic photograph, for the following reasons:

    1- I have seen many of these creatures…. it is a man covered in mud.
    2- This is clearly taken in a Mangrove swamp near a coastal area- note the long roots on the bushes.
    3- The tide is low, and the area the area he is standing in is an exposed mud pocket. Mud pockets are often created by alligator/crocodiles that use the area daily traveling to and from their nesting grounds or their favorite cover area. Mangrove mud can be very slick and gooey- it is filled with nutrients and organisms from the massive amount of decaying leaf and animal matter.
    4. Closer inspection of the photograph- the man is wearing either an open shirt or a utility vest (like fishermen) wear. He is also wearing some type of utility belt with maybe a hunting or fishing knife on his side.
    5- He is either holding a catfish or some type of fish, or has caught himself a small croc.
    6- It looks as if he is wearing a ball cap with the bill flipped up on one side, and his hair messed up on the other.
    7- The face is not contorted in horror or rage, it is simply the primal yell of some redneck thinking he is one bad SO (you know what) for wrestling and catching the fish/croc in the mud and showing off for the picture.

    I think this is an elaborate hoax story that was made up to go along with the photograph of a real situation. Nice try, but I have a hard time believing it to be anything else other than a mud covered man holding a fish/croc.

48. jules responds: August 10th, 2007 at 9:54 am

    Yes Mr. Monster, stand right there for me!

    Looks a little too staged.

49. antagonist responds: August 10th, 2007 at 10:09 am

    In photoshop, smooth the image, increase it’s resolution, then sharpen it and you’ll see so much more. Like the fact that a rope from it’s waist going to the sky was edited out, and like the fact that he’s wearing a harness and a backpack. Seems to me that someone got stuck in a bog and had to be airlifted out, and someone else thought they’d look good as a crypto beast. My first clue was the posture of the ‘beast’. I wondered what he was holding and realized it was a rope.

    A common trick to hide photochopping it to add lots of noise to the image, but it’s easy enough to take the excess noise away.

50. jules responds: August 10th, 2007 at 10:09 am

    Hongo - your English is much better than many who have been taught it as a first language. I have never heard of a bi-ped with horns either.

51. Morgoth responds: August 10th, 2007 at 10:20 am

    Here is the mask:

    http://www.scarehaven.com/masks/devil.jpg

    And notice the left shoulder of the creatue. Careful with that smudge tool!

52. lorelady responds: August 10th, 2007 at 10:23 am

    My humble opinion: it is a staged photo of a human being imitating my original sketch of the Beast of Bray Road in which it was kneeling and holding a road-killed animal in exactly this same pose. That sketch has been reprinted in many, many media from print to TV to Internet, with and without my permission so it could easily be known in Brazil.The arms are completely recognizable as human, and the “horns” are identical to the ears on a rubber werewolf mask that I own. My guess is that they used the mud to both blend the mask in with the body and to make it unnecessary to produce a consistent covering of fur. Also, the girl’s story does not ring true; I agree with the writer who asked whether she took the photo and then the creature somehow came lunging across the muddy pond before she could turn around and run? That just doesn’t work.

    That area of the world does have its own wolf-or-dog-headed creature, the Lobizon, but I doubt this is it.

    - Linda Godfrey

53. Alligator responds: August 10th, 2007 at 10:37 am

    Why it’s not real:

    The photo resolution between the creature and the surrounding area is different.

    The creature is in mud up to knees. Yet there is no evidence of tracks or sliding down the bank.

    If the creature had walked out of the water to the bank, it would be roiled and muddy.

    Amazon riverbank? Could be, but I could take you to any number of riverbanks in the Midwest and location similar in appearance.

    It is a Lord of the Rings orc.

    Finally, the story is second hand at best and important details sorely lacking. If the girl had been attacked by a human, a crocodile, a jaguar or fire ants in Bahia there would have been ways to confirm the story. What confirmation is there for this?

54. jules responds: August 10th, 2007 at 10:46 am

    The face looks a bit like the monster/devil from the movie “Legend”.

