While I consider myself to be more or less agnostic on the subject of sasquatches sasquatchery? I'm not sure how it all came to be, but there was that famous two-part episode of "The Six Million Dollar Man" back in the mids that may have been hugely influential.
A little bit of Google investigative work determined that Ian would have been 5 years old when those shows aired and, if forced to, I'd wager we watched them at the time of their original broadcast. The next major "Bigfoot" memory I have is from the following Christmas possibly the year after, but certainly no later , when the gift of "Big Foot: The Giant Snow Monster Game" arrived under the tree. I'm not sure what ultimately happened to this masterpiece, although our mom was notorious for throwing things out a polar opposite of a hoarder that we still liked to use occasionally.
I know we played this game over and over upon first getting it, with the biggest pleasure coming from getting to move the Bigfoot piece and stomping a circular white tile with black footprint on an opponent's space to knock him out I think that's how it went, anyway. I liked the game so much that I even started a short-lived "Big Foot League" and kept standings.
Wow, was I a nerd or what? By , I think it was, my dad had moved to an apartment on the second floor of a two-story house. I recall a bedroom having what was roughly a inch black-and-white TV that was equipped with cable, which back then was nothing like the three-gazillion channels one gets now. Instead of the three major networks and PBS, we got three independent stations from New York City and one from Boston, too, which meant all kinds of vintage cartoons as well as introductions to "I Dream of Jeannie," "Gilligan's Island" and a barrage of other comedy classics.
Recordings of these noises occasionally attract media attention but can usually be attributed to known animals, such as foxes or coyotes. Related: Real or not? The science behind 12 unusual sightings. Shot in Bluff Creek, it shows a large, dark, human-size and human-shape figure striding through a clearing. Widely considered a hoax, it remains to this day the best evidence for the existence of Bigfoot. With the rise of high-quality cameras in smartphones, photographs of people, cars, mountains, flowers, sunsets, deer and more have gotten sharper and clearer over the years; Bigfoot is a notable exception.
The logical explanation for this discrepancy is that the creatures don't exist, and that photographs of them are merely hoaxes or misidentifications.
Related: Did hiker film Bigfoot, black bear or 'Blobsquatch'? In his book "Big Footprints" Johnson Books, , veteran researcher Grover Krantz discussed alleged Bigfoot hair, feces, skin scrapings and blood. In most cases where competent analyses have been made, the material turned out to be bogus or else no determination could be made," Krantz said.
When a definite conclusion has been reached through scientific analysis, the samples have typically turned out to have ordinary sources. For example, in , a team of researchers led by geneticist Bryan Sykes from the University of Oxford in England, conducted genetic analysis on 36 hair samples claimed to belong to Bigfoot or the Yeti — a similar ape-like creature said to exist in the Himalayas. Almost all of the hairs turned out to be from known animals such as cows, raccoons , deer and humans.
However, two of the samples closely matched an extinct Paleolithic polar bear , Live Science previously reported. These samples may have come from an unknown bear species or a hybrid of modern bears, but they were from a bear, not a primate.
Related: Bigfoot's FBI file reveals strange story of a monster hunter and 15 mysterious hairs. Genetics provide another reason to doubt the existence of Bigfoot. The science suggests that there can't just be one elusive, unique creature. Knowing the difficulty of taking a quality picture without a quality amount of light, the insufficient light is offset by artificial light.
There are essentially three different types of flashlight that is currently on the market, white flash, Infrared, and black flash. White flash and infrared will produce the most light for the camera, but with the drawback of creating a visual light is that it is inclined to increase awareness of the camera to wildlife.
Black flash, while is not visible light to animals, or humans for that matter, creates less of an effective light for quality of the photo, often making the photo darker in appearance.
The true reason for blurry trail camera photos is the difficulty of balancing artificial light, in an environment in which an animal is moving at night while limiting the grain in the photo.
All of these calculations and readings by a trail camera happen in the amount of time it takes to blink, which is measured by the coveted trigger speed. Feeling overwhelmed with the idea that there is nothing you can do to stop your camera from taking blurry photos? Don't be there are plenty of little things you can do, without much effort, that could have an effect on blurry photos. If you still are not running lithium-ion batteries in your trail camera, you are doing yourself a great disservice.
Lithium not only withstands cold weather better than any battery on the market, but it also has the lowest discharge rate, meaning they will always produce 1. This will give you the needed power to run your camera effectively. Alkaline batteries, while a few cents cheaper per battery than Lithium, have an immediate and gradual discharge of power.
The moment you place alkaline batteries in your camera, it begins to lose power. It is impossible to control light around your camera, for properly exposed photos when you are constantly losing power to your flash. Use lithium batteries, it's simple, its a quick change, and in the end, you will be thankful you did.
Interpolation is when a company uses software to duplicate pixels inside a photo to make the photo have more pixels than it is capable of producing. The size of the image sensor is what is important when it comes to megapixels, especially when it comes to night time photos. Night time photos under infrared light produce black and white photos, and if you begin to duplicate pixels under these parameters, the software is guessing on which pixels should be white and which ones should be black.
In doing so, the lines between only two distinct colors begin to blur together, becoming even more problematic when you are fighting motion blur. Megapixel counts have become a marketing gimmick that companies use to try to sell more cameras. I have seen one trail camera company who promotes having a 24 MP photo, only to say in their owners manual that for almost every application the 4 MP is your best option.
Don't feel as though you need to use the highest setting of megapixels your camera has to offer. We recommend only using megapixel counts 2. It will create less blur around the edges of the subject in your photo, decrease your file size, and save some battery life. Seemingly every week I receive an email from someone who asks for my recommendation of the best cheap trail camera on the market. They claim they don't want all of the extra features of a more expensive camera, they just want to get a photo of a deer.
Seemingly every week I receive an email from someone who is complaining about motion blur, and their frustrations with not being able to get a clear photo of a buck's antlers. Don't be that guy. There is a distinct difference in the way trail cameras are engineered, manufactured, and programmed, based on the perceived type of setting you will be using the camera.
Exodus has a great resource on the difference between static and dynamic sets , that is worth checking out. More often than not, cheaper priced cameras tend to be built more for static sets, such as feeders, scrapes, and watering holes, where the movement of deer is minimal and predictable.
Since the movement is more predictable, the exposure tables for these cameras are often less complicated. Lack of movement allows for slower shutter speeds, allowing more light to reach the exposure of the photo. This allows the manufacturer to use less powerful artificial lights, and slower trigger speeds, which creates a lower price point. All of this is great, until you take a camera that is designed for a static set and use it in an area such as pinch points, saddles, and field edges where deer tend to move, and not stay still.
These types of areas are known as dynamic environments and require a camera designed for these types of sets. A camera designed for dynamic environments will be engineered to handle faster shutter speeds, quicker trigger speeds, and will be equipped with more powerful lights. All of which are excellent tools for capturing moving objects. Knowing your environment and understanding your camera's capabilities will alleviate a lot of frustration with blurry photos.
Knowing that eliminating motion blur is a constant balance of light and shutter speed, especially during night time photos, it is important to try and manipulate light in order to seek the best results from your camera. The more light you are able to keep in the area directly in front of your camera, the better opportunity you have to allow a fast shutter speed to capture movement. Here are a few quick tips to create more light in your photos.
0コメント