11 thoughts on “A Giant Squid”

  1. The close up still image just looks so CGI to me. I’m sure that’s because of the lighting sensor designed not to be detectable to the the squid. Still it just looks a little prestine.

  2. I remember there was images/video of a giant squid 6 months to year ago. And discovery was doing a special, is this announcement timed with the special or new footage. I have a pretty good long term memory and sometimes the news cycles throw me for loops…. When something that had happened months ago get mentioned again cause of some event to bring it back to public eye.

    1. Those were squid larvae in captivity, unless Discovery came up with something new while I wasn’t looking.

      This is a much larger specimen (3 meters) in its natural habitat.

      Also, the article should say “images of a live specimen” rather than “live images,” which means something else in English. 🙂

    2. I recall that as well. I believe that previous instance was first still pictures of a live giant squid in it’s natural habitat. This instance is, I believe, the first video of a live giant squid, although they’ve only released stills from that video so far.

    3. If I’m remembering the same thing, those previous images were of pretty poor quality. IIRC, they snagged a giant squid on a lure and took some still images of it struggling to escape. These released images are vastly superior to those I saw a year or two ago.

      1. I remember that one, too.

        There were also pictures of a giant squid that some fishermen hooked by mistake, but it didn’t live long.

        There’s also the collosal squid, a different species.

        There seems to be a sort of race among documentarians to get pictures of the giant squid.

        1. Yeah I sort of recall it didn’t look too spectacular at least the ones that were released at the time. Though suppose another trick journalist do, the discovery made a press release didn’t release the pictures so the journalist went and found the pic from squid on the hook from 2005 to have a pic with the article.
          There is this
          Well looks like it fits my time frame even though that article is from this month.

  3. I find the achievement interesting and notable, but something struck me as odd in the article: it mentions that the images were captured last July, and we’re only seeing them now.

    What would be the motivation for delaying the announcement for six months? Did it really take them six months to get everything ready to release a few images, or is this a case of journalists just being really, really slow on the uptake? (Perhaps a press release did go out last July, but no one paid attention until it was a slow news day six months later.)

    Not that I’m suggesting there’s any kind of malfeasance here, but once you have some video or photos in hand, it takes about sixty seconds to put them online, so I’m scratching my head.

    1. Well Matt look at the thread before, Myself and several others seem to recall this being in the news several months ago. But the images are brand new. Their ginning up for the tv special.

Comments are closed.