55. spock82 responds: August 10th, 2007 at 11:03 am

    I do have the DVD of Gargoyles and I too was pretty young when I first saw that flick and it was very scary at the time. At some point in the movie the main Gargoyle is cradling one of it’s dead young in it’s arms. This looks suspiciously like this shot to me.

56. Grant responds: August 10th, 2007 at 12:17 pm

    It reminds me of the TV movie “Gargoyles” (which had very good makeup).

57. shumway10973 responds: August 10th, 2007 at 12:40 pm

    Do we have anyone that might be an expert on local legends for Brazil? This one is way out of my knowledge of things. I do find it “funny” that the ears and face is similar to what most t.v. shows and movies depict “demons” to look like. Although the upper lip looks feline in nature. As for the center of gravity, that very well could be a real person walking thru that mud and I can guarantee that center of gravity will be off because in 2 seconds that person will be disappearing into the mud. This is definitely one that pushes my ability to accept and believe.

58. antagonist responds: August 10th, 2007 at 12:57 pm

    Here’s a somewhat cleaned up and zoomed in shot of the original pic. You’ll notice a smudge going from where his hands meet to the trees suggesting photoshopping.

    http://i211.photobucket.com/albums/bb37/feyfolken/photograph16111.jpg

    Now here’s a posterized version. Notice that the smudge is even clearer.

    http://i211.photobucket.com/albums/bb37/feyfolken/photograph16111.jpg

    Now, here’s the same pic with it’s features outlined. Notice the rope, waist harness, backpack, even a knife. If you compare it to the original you’ll see that he even has short sleeves on. The person who chopped the rope out altered the face as well, then covered their tracks by low-resing the pic.

    Case closed

59. devastation79 responds: August 10th, 2007 at 1:32 pm

    Come on, that picture is one of the faker I’ve seen in years.

60. wrath of the real responds: August 10th, 2007 at 1:39 pm

    you can definetly see where the rope used to be going from his hands up and to the left. And that also explains his center of gravity leaning into the rope to get his legs out. Almost this is a decent one.

61. searoom responds: August 10th, 2007 at 2:36 pm

    I have to agree with the back pack. I too Photo Shopped this image and played with a lot of adjustments. While doing this the back pack becomes rather obvious as does the left shoulder strap albeit covered with mud. When I was young growing up along the Delaware River. We would play hide and seek at low tide in the water lilies. We would completely cover ourselves in alluvial mud that was as thick and black as that of this image. This is a set up shot.

62. Mnynames responds: August 10th, 2007 at 3:18 pm

    Regardless of its reality, the story seems tacked on, perhaps as a way to explain the object the creature is holding. To me, it looks human (or at least humanoid), as I see legs and an arm as well. If so, it is very limp, and certainly covered in mud. One would have to think that if it was human, it would be a child much younger than 15, given the size, but perhaps whoever created the tale felt the creature must be a giant of some sort, or would play better with that perception.

    In short- I don’t buy the story. As for the rest? Got me…

63. mtgrogan responds: August 10th, 2007 at 3:25 pm

    Kneeling at the water’s edge in the mud with a child?

    Some kind of shaman, if legit.

    I have a mask from the Philippines on my wall by the computer that looks just like this guy’s face.

64. Sunny responds: August 10th, 2007 at 3:29 pm

    I am absolutely NOT a Photoshop expert — I’m at the brochure/catalog design end, and NOT the photo manipulation side of things. I have to do some things to make a photo look the way I need it, but I don’t pretend to be an expert — and I know what it makes the photo look like when it’s been fiddled with.

    But if even I can mess around with this pic enough to find a suspicious-looking blur on the being’s left shoulder (right side of the image as you look at it) — and a suspiciously straight blur from the figure to the top of the picture…

    Then it’s pretty right-on to seriously question the photo.

65. DARHOP responds: August 10th, 2007 at 4:50 pm

    If you guys can blow this photo up, you will be surprised by what you see, I think. I still can’t make out what it’s holding though.

66. DARHOP responds: August 10th, 2007 at 5:02 pm

    You’re not gonna see tracks like you normally would in this deep of mud. If it’s wet enough and it looks like this is. It’s real soupy like fresh concrete mud. The tracks will fill in on themselves and leave what, to best describe it is a pattern to what you see to the back right of this photo. If you have ever poured concrete slabs you know what I’m talking about. You just cant leave a 12-16 inch deep track in mud like that. Doesn’t work.

