Just checked my trail cam....you draw your own conclusions.
- Thread starter Wrong Way
- Start date
Wrong Way
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
That's the dude from the "Messin with Sasquatch" commercials for Jack Links Jerky......now PLEASE, can you just move on? Your clever links to off-site photo's is clogging an otherwise an intelligent thread.
Go check out the youth forums and stir up some #### with your peers.
Go check out the youth forums and stir up some #### with your peers.
Based on the markers on the snow, and the positions of the camera not changing, this is what you get when you give the image the right size and position.. (and yes, I did change the contrast and brightness of the image to get the markers in the snow which was used to locate the same marks in the snow on the original image.)
By not posting the picture in it original form and size, you are INTENTIONALLY trying to make the image look like something it's not. Thats obvious, when you put it in context with it's original picture..
Make you own Decision
By not posting the picture in it original form and size, you are INTENTIONALLY trying to make the image look like something it's not. Thats obvious, when you put it in context with it's original picture..
Make you own Decision
Last edited:
Kitty?
Wow, that's impressive use of technology, for sure!
How you do dat??
Also, not to stray too far off the thread, trailcam pics are fun no matter how excited we get about what we're squinting at. Besides, it's that time of year.
Wow, that's impressive use of technology, for sure!
How you do dat??
Also, not to stray too far off the thread, trailcam pics are fun no matter how excited we get about what we're squinting at. Besides, it's that time of year.
Simple use of Photoshop.. all I did was play with the brightness and contrast until the snow gave a good pattern. I did it with both pictures.. then by Eye, I located what looked like the same pattern.. I then resized the manipulated image
and overlayed it until the snow patten was the same on both images..
I didn't even need to get to the program which showed if any pixel manipulation was being done. (make it easy to detect if two images are merged, or any pixels where changed by airbrushing etc..)
Wrong Way
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Actually, that is kinda cool....too bad you couldn't just use the info to help solve this without being an asshat 
Now, one flaw.....the pic of the deer is not actual size, thanks to photobucket. If you can cease being a dink for a while, I can email you the original of the deer and you can do your computer magic to help us figure it out. The other flaw is that those two images were taken days apart, and the snow can't POSSIBLY be the same
And for the record: There was no "deliberately misleading" anyone. As I stated, up until now I emailed photo's from my cell to view at home....SOP was to crop around what I wanted to see, get the image small and mail it. Like I said: When I sent it I saw an "animal", I didn't see what you saw until I opened the image on my PC....and what you see in the image is EXACTLY what I sent myself.
Now, one flaw.....the pic of the deer is not actual size, thanks to photobucket. If you can cease being a dink for a while, I can email you the original of the deer and you can do your computer magic to help us figure it out. The other flaw is that those two images were taken days apart, and the snow can't POSSIBLY be the same
And for the record: There was no "deliberately misleading" anyone. As I stated, up until now I emailed photo's from my cell to view at home....SOP was to crop around what I wanted to see, get the image small and mail it. Like I said: When I sent it I saw an "animal", I didn't see what you saw until I opened the image on my PC....and what you see in the image is EXACTLY what I sent myself.
Last edited:
BTW, I don't want to hijack this post, but while this picture really looks like a "house cat" and that the proof above is hard to contest, there is definitely a cougar presence in the East, at least in Qc and NB. I am in contact with Mrs Helene Jolicoeur, Biologist from MNR Qc, responsible of the fur animals and great predators files (I do supply her with coyote / wolf DNA and measurments for further studies by the MNR).
Here's what came out of my discussions with her; they istalled "rubbing poles" in different locations (Qc, NB) to catch some "cat hair" for further DNA tracking. From the 120 samples they collected, 10 were positively identified as cougars. 8 in Qc (1 from Saguenay-Lac-St-Jean, 1 in Quebec City area, 2 in Gaspesie, 3 in Eastern Townships and 1 in Abitibi-Temiscamingue) and 2 in NB (Fundy National Park). Now, that's where things goes funny; 4 cougars had North-American DNA, 4 had South-America's sub-species DNA (found in Qc and NB...) and two where too damaged to make it clear (DNA loss).
There was also one killed in the late '80's in Abitibi-Temiscamingue and this one too, was from one of the South-American subspecies (from Chile).
What come out from this is that there have been some of these cats wich have been released in the wild after the laws changed (in the '70s, and then again in the late '90s). The searchers believe they were often released in couples, by illegal "breeders". That is because they can't track South-American DNA in the US and Western Canadian populations (it is almost impossible that one or many cougars have travelled all across the two subcontinents (south and NA) without leaving DNA evidences of their travel) .
Then, for the North-American subspecies, there is no way for now to determine if those found in the east were really from the eastern cougar (Puma Concolor Cougar) subspecies, because there is no DNA of the possible subspecies availlable for now to make it clear. And also because the Eastern cougar is now believed to have been a land-locked "common" cougar, so the DNA sdifference might have been very little.
But one thing is sure; the cougar is present in the East, but it's tought to be in (very) small quantity. Now they have to determine if this presence is due to the expansion of the Western population in the East or is this from a continuous subtile residual presence.....
Here's what came out of my discussions with her; they istalled "rubbing poles" in different locations (Qc, NB) to catch some "cat hair" for further DNA tracking. From the 120 samples they collected, 10 were positively identified as cougars. 8 in Qc (1 from Saguenay-Lac-St-Jean, 1 in Quebec City area, 2 in Gaspesie, 3 in Eastern Townships and 1 in Abitibi-Temiscamingue) and 2 in NB (Fundy National Park). Now, that's where things goes funny; 4 cougars had North-American DNA, 4 had South-America's sub-species DNA (found in Qc and NB...) and two where too damaged to make it clear (DNA loss).
There was also one killed in the late '80's in Abitibi-Temiscamingue and this one too, was from one of the South-American subspecies (from Chile).
What come out from this is that there have been some of these cats wich have been released in the wild after the laws changed (in the '70s, and then again in the late '90s). The searchers believe they were often released in couples, by illegal "breeders". That is because they can't track South-American DNA in the US and Western Canadian populations (it is almost impossible that one or many cougars have travelled all across the two subcontinents (south and NA) without leaving DNA evidences of their travel) .
Then, for the North-American subspecies, there is no way for now to determine if those found in the east were really from the eastern cougar (Puma Concolor Cougar) subspecies, because there is no DNA of the possible subspecies availlable for now to make it clear. And also because the Eastern cougar is now believed to have been a land-locked "common" cougar, so the DNA sdifference might have been very little.
But one thing is sure; the cougar is present in the East, but it's tought to be in (very) small quantity. Now they have to determine if this presence is due to the expansion of the Western population in the East or is this from a continuous subtile residual presence.....
Actually, that is kinda cool....too bad you couldn't just use the info to help solve this without being an asshat
But being an Asshat is so much more fun.. it keeps the topic going. (and occasionally gets them locked..
) once you get to know me, you won't hold it against me.. you could size the deer based on the "Average" cat size, and going upwards from there. If you knew the distance from the pile to the camera you could calculate it as well.
if you knew the dates, you would also take into account the temperatures in the area, and calculate the actually decay in the size of the snow pile
