A visual digest of my research 2012- 2017

[paulmcleod67]

MY IMAGE ENHANCEMENT TECHNIQUES.

Some facts on layering or stacking image frames, a technique I have used for years when dealing with still frames from footage or to improve pixel quality and reduce noise in single images via R.B.G values (RED,BLUE, GREEN) color chanels.
Here is a video example of frame stacking, a technique I used on Curiosity Rover images of Mars last november. The technique improves clarity and has nothing to do with fakery.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9H2K9QjvQkQ&t=20s

Astronomers opinion on the method...

https://photographingspace.com/stacking-vs-single/

"Is it worth it to stack and process multiples vs. a single exposure?
I think so.
It’s more work, it takes more effort, but in the end the image quality you get from stacking multiple exposures can drastically improve your final product in multiple ways.

Reduce noise with reality
Stacking multiple exposures reduces noise by increasing the signal:noise ratio using reality. I like that.
But, what is signal and what is noise? It’s pretty simple — signal is the stuff (light) we want, noise is the stuff (camera sensor errata) we don’t want. One of the best benefits about stacking multiple exposures is the dramatic increase in the image quality, noise removal, by increasing your signal:noise ratio.

When you stack, you reduce the differences in the digital representation of the light that hits and excites the camera sensor. Each time you shoot an image, the electrical characteristics of the sensor cause it to do its best at representing the photons it “sees.” However, from shot to shot, there are slight brightness and color variations on each pixel for the exact same image. Image stacking produces an intelligent average of each pixel of all exposures, detail for detail, instead of trusting just one exposure and hoping it’s accurate".

https://www.ephotozine.com/article/imag ... ges--30639

"There's a technique called 'image stacking' which, if you've not heard of it before, can be used to improve resolution and detail, as well as reduced noise in your photos.

There are two reasons why you might want to do this:

1. To get a higher resolution image if you need one and your camera doesn't currently offer enough megapixels.
2. You want to take a photo with reduced noise, for example for photos of the moon, astrophotography or in low-light.
In a nutshell, the way you do this is by combining multiple images that are on individual layers in your chosen photo editing software and there are some great tutorials out there all on the subject. These include the following two tutorials by Ian Norman and Points In Focus.

The Points In Focus article looks at using Smart Objects and Mean / Medium stacking which is available in Photoshop CS6 Extended+ and CC onwards while Ian Norman shows you how to stack images using layers for a technique called 'superresolution'. Instead of using a tripod to keep your camera still when capturing multiple shots, Ian suggests you work handheld as the slight movement in-between shots give additional detail and resolution (similar to pixel-shift used in the Olympus OM-D E-M5 II and Hasselblad HS-200ms).

The 'superresolution' tutorial is a little more complicated so if you've not done this before, have a play around with smart object image stacking first, which is what we did below.

Why Should I Use Image Stacking?

The moon photo below was captured with an ultra zoom bridge camera so the result is pretty good but we had to take multiple images to ensure we captured one image that was sharp and had a reasonable amount of detail."
http://www.nightphotographyworkshop.com ... t-stackers

Cheers

[paulmcleod67]

This is exactly what I said to Simon...

"Hi Simon
Thanks for the kind words and advice.

That image is nothing compared to the footage. I am editing video and images from five cameras set up around the "Thicket" site in Chuwar. I'm not going to release anything else until I am finished with the Chuwar site. In 2017 I released all the details of the Ipswich yowie footage and without my consent it ended up in the Queensland Times. Within a few days of that article the site was torn up by spotlighters and idiots. At that time I believe I was filming a young adult female with a young one, probably at the site because there are no predatory animals. Not long after the ipswich yowie footage I filmed what looks to be a juvenile swinging in a tree almost exactly where I filmed the original footage of the young adult female. Its all on youtube at my channel "Global Monster".

I won't be making that mistake again and should never have posted the images under contention now. I have a bad habit of trusting everyone and my enthusiasm has finally got me in the "you know what" again.

Once the data from all five cameras have been sorted I will be releasing the entire thing to Gary Opit and then on his advice It will go to my tube chanel and lastly this forum.
That's it, and that's the iron clad truth.

I don't care about what has been said because it IS my fault for being overly enthusiastic and wanting to share. If I do, the chuwar site and all my cameras could be deep sixed just like the Ipswich sighting.