67. CrimsonFox79 responds: August 10th, 2007 at 5:39 pm

    I brought the pic into photoshop and raised the resolution to enlarge the picture to view detailing better, it appears as though the creature has a ‘male organ’. It could be something else, but IMO it looks like there’s one there.

    Which, may not be important. But I figure that- if this image is staged, or if it’s some guy being rescued who fell in, why wouldn’t they be wearing pants or some kind of covering?

    Which makes it seem, IMO, more like a legit pic or possibly someone from a tribe of people, etc.

68. FaceThePain responds: August 10th, 2007 at 8:22 pm

    I enhanced the color saturation, as well as changed the picture into it’s negative state, and I’m sorry to say, this “creature” IS part of the picture.

    Now aside from that, if you look in the water, you see a mud trail, where mud is left mixed through the water, to show something has moved along through there.

    My take : This is someone in an elaborate costume, holding what appears to be a prop of a lifeform (rather baby, animal, etc), who traveled from the location of where the person taking the picture was, waded to the bank, and slightly turned, letting said person take the picture.

69. ThermalRider responds: August 10th, 2007 at 8:42 pm

    I’m familiar with this strange beast. Its very rare…
    Its called Persono In Masko

70. BitterDrunkGuy responds: August 10th, 2007 at 8:47 pm

    Kinda reminds of a large ape, although muddy and fur matted down, with a dead baby ape in her arms and little legs hanging down and one arm dangling. If u look right under its left wrist u can almost make out a pair of little legs and tummy. The rest of the torso still in its arms . Although the lower half appears to be a bit distended from the upper torso but possibly cause it got pulled out of the mud.

71. Slyfox responds: August 10th, 2007 at 9:07 pm

    I believe it is yet another ‘hoax” sorry to say…..

    The reason being though it may be just me but…..It looks as if on th right side there is a “lady in the woods” aswell a ghost and a monster !!! Lol I highly dout it……..It looks as if it is a spoof from a movie……

72. Slyfox responds: August 10th, 2007 at 9:36 pm

    Although I havnt blown it up yet though…..

73. CrimsonFox79 responds: August 10th, 2007 at 9:37 pm

    Hope this works… I enlarged the pic in photoshop and outlined in red the shape.
    http://i117.photobucket.com/albums/o73/CrimsonFox79/Miscellaneous/photograph16zoomed2.jpg

74. Slyfox responds: August 10th, 2007 at 10:42 pm

    Also one more note: I noticed I really didnt give a good explanation as to what I am seeing..So here it is she is in the tree on the right side by the water she looks as if she is made of clay (maybe just coloring) and she appears to be kneeling aswell….it is kinda hard to see…..

    “O” she appears to be hlding somthing aswelll…As I said before maybe just my eyes……

75. ThermalRider responds: August 10th, 2007 at 10:44 pm

    Ok - I flipped the image to see if the reflection matches up.
    It does… hmmm…. but still….

    I still think its the very rarely seen “Persono In Masko” species.

76. 0mikron responds: August 10th, 2007 at 11:09 pm

    I have been analyzing this in photoshop…. it is a thing in the water holding some other thing. There is no rope, there is no back pack. It is a critter with skeletal features. If it isn’t a person in a mask making a staged hoax….. then it is either a zombie, a demon or some other spawn of hell. These are the end-times you know…. demons are supposed to walking among us now in temporal form.

77. springheeledjack responds: August 11th, 2007 at 12:45 am

    I don’t like the angle that the “thing” is standing…looks like a statue because even in the mud, a living creature would not stand at that angle…leaning too far back with its legs too close together for balance…I am going for the statue in the mud theory…

78. PhotoExpert responds: August 11th, 2007 at 1:29 am

    As I have always stated, there needs to be two things that need to happen simultaneously for a photograph being considered as proof of existence.

    They are:
    1. A clear photograph or video, unlike the numerous blobsquatch photos that are encountered everyday.

