The 1933 Hugh Gray Photo

Thanks to Glasgow Boy - a brilliant Nessie blogger who takes a neutral and serious look at the varying and diverse (and sometimes contrasting) evidence - I was inspired to look at the 1933 Hugh Gray photograph and see if I could project a monster of my own out of this image.

Glasgow Boy's informative post on his own projection of what is in the picture is here.
You must read it in order to understand where I'm going with this.

I won't repost any of Glasgow Boy's wonderful work, with the exception of Hugh Gray's own testimony of what he saw on November 12th in 1933.

"Four Sundays ago after church I went for my usual walk near where the river enters the Loch. The Loch was like a mill pond and the sun shining brightly. An object of considerable dimensions rose out of the water not very far from where I was. I immediately got my camera ready and snapped the object which was two or three feet above the surface of the water. I did not see any head, for what I took to be the front parts were under the water, but there was considerable movement from what seemed to be the tail, the part furthest from me. The object only appeared for a few minutes then sank out of sight."

From the original wide angle picture, I was able to see what looked to be a tail, perhaps a dorsal fin or flipper curled up in the air as if the creature was rolling over and changing direction - much like an otter does - and what appeared to be the shadow of a second fin under the water.  Maybe a bit too zealous, I also projected a long tail trailing behind (submerged) using some shadowing in the water which could be submerged length further away from the camera.  If the animal is rolling its body and turning away (see arrow for proposed direction), the tail would no doubt follow the same movement in the water as the neck & body. I believe the darkness behind the body fits with this shape and movement.

What I did come up with does look rather prehistoric.
Do you see it - or is it just a trick of perception? ;)
More importantly.. when you look back at the original photograph - can you "not see" it anymore - or is it convincing enough that you see it in the original without the projected body shape. ;)

Below is the original - credits to Glasgow Boy - for this scan.

 

 
And here's the reveal ...  could this be there?

The arrow represents the animal arching back under the water.. this is why the frontmost flipper came up in the air as the creature is at the water's surface.  The back flipper is clearly a shadow close to the surface of the water. It's body is twisted.  The light parts are reflecting the sun you can see reflected in the water in the top left, while the dark parts are the dark color of the animal itself.  

It's head is turned on the side as it is turning it's body while changing direction away from the camera. I've projected a darkened portion of the photo which seems to be tail-like, assuming this would be near the surface enough to see a shadow (sorry about the blobby tail bit. Drawing with a mouse is like drawing with a rock. lol. )    I've also projected a jawline, head shape and possible eye location so you can see it a bit better.

Also for reference. I have added waterline estimations of the animal.  Because even I was losing track which parts were underwater once I traced the creature out.  :-p