I don't mind if you pass this along, but I wont be addressing the issue on this forum.
With regards to the "faked" claims. Yes I use paint dot net as my default photo software and in the images released I adjusted the contrast, increased the color and frame stacked the image using multiple versions of contrast and histogram. These are legitimate methods and are even used by NASA on the CURIOSITY ROVER IMAGES.
So Rusty was correct in that regard. If I was going to fake anything why would I not alter the metadata as well? As to his concerns of me faking the background...no it is two images as I said when I posted them originally. Thank you for your concern and interest Simon.
As I've said before I'm no scientist and a rank amature in this field, learning as I go.
Just doing the best I can with what I have matey.
From now on ANYTHING In evidence footage and images from Chuwar will be going through Gary Opit first and pending on his advice here.

I will still be posting footage and stills from the Pine Mountain and Tivoli sites so all's not lost here.
And no I'm not missing as someone commented lol.
Cheers mate"

[Yowie bait]

What about the other questions from members? Like how high was your camera off the ground? Maybe you could post the raw image first instead of the treated versions? Looks dishonest once its pointed out by someone with some computer skills when you offer up treated images with no explanation. Its no wonder everyone is on your case!

[paulmcleod67]

What about the other questions from members? Like how high was your camera off the ground? Maybe you could post the raw image first instead of the treated versions? Looks dishonest once its pointed out by someone with some computer skills when you offer up treated images with no explanation. Its no wonder everyone is on your case!

As I have said it will all be in the public domain when the work is completed and no sooner.I apologize for making the judgement error of posting the two images prematurely and causing all this turmoil, once again my enthusiasm has bitten me on the butt.

I won't be drawn into a protracted argument over this issue, and no offense to anybody is intended when I say If you don't like my methods or my research, don't read it...simple. I will say that I haven't ran away from anything, I have a busy life and am not always on the forum. Any comments on my activities or lack there of on this forum is pure assumption.

Moving on

[Dion]

As I have said it will all be in the public domain when the work is completed and no sooner.I apologize for making the judgement error of posting the two images prematurely and causing all this turmoil, once again my enthusiasm has bitten me on the butt.

I won't be drawn into a protracted argument over this issue, and no offense to anybody is intended when I say If you don't like my methods or my research, don't read it...simple. I will say that I haven't ran away from anything, I have a busy life and am not always on the forum. Any comments on my activities or lack there of on this forum is pure assumption.

Sorry Paul but is the above not an excuse of avoiding questions yet again? the two images you posted prematurely as you put it are causing turmoil because they are not originals like people politely have asked for but instead are heavily edited blurry and pixelated images.

Sorry to be the bearer of bad news but I would suggest in future that if you would like people to respect you as a researcher you may want to listen to peoples questions or else you may start looking like a bit of an outcast.

[Searcher]

“A visual digest of my research 2012-2017” started on this very day one year ago. For a while it was a really interesting thread until blurry pictures and outlandish claims put paid to some credibility.

Now he has responded, I hope Paul’s explanations will be taken on board by AYR readers, although as YB correctly points out, he still won’t address many of the pertinent questions raised.

Paul wrote on September 26th, 2017 “Hell in 2012 I knew almost nothing on the subject.” He certainly made great leaps and bounds with his knowledge from that point in time. I enjoyed reading a lot of his archival research, but could never cotton on to the pareidolia required to see blurry yowies in his pictures.

Just like Dean’s famous encounter, I have taken Paul’s sensational yowie attack story and photos (see page 1) of the damage to himself to be bona fide. At least the photos of body scratches and swollen foot were not badly out of focus! Those scratches look genuine to me although they could have been much better documented with sharper, clearer daylight photographs or HD video. What do others think about Paul's yowie attack?

[Simon M]

Cards on the table: I believe Paul's account of his attack. Like every other eyewitness account we have nothing to go on but our own judgement and Paul's account - while floridly worded - reads like the account of a real event to me. I have no reason to disbelieve him.

I'm happy with his explanation of the image stacking - it makes complete sense to me, although I freely admit I'm no expert.

As to why he may not have responded, I suppose everyone was sort of piling on there for a while, and even I was disappointed that Paul didn't respond more promptly. It may have looked bad but it isn't evidence of dishonesty in and of itself.

As he said, he has a life like everyone else and none of us post here on anything like a routine or a schedule; we post when we get the chance in between doing other stuff.

It's true that Paul's a writer, and I can see why people might view him as being someone who wants to write a book about all this and make a name for himself, etc. Maybe he does want to do that, who knows? It seems likely. He's certainly compiled a lot of info in this thread, and whether you agree with his conclusions or not I don't think a common hoaxer would go to all this trouble only to shoot themselves in the foot - it makes no sense. He's put too much serious effort into this to be a con artist in my opinion.