    2. A credible witness with story.

    In this case, the photograph is somewhat adequate but the witness and her story are open to scrutiny. How could some creature that is able to hold something that carries some weight, negotiate itself through thick, knee deep mud, climb a hill and then a young girl is able to defeat it’s grasp? You have got to be kidding me! Strong enough to do all that but not strong enough to prevent a young girl from overpowering it. LOL

    I’m not buying under the litmus test. It is full of holes. Interesting to look at but that is about it. Since the story and girl are not credible, I did not waste my time analyzing the photograph itself.

79. jspiers responds: August 11th, 2007 at 4:25 am

    Has anyone other than me considered that the “baby in its arms”, the “knife”, and the “wings” might simply be a guy holding on to a rope attached to one of these?

    I think that I would look for some pics perhaps from Katrina or some of the “mud rescue” squads that are out there. It doesn’t take too much to imagine the “horns” and supposed ridge around the head to be a rescue worker’s hat and mussed hair. A rope does make complete sense, since increasing contrast shows that there is a straight line extending up and to the top left of the picture. The ridge around the head may be an optical illusion from the branch behind it’s head, as well.

    On the other hand, maybe it is the infamous and rarely seen two horned humpbacked mud monster of Brazil.

80. Joshua Inayat responds: August 11th, 2007 at 6:28 am

    Greetings to everyone here! My name is Josh, I’m new to the site. Looks great! Being a photographer I’m more familiar with photoshop than I ever wanted to be! lol This picture intrigued me so I thought I’d take a look at it…

    Picture 1: Just over exposed and color corrected the image I got from up top. To a trained eye, you can see dozens of spots of obvious editing.
    http://www.eternaltouchstudios.com/overexposed.jpg

    Picture 2: Blown up, exposed up 1 exposure stop, color corrected.
    http://www.eternaltouchstudios.com/areas.jpg

    Area 1: Completely unnatural lines, no clear definition between water and foliage. Obvious signs of “Blur” tool or similar. I don’t care how swampy a picture is, at that distance there SHOULD be a clearly defined bank - be it water, dirt, mud, etc. If the water were so clear you could see the shapes below it as foliage, then you’d be able to see the creatures legs and not a supposed reflection/shadow.

    What I see is foliage colored to be blue with no water source! It’s dry land with a blue tint, in my opinion.

    Area 2: Completely unnatural line in water in terms of lighting and exposure. The rocks are underexposed while the water infront of it is so over exposed it’s blown out. Again looks like signs of editing.

    Area 3: Again, dry land to be made like water. Foliage colored over, areas around it blurred and over-sharpened.

    Area 4: One of dozens of distortions caused by over sharpening or over blurring. Poor image quality if due to low camera or scan resolution creates a pattern of pixelation rather than areas of over-sharp or over-blur.

    I could have pointed out another ten or so areas of suspected editing, such as the banks being blurred into the water, etc.

    The interesting thing is that I didn’t see any evidence of editing ON the creature itself to make me think it itself has been changed. The lighting is plausible, but can be done with photoshop also. Samguzman’s picture shows the first half of the reflection shadow on the water, but it continues to the full length of the critter. Looks like to me they just turned the critter 180 and put the opacity to 15% so that the highlights in the water shine through it still.

    At a small enough size, the picture looks okay which is what it was designed to do. Blow it up even just a little bit however, and all the editing comes out!

    Lastly, I agree with everyone about the pose! Either it’s running backwards or falling backwards. There’s NO way it would be going forward knee deep in mud leaning backwards!

    Thanks for the great exercise!

81. CryptoGoji responds: August 11th, 2007 at 8:09 am

    If that thing aint photoshoped in, then I will eat a hat.

82. tsunamicarlos responds: August 11th, 2007 at 9:03 am

    I do not think this photo is of a cryptid creature, nor is it paranormal.

    I do not think it is a hoax, nor is the photo staged.

    In a region of the world where witchcraft and voodoo is so common, I believe it is a witch doctor performing some kind of ritual. Whatever it is holding in its arms is part of that ritual — a sacrifice or offering. By the looks of it, the person wearing the mask and covered in mud is participating in black magic of some sort.

