posted on Jul, 25 2005 @ 11:29 PM
A bit of the motion blur corrected...
I don't think it's anything, in fact i think it's fraud only because the angle of motion blur was exactly 45 degrees and looked very much like it
was added to the image afterward because it was so uniform and short which to me, doesnt match the level of light and lack of blur from the horses
If that motion blur was real, it would mean the lense was open longer to allow more light in so the photo won't be dark. That open lense would also
show the horses legs, tail etc as being blured as they would be moving faster than any hand movement that an open lense that can pick up.
I'd say it was a photo that was taken, there was a slight resemblance to something being there and so they added to it then added the motion blur to
mask any artifacts from moving or cloaning pixals.
I think if you remove the 'legs' from this creature then it becomes little more than part of the road or possibly a falling leaf in the forground.
If the legs weren't there then i doubt anyone would see a creature in this photo.
I think someone took the photo, added to the illusion that there was something walking across the road and then added motion blur to round it all
That's my point of view on it.