Rich Jones 1932 Batlow Yowie image explained at last?

This board is open for discussion on the Australian Yowie, Bigfoot, Yeti & Sasquatch. Please keep on topic in this forum.
User avatar
Simon M
Long Time Contributor
Posts: 780
Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2016 1:36 am
Position: Unsure
Location: South Western Victoria

Re: Rich Jones 1932 Batlow Yowie image explained at last?

Unread post by Simon M » Wed Jul 04, 2018 8:34 pm

Austral wrote:
Tue Jul 03, 2018 5:45 pm
O.K. Double exposure of what ???
Another person at a different time. The fact that the picture seems to deliberately include the third 'see through' figure makes it look like it may be intentional. Maybe they were just messing around with the camera and this picture didn't work out as they'd planned? Not a hoax, but an attempted camera trick gone wrong?

If the camera was moved somehow, even slightly, or someone sat closer to/further from it than the other two did then they'd appear to be a different size to the other people in the image.

I don't buy it as a Yowie image, personally. It reminds me a bit of those photos taken by Spiritualists in the early days of photography where 'protoplasm' was coming out of people's mouths, or mediums were surrounded by ghostly figures, etc.

I think it's an example of attempted trick photography, done for a laugh, that didn't work properly.

User avatar
Black
Silver Status
Posts: 152
Joined: Wed Feb 14, 2018 11:38 am
Position: Monk

Re: Rich Jones 1932 Batlow Yowie image explained at last?

Unread post by Black » Thu Jul 05, 2018 12:25 pm

My take:

It's not paradolia. The edges and shading of the mystery figure, are too precise and exact. It is a definite image of a figure. There is no denying it. The lighting on the figure is even similar to the guys in the foreground - sun above. With crisp sharp continuous lines like that, with no kinks or dents, that's not wishful thinking.

As for the two guys in the foreground, it was mentioned the shadow from the sun on their heads is different, suggesting they were individually photographed at different times of the day. I disagree. The fella on the left is stooped forward and his head tilted to the left, hence the shadow falls down over his torso and more on his left shoulder. It is a bigger shadow than the other fellow's who is sitting more upright with his head back, and shadow not falling below his scapula at the top of his chest.

As for the figure. It's very similar to the fella on the left. The fella on the left is sitting on his hands with his legs together, whereas the figure behind is stooped forward with his arms resting on his thighs, with legs apart. The hairstyle of the fella on the left with head forward, forms a slight peek at the back. There also seems to be a stick resting vertically next to the fella on the left's left arm and a similar stick in the left hand area of the mystery figure.

With old photos like this, the proof isnt in the photo, it's in THE NEGATIVE and whatever photos were taken immediately before and after this one. I can only assume the negative no longer exists.

While Mr Jones certainly comes across as a sincere senior citizen in the interviews (where butter wouldn't melt in his mouth), who knows what his character was like, sixty years earlier, or if the story from sixty years earlier matches his 1990's version?

I'm thinking, whether there was or wasn't double exposure involved, someone has very possibly had some fun tampering with the photo, adding shades and black and white to highlight the figure, using the fella on the left as a rough guide.

Otherwise, if that exact image exists on a film negative somewhere (which I'm confident it doesnt), that's a yowie, man!

User avatar
paulmcleod67
Long Time Contributor
Posts: 702
Joined: Sat Jan 21, 2012 3:28 pm
Facebook Profile Page: https://www.facebook.com/paul.mcleod.359
Location: Tivoli Queensland
Contact:

Re: Rich Jones 1932 Batlow Yowie image explained at last?

Unread post by paulmcleod67 » Thu Jul 05, 2018 2:15 pm

For those that might be interested here is a short clip from "THE THICKET" an Australian Monster Hunt ( part three).
Posted below are a couple of still frames and image enhancements from the video.

Part three wont be ready in full for some time due to the amount of video and imagery I have to work through from
the 5 trap cameras set up around the perimeter of the "thicket" not to mention all the footage from the hand held.



Cheers
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

User avatar
Searcher
Long Time Contributor
Posts: 548
Joined: Thu Mar 20, 2014 12:18 pm

Re: Rich Jones 1932 Batlow Yowie image explained at last?

Unread post by Searcher » Thu Jul 05, 2018 3:54 pm

Could this weird photo be a double exposure? Of course it could. It was relatively easy to simply click the shutter twice without winding on the film. I know, as I have an old box camera. This could even happen when the film was wound as it could sometimes stick and not move on.

However, as Austral asked…exposure of what ???

The Yowie like image looks nothing like a person and would have to have been taken separately either directly before or after the exposure of the two forest workers sitting on the log. To my eye, there is no evidence of a double exposure in the rest of the photograph. It should be noticeable if the shutter lever was accidentally pressed twice.

So even if it was an accident, it still doesn’t explain how the gigantic creature came to be on the camera roll.

It has been suggested the photo was faked. Yes, we can’t be sure of the old man’s true character, but to me, he does come across as genuine on the Warrick Moss narrated TV program “The Extraordinary”. It’s all too easy to suggest the old bloke was a confabulator when there is no way of knowing what he was really like.

User avatar
Searcher
Long Time Contributor
Posts: 548
Joined: Thu Mar 20, 2014 12:18 pm

Re: Rich Jones 1932 Batlow Yowie image explained at last?

Unread post by Searcher » Thu Jul 05, 2018 4:24 pm

With all this chit chat about Mr Jones and his photograph, it reminded me of an old favourite Bee Gees song.

It may be a bit left field, but interpret the lyrics as you will... and enjoy!


User avatar
ChrisV
Long Time Contributor
Posts: 623
Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2014 3:28 pm

Re: Rich Jones 1932 Batlow Yowie image explained at last?

Unread post by ChrisV » Tue Jul 10, 2018 9:39 am

its interesting how opinion is so firm in believing thats is a double exposure or paradoila .

But no one can explain the proportions of the figure?

Double Exposure is a fine comment to make - but have a look at those proportions. Even if a double exposure - no human I have ever known has looked like that !!!

And the image looks a lot like a Yowie as stated before.

User avatar
paulmcleod67
Long Time Contributor
Posts: 702
Joined: Sat Jan 21, 2012 3:28 pm
Facebook Profile Page: https://www.facebook.com/paul.mcleod.359
Location: Tivoli Queensland
Contact:

Re: Rich Jones 1932 Batlow Yowie image explained at last?

Unread post by paulmcleod67 » Wed Jul 18, 2018 8:03 pm

Had a bit of spare time so I put together a comparison of the "Yowie" and two big human blokes. Although I degraded the resolutions and tone of the two body builders as much as possible, the lighting is far from perfect. Despite the difference in resolution it's still interesting to see the way light and shadow works on matt skin tones as opposed to vegetation and stone.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

Post Reply