    You can walk into certain “Botanicas” and find such masks, along with other trinkets and beads. Incense, herbs that give hallucinations, skulls, live animals (for sacrificing), etc. In Miami, there are many of these Botanicas so Bahia must have them on every shopping strip!

83. Alligator responds: August 11th, 2007 at 12:40 pm

    It’s really interesting to see the diverse interpretations here. Many see a photo hoax, a few believe it is some kind of a shaman and only a very few think it is a paranormal (demonic) being. I think most everyone is in agreement that it is not some kind of unknown animal.

    One comment was made that there would be no tracks in a bank like this because it is very liquid mud. AS an old river rat who has swam, waded and bank fished along multiple Midwestern streams. I am very familiar with mud banks like that. You don’t leave tracks, you leave a wallow line. You can’t just walk through knee deep like you’re strolling at a mall. Even when that liquid mud fills back in where youve been it stakes hours to obliterate the sign of your passing. If the “creature” had walked in from the water, there would be roiling and discoloration there. When a raccoon or otter plays in the water at a the river’s edge, you can see the sign for several hours. So if this is something actually standing on the bank, it stood there for several hours before the photo was snapped. Furthermore, it is extremely difficult to keep your balance in knee deep mud. This figure is leaning so far back, it would fall over. There is a clean straight line where the legs meet the mud, a physical impossibility.

    Although it might be tempting to say it could be medicine man in a mask etc.. the photo anomalies are pretty obvious. I can’t add more than the photo experienced folks have said about it. If anything, this “beast” shows that the standard for proving the existence of something has to be rigorous - it is far too easy to fake photographs and there are too many people willing to do it just to kick from watching reaction to their story.

    Are there cryptids out there? I think there are especially in the depths of the sea, but possibly still in the few very remote wilderness areas which are rapidly shrinking around the globe. But I sure don’t think this Bahia Beast is one of them. This particular photo and story has way too many holes and gaps to be taken seriously as a cryptid sighting, although it sure was fun to pick it apart and analyze it.

84. devastation79 responds: August 11th, 2007 at 3:15 pm

    I don’t know, it looks real, but real as in someone in some type of suit, rather than an actual hominoid. I can tell you this it definitely wasn’t worth the time that George and Loren spent talking about it last night on coast.

85. tsunamicarlos responds: August 11th, 2007 at 4:31 pm

    Alligator, as well as many others, seem to agree with what I think: the story has way too many holes. I do not quite see how the photo coincides with the story.

    Irregardless, I am more willing to believe the photo is a fake than to believe this is an actual cryptid of some sort.

    A long time lurker on this site, but the discussion on this photo was so good I had to jump in!

86. aliasrae responds: August 11th, 2007 at 8:33 pm

    I don’t think it’s mud, it looks like slough floating on the top and collecting on the bank. You can see a break behind him.

87. sausage1 responds: August 12th, 2007 at 4:34 pm

    I don’t have a clue what this is, but is is a distressing picture. It appears to be screaming and holding a child, unless I am being too fanciful.

    If it grabbed hold of this girl, and she pushed it into the water to escape, how did the photo come about? And why did she not mention he ‘thing’ it is holding?

    I must admit to being intrigued by the mudsmearing that the purported creature tried. This suggests some ritual or rite of passage, which in turn suggests human. By the way, doesn’t mud and clay play a part in many creation myths, and in folklore worldwide. Thinking of the Semitic “golem,”for example.

    Just tossing it into the pot, people.

88. tlalucky responds: August 13th, 2007 at 1:06 am

    – The photograph seems to be taken from a height, looking downwards, as if the photographer was on a ladder, or platform, or the superstructure of a ship. The image is carefully composed and balanced in an almost artistic arrangement. This does not seem consistent with “photographed by a 15 year old … girl”.

    – The image has an “aspect ratio” (longest side divided by shortest side) of 1.53 , which is very close to the film size produced in an SLR camera, 36mm x 24mm or 1.5:1 or 3:2. Single Lens Reflex cameras shooting film were standard for keen photographers in the final decades of the twentieth century. The modern digital cameras that have almost replaced them are normally set to shoot at an aspect ratio of 1.33:1, or 4:3, e.g. 640 x 480 pixels or 1600 x 1200 pixels or 2272 x 1704 pixels. Also, The image is only 54.2 KB, a small file size for a digital camera. This also does not seem consistent with the equipment which might be used ” in … 2007 … by a 15 year-old … girl”.

