Comments on: “Dead Bigfoot Photo,” More

By: Laeria

Laeria — Sun, 24 May 2009 17:00:26 +0000

The legs could have also easily been photoshopped

By: pac

pac — Sun, 26 Apr 2009 18:22:33 +0000

I can’t understand why you say that the dead bigfoot is a bear, because of the ears. Why, have you ever seen bigfoot’s ears? They maybe look like bears and the body of a bear is not like that.

Guys look at the bear legs and look and the bigfoot legs, bigfoot legs are much more bigger and that is not photoshop (the legs).

By: john5

john5 — Sat, 25 Apr 2009 23:48:36 +0000

Although rough around the edges – Good Job! My question has been answered. Thanks David for the revelation and Loren for the posting!

By: norman-uk

norman-uk — Thu, 23 Apr 2009 09:52:47 +0000

Am I wrong or has Loren Coleman’s face (not as good as the original of course) with added hair, been added in place of the man’s with the peashooter?

If the hoaxer was a jokester then wouldn’t this please him mightily?

By: cliff

cliff — Wed, 22 Apr 2009 18:20:36 +0000

Great deconstruction, good work David Lowe, kudos to you.

By: red_pill_junkie

red_pill_junkie — Wed, 22 Apr 2009 17:06:11 +0000

Big round of applause, Mr. Lowe

By: LittleMike

LittleMike — Wed, 22 Apr 2009 11:27:58 +0000

As someone who uses Photoshop on a daily basis (as part of my job) there was never any doubt in my mind that the ‘Dead Bigfoot’ picture COULD be a fake. However it’s useful to see some do a step by step of just how it could be a fake just to give people an idea that such a thing is relatively simple to create.

The thing is, it COULD have been real – for example I’m sure the above deconstructions could have been applied to a perfectly real photograph – but the lack of any provenance associated with the Dead Bigfoot picture was for me the most telling issue.

By the way, this is my first post. Apologies if I have rambled on – I’ve been a silent visitor to this site for years so I’ve got lots (about nothing much) to say!

By: timi_hendrix

timi_hendrix — Wed, 22 Apr 2009 04:53:54 +0000

Thanks for this post. It explains the transformation clearly.

Still it was an interesting picture while it lasted.