Although I accept Paul's explanation about the image stacking, I'm still not seeing anything conclusive in the images themselves. They're too indistinct for me to see anything in detail and I'm not sure what they show.

That's my take on the whole thing. I'm not seeing anything definitive in the images, but I don't think Paul has intentionally mislead anyone. He may have become too enthusiastic about some stuff that wasn't as conclusive as he thought it was when he took the images, but I don't think he's been dishonest. Maybe he just got carried away? That I can accept, but I don't see him as a schemer. Just my opinion, of course.

[hillbilly]

Searcher, I know something is out there. But we shouldn't keep swallowing unacceptable offerings.
I posted this on page 1.
"I really enjoy seeing the pics and reading the reports. Please forgive my ignorance, but why have the pics showing scratches on human arms and torso? I read your report from West Wyalong encounter and I don't recall a mention of a physical hands on attack. It mainly included sounds, shadows and stones thrown.
I do not understand the process of "cleaning up" or enhancing a blurry picture. If someone took a picture of a blurry tree stump or a blurry rock, could it be enhanced to look like a Yowie?"

But since then we have had rehashed story offerings, which NOW include contact and scratches.
The images of scratches seem a very narrow scratch. Like a barbed wire fence, a sharp nail or even a knife blade. I don't know, but I would imagine a Yowie has broad nails, as opposed to claws- just my opinion.
I am sure that something happened at West Wylong, but the search for proof has been derailed on the detour.

I posted this on page 14.
"When it comes to seeing members manipulate pictures and evidence, ignore questions, deflect from topic and outright avoid other seasoned researchers with their enquiries. I have heard enough excuses. And a "Sorry" doesn't fix it. FFS folks, we are trying to see "Scientific" proof, but we are being fed "Hollywood" examples. My "give a damn" is busted."

It would be a naive person to accept manipulated, altered data when assessing a subject scientifically. Just my opinion. (smiley)

[Yowie bait]

What about the other questions from members? Like how high was your camera off the ground? Maybe you could post the raw image first instead of the treated versions? Looks dishonest once its pointed out by someone with some computer skills when you offer up treated images with no explanation. Its no wonder everyone is on your case!

As I have said it will all be in the public domain when the work is completed and no sooner.I apologize for making the judgement error of posting the two images prematurely and causing all this turmoil, once again my enthusiasm has bitten me on the butt.

I won't be drawn into a protracted argument over this issue, and no offense to anybody is intended when I say If you don't like my methods or my research, don't read it...simple. I will say that I haven't ran away from anything, I have a busy life and am not always on the forum. Any comments on my activities or lack there of on this forum is pure assumption.

Moving on

So you have enough time to post pages and pages of images and txt but no time to answer a few queries about your images or to answer a much respected fellow researcher when he provides evidence of photo manipulation?

That shows how much respect you have for the forum , its members and your fellow researchers.

For someone who spends so much of your own time on your research , its a shame you cant take the time to answer the questions as its all part of presenting evidence. It wont wash if you do actually get your " money shot" and have to do the same with a group of scientists and or tv presenters. Practice makes perfect they say...

[paulmcleod67]

All taken under advisement. I respect all of the opinions posted and I appreciate the time you have all invested on this thread.
I have no desire to bring disrepute to the forum or to the subject matter.
As I have said before I am an amature that has had to learn at a steep curve, I'm not scientifically trained nor do I have any academic qualifications beyond High School, some TAFE and military training combined with a lifetime of travel around Australia.
I'm 51 now and I believed that my physical ability to hike into isolated areas on my own and at night had a definite shelf life and that the clock was ticking.
I have now broken up with Mylene my long suffering fiancee, mainly because of what I'm doing and the perceived risks I take, fair enough. I put up no argument when she broke it off.
This is not an excuse it's just the facts. So forgive me if I haven't been online at the forum more regularly. In fact if you read a dozen pages back I mentioned that I wouldn't be posting much anymore because it all seemed to becoming a rhetorical discussion.
That has changed but far from what I intended.

I will continue with my research because I still need to find answers if only for myself.

When I have all of the Chuwar stuff sorted out and when I have passed it all to Gary Opit for review and critique,
I will post it all here for dissection (I don't mean that in a bad way).

No I have ZERO plans for a book, a movie or anything else of a financial nature as I have often stated. I have refused mainstream media approaches on quite a few occasions and wont be changing my mind on that. I am a stubborn man and always have been.