    – The image is said to come from “Porto Seguro, Bahia, Brazil”. The image certainly appears to show a typical coastal swamp or “manguezal”. These are common along the coast of North East Brazil, and can be found in Porto Seguro (search manguezal porto seguro in Google). The person or statue is reminiscent of Umbanda / Candomble, also common in Brazil, but there seems to be no specific reason to link the figure with Porto Seguro. Porto Seguro is best known as the location of the “Discovery of Brazil” or the first formal landing of the Portuguese, in 1500. It is now a very popular tourist destination, known for excellent beaches and cheap accommodation.

    – It is difficult to determine whether the image shows a person or a statue, or why it was taken. One possibility that comes to mind is that it could be a still photograph from a Brazilian horror or mystery film, made perhaps in the 1980s.

    – The Internet Movie Database records a couple of movies produced in Porto Seguro, but none are likely sources for this shot.

    – “Supposedly the temp. is 100+.” There is normally a pleasant breeze on the coast of NE Brazil, and the photo was supposed taken in July; that is equivalent of winter in the Southern hemisphere. Google gives several sources for the temperature in Porto Seguro, which is normally quoted as: lowest 20.9ºC or 69.6ºF; average 24.4ºC or 75.9ºF ; highest 30.6ºC or 87.7ºF. In fact the highest temperature recorded at Porto Seguro airport in July 2007 was 27 ºC or 82ºF.

    – The airport recorded some wind most days, up to a maximum of 23 mph or 37 kph. The city has become a major tourist center because it has an excellent climate.

89. lidphi responds: August 13th, 2007 at 2:31 am

    To all you out there that say that it is too close to land to be so deep, and such, I’m from Charleston, SC, and the pluff mud in the marsh as well as that in the swamps acts the same way as the mud in this picture.

    I’m no expert, but from my experience with photoshop, this would be incredibly difficult to pull off correctly, with the reflections, etc.

90. Late Night Visitor responds: August 13th, 2007 at 12:16 pm

    So many ideas and interpretations, love it. I truly am a photoshop expert, been using the tool daily for over 10 years. I did an examination as well. As if you all need another opinion, but my take is that it is legit. Looking for edits and manipulation is a witch hunt. On a photo as low-resolution as this one, you will get pixel blur-spots randomly when you blow up the photo or add resolution that isnt in the original, all on its own. Noise occurs in random areas. Seeing these spots and deducing them as manipulation is false. When manipulating photos, you dont go in and blur little parts here and little parts there, its a more detailed approach than that. If anything, its all clone tool, but still more to it than that.
    Overall, I think its a real photo of a real person covered in mud, wearing a wooden mask, a mask that is symmetrical on either side of it. The unbalanced look is the result of being just that, trying to walk unbalanced in the waters’ current and unsteady footing.

91. Honest John responds: August 14th, 2007 at 1:03 am

    If it was faked, wouldn’t there be a more detailed story to go with it right away?

    We then would know if the photo was taken before, or after the attack.

    I think a liar would work this way, and have more to the story immediately.

    There have been some flying witches going around farther north in Mexico lately.

92. pentagramma responds: August 14th, 2007 at 2:20 pm

    I’m inclined to agreed with the hoax/masked man point-of-view.

    I just would like to add some info on Porto Seguro - it’s a beautiful tourist location, but it’s also a traditional place to go when college students want to have a great time and /or get very drunk.

    I mean, it’s a nice place, but it should be clear that Porto Seguro isn’t some kind of far away jungle outpost or something…

93. Loren Coleman responds: August 15th, 2007 at 11:17 pm

    Update: Wednesday, August 15, 2007

    The cultural reality behind this photograph (which caused almost 100 comments) has been revealed for what it must certainly be, rightfully, by a Brazilian.

    For more, please see:

    Bahia Photo Solved

Leave your comments

You must be logged in to post a comment.

|Top | Content|