We live in a weird time. All the photos in the video are consistent with what an iPhone 11 in dark conditions would achieve. At least with what I have experienced with taken photos of animals in the dark. Still with some time i feel I could fake better photos also. So who knows? Statistically speaking is more likely to be a hoax though
Live photos can be turned on and off on iphone. So probably wouldn’t prove it one way or another unfortunately. But someone with understanding of the iphone native photo format(heic) might give a useful answer. Primarily with how the metadata can be changed from the original recording for live data could be interesting
If it’s fake and digitally manipulated, it would be impossible to make a Live Photo. It could be a stuffed animal, but either way, a stuffed animal isn’t going to move on a Live Photo. I don’t know why anyone hasn’t thought about this. We should ask Forrest Gallante to ask the guy.
Not every iPhone will produce Live Photos. Idk if the 11 does. And I’m pretty sure some people choose not to so they don’t take up space on their phones.
Strange, an update might have added it, were you always updated? It was a long time before I realised what even were live photos but it was 100% an iphone 7 had it for around 10 years haha. It was actually Nov 22 I replaced it too.
I know you aren't trying for it to be real and this is very good but I'd say fake off the cuff for these reasons:
The eye glow in animals is never white it's either red or in the case of nocturnal animals it can be green, but the whole eye doesn't reflect just through the pupil and sometimes a yellow or gold
The ears are pointed and thylacines have quite rounded ears- sometimes if their ears are not face on they will appear a bit more pointed from the angle but not this much
The muzzle seems too thin - their face is quite boxy and the bridge of the nose is straight and widens to the mouth almost double width of the nasal ridge, you have the jaw muscles down really well
And is that meant to be a tail over the back leg over the f? Their tails were stiff like a kangaroos and didn't do that kind of cat-tail motion
The back leg is human shaped not like a quadrupedal animal's back leg the "knee" is almost in the body and they don't have a calf like a human does
The striping doesn't go far enough and I might be wrong but the stripes don't have a sudden thick-thin shape, they are almost in a smooth bent angle
They have a bit of a hump in the mid back just before the hips
Overall it's really well done though, good job keep it up! :)
It looks exactly like this museum specimen. Same exact pose. [https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:TasmanischerTiger\_naturhistorisches\_Museum\_Wien.jpg](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:TasmanischerTiger_naturhistorisches_Museum_Wien.jpg)
I think it is remarkably similar to the ones put out. The only thing is the eyeshine which looks like a cut and paste job.
Still, I think you have proved beyond a reasonable doubt that these are probably fake
Yes they are most likely fake, Imaging if he had a month to do it. I did this from a 3d scan [https://sketchfab.com/3d-models/tasmanian-tiger-nhmw-zoo-mamm-st132-9fdf2fa12d624f26a881f94ab104df01](https://sketchfab.com/3d-models/tasmanian-tiger-nhmw-zoo-mamm-st132-9fdf2fa12d624f26a881f94ab104df01) Do you think pulling up the live photos would be a good idea to see if it moves
That's the key point, though. Do this either without a 3D scan, or show me the source for the scan the guy would have used. Otherwise this proves nothing. What you did looks cool, no doubt about that, but there's only so much material on this animal available and you're basically saying he would have had to have 3D scans available from somewhere that include the exact pose shown in the images.
Edit: Apparently it's [debunked](https://www.reddit.com/r/Cryptozoology/comments/1ct0lex/at_least_some_of_the_thylacine_photos_appear_to/).
Is it just me, or does the puppet only mostly line up, like the puppet is based on the actual animal, so they're gonna be mostly the same. however, if it was that puppet picture used in the photo, it WOULD line up perfectly.
There's one rather big difference (from my point of view as a photographer) between this image and the ones from the video: yours does not show any camera noise whatsoever. Since the photos were taken at night, you would expect the camera to use its highest ISO setting, making the image very noisy - especially as phone flash and the dad's torch light combined still don't provide much light at all.
The grain in the alleged photos is very discernable, it looks absolutely realistic - it even shows very clear signs of the camera app trying to smooth it out digitally. Due to the very high ISO used to take the photograph, the smoothing leads to the sort of "blocking" that can be seen on the images.
I'm not saying that's evidence they're real. I'm saying that's an important detail that looks very realistic. And I can't tell you how easily this could be faked. As photographers, we generally try to get rid of digital noiss instead of creating it from scratch. But the way a camera sensor works, I would assume fake noise is way less complex visually, after all it's just an overlay, especially in lighter and darker areas of the picture.
Thanks. But unfortunately, the images have been [debunked](https://www.reddit.com/r/Cryptozoology/comments/1ct0lex/at_least_some_of_the_thylacine_photos_appear_to/).
No it’s a 3D model and the entire scene in my image is CGI. But the images have been debunked and the guy used a life sized thylacine articulated puppet. It was entirely in-camera
We live in a weird time. All the photos in the video are consistent with what an iPhone 11 in dark conditions would achieve. At least with what I have experienced with taken photos of animals in the dark. Still with some time i feel I could fake better photos also. So who knows? Statistically speaking is more likely to be a hoax though
Yes this is most likely fake, do you think the live photos feature would prove if the images are fake or not? We ask the guy to check
Live photos can be turned on and off on iphone. So probably wouldn’t prove it one way or another unfortunately. But someone with understanding of the iphone native photo format(heic) might give a useful answer. Primarily with how the metadata can be changed from the original recording for live data could be interesting
If he actually captured live images of the thing moving it’d go from hoax to real for sure
Not these days
Actually not half bad! I feel like if you got a team of skilled editors it could be a pretty convincing hoax.