My facebook page is linked below this if anyone is still interested in what I'm doing.

https://www.facebook.com/paul.mcleod.359

Cheers to all that have participated in these discussions you have my respect.

[Rusty2]

Sorry Paul , unless the subject in the photos suddenly developed Lipoma between frames or was perhaps morphing into a cucumber then the photgraph below has been manipulated , lumps don't appear from photo stacking .
Photo stacking doesn't explain two different timestamps .
Photo stacking doesn't explain the two different backgrounds .

[paulmcleod67]

One time stamp is a static image the other is footage, feel free to check the specs on the trail camera listed previously.

[paulmcleod67]

Rusty here is an example of the camera time stamps for footage and still frames...
Static image timestamp same timeframe attached RAW file.

Footage just posted on youtube just for this example.
https://youtu.be/iPMHU7lr0ZM

Hope that helps.

Cheers

[Yowie bait]

All taken under advisement. I respect all of the opinions posted and I appreciate the time you have all invested on this thread.
I have no desire to bring disrepute to the forum or to the subject matter.
As I have said before I am an amature that has had to learn at a steep curve, I'm not scientifically trained nor do I have any academic qualifications beyond High School, some TAFE and military training combined with a lifetime of travel around Australia.
I'm 51 now and I believed that my physical ability to hike into isolated areas on my own and at night had a definite shelf life and that the clock was ticking.
I have now broken up with Mylene my long suffering fiancee, mainly because of what I'm doing and the perceived risks I take, fair enough. I put up no argument when she broke it off.
This is not an excuse it's just the facts. So forgive me if I haven't been online at the forum more regularly. In fact if you read a dozen pages back I mentioned that I wouldn't be posting much anymore because it all seemed to becoming a rhetorical discussion.
That has changed but far from what I intended.

I will continue with my research because I still need to find answers if only for myself.

When I have all of the Chuwar stuff sorted out and when I have passed it all to Gary Opit for review and critique,
I will post it all here for dissection (I don't mean that in a bad way).

No I have ZERO plans for a book, a movie or anything else of a financial nature as I have often stated. I have refused mainstream media approaches on quite a few occasions and wont be changing my mind on that. I am a stubborn man and always have been.

My facebook page is linked below this if anyone is still interested in what I'm doing.

https://www.facebook.com/paul.mcleod.359

Cheers to all that have participated in these discussions you have my respect.

Sorry to hear about the troubles in your personal life Paul. I hope it gets better for you.

Its good to have a step back and not let obsession take over. As someone said to me recently " yb , who really gives a f@#$ what they ( yowies) do. Its just not that important ..".

[paulmcleod67]

ATTEMPTED ONGOING IN SITU PHOTOGRAPHY OF THE kHOLO/ CHUWAR YOWIE
I plan on camera trapping "The thicket" in Chuwar,( not far from Kholo bridge), with six cheap trap camera's that meet my specific needs tacticle and financial needs for the research project.

THE PLAN

Having visited the area a few times and captured pretty good initial evidence of the pressence of Yowies in the area (see video's above listed as either Chuwar or Kholo Bridge) I plan on strategicaly surrounding the investigation site with six cameras that can stay in the feild for an extended time (relativly speaking) in order to TRY and document movements in and out of the area I have nicknamed "The Thicket" near the banks of the Kholo river in S.E Queensland.
Having finally received the camera's I'm in the process of organising the settings on the equipment and will set them up in a already predetermined locations established during previous visits to the site.

