As Keating approached the trail head and about 200 yards away from the main road, he heard some movements on his left hand side. After listening for a few moments, he continued towards the road. He radioed Myers and DeWerth and told them to keep their eyes and ears open on the left side of the trail as they were approaching the road.
As Keating approached his car about 1/3 of a mile down C.R. 410, Myers radioed Keating and told him that he and DeWerth had been hearing some movement in the same area that Keating had just 15 minutes prior. Keating got in his car, rushed down the gravel county road, arrived seconds later, and rushed up the trail to where Myers and DeWerth were standing. Upon getting to the two men, Keating was told by DeWerth that they had been hearing some movement and as DeWerth was video taping, he was capturing the image of what he took to be some sort of creature in the underbrush.
After some 15 minutes of trying to spot the creature(s) with the naked eye, his own video camera, DeWerth's video camera and a failed attempt to flush the animal/creature out of the underbrush, Keating, DeWerth and Myers decided to head back to Newcomerstown.
Jumping ahead to current day (December of 2003). A video expert in the eastern United States has examined the video from DeWerth and has come up with the following conclusion. I might add that the one thing I disagree with in his report is that the three of us were NOT out there hoping to find a Bigfoot. Contrary to what the video examiner states in his very first paragraph that we "REALLY wanted to see something" we didn't go out to find a Bigfoot. We went out to hike and if we discovered something, it would have been a plus.
THE REPORT...
I've seen the video from this encounter and concluded that it was not a Bigfoot, but a combination of light and shadow, plus a bunch of guys who REALLY wanted to see something. No one but Marc saw anything, and even then he only saw it through his camcorder viewfinder. There was no other supporting evidence, no footprints or hairs.
I think Marc is good guy, and I think there is something going on in their area, but I don't think this report is a good one.
Here's the report I sent to Marc after examining the video.
Description - Marc DeWerth shot this video segment while investigating An area with a history of Bigfoot activity. Two other people were also With Marc that day, although neither of them saw the creatures that Marc describes.
In the video, Marc zooms in on what he describes as a "face" which is "looking right at" him. His nervousness and excitement are evident in the tape's soundtrack. At the extreme telephoto end of his camcorder's capabilities Marc continues to pan around the area. At one point he hands the camcorder off the Don Keating, who doesn't see the creature Marc has described. Don and Marc make noises to try and encourage some movement from the creatures, but their attempts have no effect.
I have met with Marc personally and have spoken to him at great length about this video. I visited the film site with Marc and Don, as well. I want to make it clear that I believe Marc's account of the events of that day. His sincerity is, in my opinion, genuine. There are, however, several factors which lead me to conclude that what he witnessed that day was not a Bigfoot, but an optical illusion caused a combination of his camcorder's focus hunting and the natural human tendency to mentally group shapes into a face.
There are several factors, which have brought me to my conclusion. The First issue is the fact that three people were at the film site, and all of them were at fairly close range to the creatures Marc described. And yet, only Marc actually saw the creatures, and then only through his camcorder viewfinder. At no point where any of the creatures seen with the naked eye, nor where any tracks found or other evidence collected at the site.
Close examination of the video in slow motion has convinced me that the Key facial features of the creature were actually an out-of-focus branch, swaying in the breeze. Given the fact that Marc was at the limit of his camera's zoom range, and the fact that the camera's viewfinder by it's nature makes the image two dimensional, it is understandable that Marc could have interpreted a face in the image he was viewing. The camcorder's hunting for focus, however, reveals that these key components of the creature's face were not in the same focal plane as the outline of the creature's head. The face seen in the video was in all probability an illusion of light and shadow, enhanced by the camcorder's lens and viewfinder.
Case Closed. It wasn't a Bigfoot. It was nothing more than an optical illusion of video and light as well as natural movements in the woods. Just goes to show... be careful with what you promote as being a living animal as compared to natural formations/growth.