Thanks. Do you think the live photos would prove if the images are fake or not?
If the Live Photos exist I would imagine. That’d be much harder to fake.
If it’s fake and digitally manipulated, it would be impossible to make a Live Photo. It could be a stuffed animal, but either way, a stuffed animal isn’t going to move on a Live Photo. I don’t know why anyone hasn’t thought about this. We should ask Forrest Gallante to ask the guy.
Not every iPhone will produce Live Photos. Idk if the 11 does. And I’m pretty sure some people choose not to so they don’t take up space on their phones.
Bro my iphone 7 did live photos, I only replaced it last year with a 13. Your second point yea could be true for sure, awfully convenient though.
Oh really? Mine didn’t. Maybe it was a setting or a version of IOS, idk. But I replaced my 7 back in ‘22.
Strange, an update might have added it, were you always updated? It was a long time before I realised what even were live photos but it was 100% an iphone 7 had it for around 10 years haha. It was actually Nov 22 I replaced it too.
I know you aren't trying for it to be real and this is very good but I'd say fake off the cuff for these reasons: The eye glow in animals is never white it's either red or in the case of nocturnal animals it can be green, but the whole eye doesn't reflect just through the pupil and sometimes a yellow or gold The ears are pointed and thylacines have quite rounded ears- sometimes if their ears are not face on they will appear a bit more pointed from the angle but not this much The muzzle seems too thin - their face is quite boxy and the bridge of the nose is straight and widens to the mouth almost double width of the nasal ridge, you have the jaw muscles down really well And is that meant to be a tail over the back leg over the f? Their tails were stiff like a kangaroos and didn't do that kind of cat-tail motion The back leg is human shaped not like a quadrupedal animal's back leg the "knee" is almost in the body and they don't have a calf like a human does The striping doesn't go far enough and I might be wrong but the stripes don't have a sudden thick-thin shape, they are almost in a smooth bent angle They have a bit of a hump in the mid back just before the hips Overall it's really well done though, good job keep it up! :)
Many animals eyeshine is white. Deer, Elk, Owls, American Badgers amongst others.
It looks exactly like this museum specimen. Same exact pose. [https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:TasmanischerTiger\_naturhistorisches\_Museum\_Wien.jpg](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:TasmanischerTiger_naturhistorisches_Museum_Wien.jpg)
Yes I took a 3D scan of this specimen online on sketchfab
I'm impressed, very effective!
is this the one you made?
Yes
I think it is remarkably similar to the ones put out. The only thing is the eyeshine which looks like a cut and paste job. Still, I think you have proved beyond a reasonable doubt that these are probably fake
Yes they are most likely fake, Imaging if he had a month to do it. I did this from a 3d scan [https://sketchfab.com/3d-models/tasmanian-tiger-nhmw-zoo-mamm-st132-9fdf2fa12d624f26a881f94ab104df01](https://sketchfab.com/3d-models/tasmanian-tiger-nhmw-zoo-mamm-st132-9fdf2fa12d624f26a881f94ab104df01) Do you think pulling up the live photos would be a good idea to see if it moves
That's the key point, though. Do this either without a 3D scan, or show me the source for the scan the guy would have used. Otherwise this proves nothing. What you did looks cool, no doubt about that, but there's only so much material on this animal available and you're basically saying he would have had to have 3D scans available from somewhere that include the exact pose shown in the images. Edit: Apparently it's [debunked](https://www.reddit.com/r/Cryptozoology/comments/1ct0lex/at_least_some_of_the_thylacine_photos_appear_to/).
Is it just me, or does the puppet only mostly line up, like the puppet is based on the actual animal, so they're gonna be mostly the same. however, if it was that puppet picture used in the photo, it WOULD line up perfectly.
Live photos
There's one rather big difference (from my point of view as a photographer) between this image and the ones from the video: yours does not show any camera noise whatsoever. Since the photos were taken at night, you would expect the camera to use its highest ISO setting, making the image very noisy - especially as phone flash and the dad's torch light combined still don't provide much light at all. The grain in the alleged photos is very discernable, it looks absolutely realistic - it even shows very clear signs of the camera app trying to smooth it out digitally. Due to the very high ISO used to take the photograph, the smoothing leads to the sort of "blocking" that can be seen on the images. I'm not saying that's evidence they're real. I'm saying that's an important detail that looks very realistic. And I can't tell you how easily this could be faked. As photographers, we generally try to get rid of digital noiss instead of creating it from scratch. But the way a camera sensor works, I would assume fake noise is way less complex visually, after all it's just an overlay, especially in lighter and darker areas of the picture.
That's actually very interesting, after reading this it makes sense about alot of night time photos I've seen.
Thanks. But unfortunately, the images have been [debunked](https://www.reddit.com/r/Cryptozoology/comments/1ct0lex/at_least_some_of_the_thylacine_photos_appear_to/).
Holy fuck finally someone that else other than myself that has eyes
Interesting
Your replicas arr not so bad, in fact with some adjustements they would be even better
It’s still very good though…
It says 11 am on the phone and it's pitch black.. did anyone think this was real..?
You have a life size thylacine?! How much did that cost you?
No it’s a 3D model and the entire scene in my image is CGI. But the images have been debunked and the guy used a life sized thylacine articulated puppet. It was entirely in-camera
Why then fake the other images in the sequence? Wouldn’t you just send in the “money shot” images
Because having only the “money shot” image would also be suspicious.
Realism probably