https://youtu.be/Izioj9MkomE

OVERVIEW OF THE AREA AND CAMERA TRAP PLAN
SEE IMAGES ATTACHED

THE CAMERA

HC700 series trail camera is our newest product which set with High-end configration,HC700M/HC700G is belong to 2G/3G model with MMS/SMTP function can work automatically day and night. It can be triggered by any movement of human (or animals) in a certain region onitored by motion sensor, and then automatically captures pictures (up to 16M pixels) or records 1080p or HD video clips (WVGA or QVGA).
During daytime it begins to take color photos and video till light is not enough,then it begins to take monochrome photos video.
SPECS
It supports 2G/3G GSM/MMS/SMTP/SMS.
Also supports GPS Loction(stampped the Longitude and Latitude on the picture)
B. Specifications
Image Sensor 16 Mega Pixels Color CMOS
Selectable Image Resolution 16MP/12MP / 8MP
PIR Sensor Sight Angle 60 Degrees
PIR Sensing Distance 65ft / 20m
Trigger Time 0.5 second
LED 30 High Brightness LEDs (Black/Blue-850nm/940nm)
Operation Temperature -30 ~+70℃/-22~+158℉
MMS/Email/SMS Remote Control Support
Stand-by time 5 Months
Memory TF Card up to 32GB
IR Filter Full Automatic IR Filter
TFT Display Screen 2.0 inch
PIR Distance Adjustable
High / Medium / Low
Triggering Interval : 1 second ~ 30mins (default 1 sec)
Multiple Photo on one detection 1/3/6/9
Video Resolution 1080P/720P/VGA
File Format JPEG / AVI
Exposure: Auto
Device Serial No. 4 digits and 26 alphabets set by yourself
Time Lapse1 Second ~ 24 Hours Programmable
Password Security 4 digital PIN code
Frequency Bands
GSM 850/900/1800/1900 MHz
UMTS/HSPA 850/900/1900/2100
SMS Remote Control
Supports
GPRS transmission
Data transfer by email
MMS to phone
1-3 phone number
MMS to e-mail
1-3 email address
Periodic shot
1Second~24Hours
Power Supply
6xAA battery
Camera Socket
Water proof
IP54
Security authentication
FCC,CE,RoHS
SMS Command Code
*505*: Take a photo and send the picture to send phone
*500*: Take a photo and send it to the phone in Parameter
*530*: Enable detection
*531*: Disable detection
*520*: Return the picture and battery information

[paulmcleod67]

Thanks yowiebait I appreciate it.

The above is reposted from page six and details the camera specifics.
Just for general information.

Cheers

[Rusty2]

Hope that helps.

Thank you !
So what about the two different backgrounds and the lumps that have been added ?

[Black]

Paul, what is happening in your personal life with family, friends, relationships and work (not necessarily in that order) ought to always come first, way before this. It's no surprise to me, hearing what you have said. I'm still sorry to hear it.

This activity tends to regularly derail relationships. I could be mistaken, but it seems you have gone from obsession to making it a crusade.

Some time off, or even a holiday, wouldn't hurt.

[paulmcleod67]

Don't know about "the lumps" but they are two different images one is cropped and enlarged the other is a straight image with stacking and contrast adjustments. Both I should not have posted until all the data was ready.
I won't make that mistake again.
And to be honest I'm over the whole storm in a tea cup "He's playing us for fools" rubbish.
Why would I Hoax this?
To what end?
And why would I try to hoax the hardest audience to deceive on the planet, when it comes to the subject matter, especially after what I've read lately here about what "Brett Green" did....who the hell is Brett Green and what did he do? (I really don't know)

I have written two good articles I wanted to post here for opinion but clearly we are not going to move on and just wait for the whole release. So I wont post anymore stuff here until the whole shebang is ready. And Ill check the boards every day so I'm not accused of what was it... "running away"? From what? And trust me I'm not upset, just bored with the silly remarks.

Cheers

[paulmcleod67]

Actually Rusty I have a question for you.

How long did it take you to review and prepare each video release of your camera trap set ups?
I'm genuinely curious at 50 videos over eight years ? I'm not asking sarcastically I'm honestly interested.

Cheers

[paulmcleod67]

Paul, what is happening in your personal life with family, friends, relationships and work (not necessarily in that order) ought to always come first, way before this. It's no surprise to me, hearing what you have said. I'm still sorry to hear it.

This activity tends to regularly derail relationships. I could be mistaken, but it seems you have gone from obsession to making it a crusade.

Some time off, or even a holiday, wouldn't hurt.

Thanks for the concern Black. I planned this whole relocate to research move, over a couple of years and Mylene had the right to veto the whole thing at anytime with full understanding of what I wanted to achieve and how long I would be away from home. We had been together since 2010 as a pretty solid couple. She made connections here that introduced her to some bad influences, Influences that she knew I was geometrically opposed too, I'm sure I don't have to spell that out. I have solid principals concerning those influences, so we both made our choices. All good. I don't consider this an obsession or a crusade I consider it a job. (unpaid volunteer work if you will). Next year at some stage I'm relocating to the mid north coast and will start the whole shebang again for two years there. After that I'm planning to re-visit the Nowra region and a few other places I served with the army where some strange stuff happened, events that I did not have the knowledge to explain at the time.

In the end I love the bush and I like what Ive been doing, this is my bucket list I suppose.
Cheers mate

[Rusty2]

Paul it took me months to collect all the information and present it for each video not to mention up to a week to go through all the audio and video footage for one part of the video .
Now , back to the questions , where did the lumps come from and why are there two different backgrounds on two seperate photgraphs ?
I don't think the questions are silly at all , they're relevant and you keep avoiding them . Lumps don't appear by themselves which means that particular photo was manipulated .

[paulmcleod67]

Don't know about "the lumps" but they are two different images one is cropped and enlarged the other is a straight image with stacking and contrast adjustments. Both I should not have posted until all the data was ready.
I won't make that mistake again.
And to be honest I'm over the whole storm in a tea cup "He's playing us for fools" rubbish.
Why would I Hoax this?
To what end?
And why would I try to hoax the hardest audience to deceive on the planet, when it comes to the subject matter, especially after what I've read lately here about what "Brett Green" did....who the hell is Brett Green and what did he do? (I really don't know)

I have written two good articles I wanted to post here for opinion but clearly we are not going to move on and just wait for the whole release. So I wont post anymore stuff here until the whole shebang is ready. And Ill check the boards every day so I'm not accused of what was it... "running away"? From what? And trust me I'm not upset, just bored with the silly remarks.

Cheers

I've already answered you matey

[Rastus]

Paul Im curious about you stating the photo was stacked. Being a photographer myself ( mainly wildlife but sometimes landscapes and low light long exposures ) I am familiar with stacking. Stacking as the name states is the stacking of multiple shots on top of one another,most often then not of static objects where each shot is framed exactly the same, to bring out more detail. This is achieved through tripods and other mounts to lock the camera in position.

But to my point, stacking is used for staic objects. Are you saying your Yowie remained still long enough to have your camera take mutiple shots all exactly the same which you then stacked? If the yowie didnt stay still and was moving we would see a ghosting effect of any moving object in stacked shots, however your yowie has clearly defined edges meaning it must have been static (if stacked). And also if it sat still your pictures would be a lot clearer and we could make it out better than it actually is?

Could you please clarify this for me please if you dont mind?

Thankyou.

[paulmcleod67]

No problem.
Here is a recent image taken by mism4mi in another thread. I used her initial image (on the left) because it is NOT one of my own.
I hope she doesn't mind me using it as an example.

I resized the image for ease of viewing.

Left original image
Right, Frame stacked (or layered) three times. The original image. An R.B.G (Red, Blue, Green) adjusted layer. And a contrast adjusted layer. Used to highlight more detail in the original image. Its the exact same image just enhanced (that is to say adjusted to see more details ) by stacking the same frame three times.

The one downside is that stark whites (such as the lighter) can bleach out or over contrast.

[paulmcleod67]

Paul Im curious about you stating the photo was stacked. Being a photographer myself ( mainly wildlife but sometimes landscapes and low light long exposures ) I am familiar with stacking. Stacking as the name states is the stacking of multiple shots on top of one another,most often then not of static objects where each shot is framed exactly the same, to bring out more detail. This is achieved through tripods and other mounts to lock the camera in position.

But to my point, stacking is used for staic objects. Are you saying your Yowie remained still long enough to have your camera take mutiple shots all exactly the same which you then stacked? If the yowie didnt stay still and was moving we would see a ghosting effect of any moving object in stacked shots, however your yowie has clearly defined edges meaning it must have been static (if stacked). And also if it sat still your pictures would be a lot clearer and we could make it out better than it actually is?

Could you please clarify this for me please if you dont mind?

Thankyou.

One image was a static camera photo. The other was a screen capture from footage. The third image, the one causing all the drama from what I'm understanding is cropped and enlarged from another segment of the same footage.

All this will become clearer when I release all the images and footage.
Cheers

[paulmcleod67]

All the posted images together .

[paulmcleod67]

And later I posted this cropped, stacked and enhanced image in an attempt to get more detail out of the face.

[missm4mi]

please feel free to use my photographs as you wish.
I took the photograph because I see a distinct set of toes. the central indentation I feel, does not belong to the footprint so to speak. I am aware that yowie try to disguise their tracks so maybe there is an element of that going on here. it's the toes and general footprint shape that get me every time I look at this photograph and that's what prompted me to take the photograph in the first place.

[Dion]

Paul a few more questions regarding you video below, why is it that you have deliberately mislead people?

In the video we have a tree branch which you have deliberately put through paint.net and or you colour filters to highlight the tree branch to make it stand out as something different to the tree. You are deliberately manipulating images yet again.

Tell me what sort of Yowie is going to be standing there right in front of you like a branch [cough] just so you can film it in broad daylight? None!

Please explain?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GypAi_A13Vw

Explanation of images:

1.jpg

2.jpg