• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Bigfoot - The Patterson-Gimlin Film

Status
Not open for further replies.
Kirk is one of the founders of The British Columbia Scientific Cryptozoology Club, and remains active with them.

The logo of the club shows what is supposed to be a Cadborosaurus ("Caddy"). It's not. They used an old photo of a found decomposed shark as the model. They think it was a Caddy. :D

topbar4.jpg

caddyphoto1.jpg
carcass.jpg
 
The whole head changes shape in front of your eyes like a glob of molten lava. I don't know how anyone can pull good detailed analysis from this. MK Davis does the same thing but comes up with different weirdness. He strips away color layers like Caddy did and then goes about looking for stuff. At this point, animations give the appearance that the grain of the film itself is boiling and wiggling. Patty retains an overall form but the surface of her body can look like it's crawling with bugs. Davis sees scars, eye drippings, clinging feces, a hair braid, etc. - and who knows what else he found last week. But in the single frame that shows this 'braid', the ear below it is really much smaller than Caddy found. Swindler found moving eyelids in the grainy chaos.
 
Watching Caddy and Swindler on MonsterQuest reminds me of Spinal Tap.

These go to eleven.
 
Last edited:
Diogenes said:
Oh, I almost forgot ... Here is Patty with her mouth open..
(image removed, I'm not allowed to post URL's or photos....)
===============
The enhancements are revealing in some aspects but misleading in others, for example the photos posted by Diogenes give the impression of a conical head or perhaps a sagittal crest. The sasquatch has neither; the skull is the same shape as mine, maybe larger but that mess on top of Patty's head is all hair and I believe M.K. Davis has the best stills of the hair which is pulled back and up swept into a top knot, then cascades down the back of her neck in a very long ponytail type arrangement....
Click to expand...
 
Drewbot said:
1. The view of Patty is tiny, because she is so far away, the magnification of the frames we look at blurs the fur to an extent. It is so far away and the camera so wobbly, that the fact that we see the flaws that we do is amazing.
Click to expand...

Come to think of it, I'd like to see what would happen if someone tried magnifiying that BBC sequence with the Optic Nerve suit.

3. Harry from Harry and the Hendersons, is considered by most Pro-PGF as evidence that Patty is real, because in the movie, the costume doesn't look 'real'. It has obviously long hair to cover seams. However, I believe that if the Harry costume was shot under the same conditions as Patty, the results would be far better than what we see with Patty.
Click to expand...

If I'm interpeting Stan Winston's comments on the PGF correctly, he was saying that he'd fire one of his people if they had made a costume using obvious fake fur with a uniform pattern. Rick Baker's Harry costume didn't have that problem. Sadly, this is ignored by many proponents, who love to snicker over the idea of Winston firing Baker for making a costume that's "inferior" to Patty.

Outside the Bigfoot proponent crowd, "Harry" is considered to be a very convincing Bigfoot costume, presumably due to the impressive animatronic head. This site includes it as part of a "top 20" list of creature suits and notes why it's not as "realistic" as some of Baker's other costumes.

By the way, I noticed something that kinda ties into this discussion while watching the special features for THE MONSTER SQUAD. Some interesting notes on creature suits are brought up during the 5-part retrospective on disc 2, especially for the "Gill Man." Said costume shows muscles, doesn't show bends or folds, and the mask required the performer to wear it with his face at a distance from the eye holes (which were obscured by animatronic eyes). Just be sure to avoid the unlicensed DVD by Pacific Family Entertainment, as it doesn't have those special features and is of inferior quality.

Speaking of special effects, an idea just came to mind: If Patterson really did make the suit on his own, could he have made a water bag using the empty liner from some box wine? Granted, there are other ways he could have obtained or built a water bag.

Also: The return of our old friend Tor.
 
William Parcher said:
The whole head changes shape in front of your eyes like a glob of molten lava. I don't know how anyone can pull good detailed analysis from this. MK Davis does the same thing but comes up with different weirdness. He strips away color layers like Caddy did and then goes about looking for stuff. At this point, animations give the appearance that the grain of the film itself is boiling and wiggling. Patty retains an overall form but the surface of her body can look like it's crawling with bugs. Davis sees scars, eye drippings, clinging feces, a hair braid, etc. - and who knows what else he found last week. But in the single frame that shows this 'braid', the ear below it is really much smaller than Caddy found. Swindler found moving eyelids in the grainy chaos.
Click to expand...

Does anyone think that the so-called muscle movements are also due to this? If so, making a recreation would be much easier without having to worry about making fake muscles move exactly like what's apparently seen on the film.
 
sierra4 said:
The enhancements are revealing in some aspects but misleading in others, for example the photos posted by Diogenes give the impression of a conical head or perhaps a sagittal crest. The sasquatch has neither; the skull is the same shape as mine, maybe larger but that mess on top of Patty's head is all hair and I believe M.K. Davis has the best stills of the hair which is pulled back and up swept into a top knot, then cascades down the back of her neck in a very long ponytail type arrangement....
Click to expand...
You would be a 'Patty is a Digger Indian' proponent, then?
 
Last edited:
SweatyYeti said:
"Houston......we have a problem"... :),

Actually, Bob Heironimus and his "believers" have a problem.


Here are side-by-side comparisons (properly scaled, though not exactly-aligned vertically) of Bob H. and Patty's skeleton, as determined by Vision Realm....


http://i172.photobucket.com/albums/w28/SweatyYeti/BobH222Correctlined2.jpghttp://i172.photobucket.com/albums/w28/SweatyYeti/PattySkeleton1lined1.jpg



The problem is....Bob H. does not have nearly the chest width that Patty does.
How was Roger able to increase Bob's chest width by the amount needed....with padding....and still have Bob's arms able to hang down straight?

http://i172.photobucket.com/albums/w28/SweatyYeti/HoHoHo1.jpg


That Roger was a true master of the suit....wasn't he??!


http://i172.photobucket.com/albums/w28/SweatyYeti/Pattywalk5.gif
Click to expand...


ATTENTION: Looking for short legged man to play huge gorilla. Must have legs shorter than body. Also, enormous girth an advantage.

Small heads only please.
 
I think more direct study of the surviving, self declared principals is needed.
That would be Bob Gimlin and Bob Heronimus.
Also, if there are any costume people who have ever made a revealing declaration about the proposed PGF suit. Mr. Morris, etc.

Such as, what was Bob Gimlin's personal account of the encounter? Or better, does his contemporary account still hold?
And what particularly did Bob Heronimus have to say about being the man in the suit? Did Heronimus have experience being in a costume? That would be important.
 
You would think that with all the example of costume changing the proportion on bodies, somebody would have LEARNED by now to avoid drawing blue/red/yellow lines on screenshots of Patty and compare them to real life person... But I have the sinking feeling this is not the last time you will have to do such an insightful answer dfoot.
 
Aepervious wrote:
I have the sinking feeling this is not the last time you will have to do such an insightful answer dfoot.
Click to expand...


Wow....such insight! :boggled:

Let's take a closer look at this "insight".
All Dfoot managed to show was that a suit can add to the outer dimensions of the body, very easily....

Bodysuit3.jpg



The problem with Bob being inside of Patty's "suit", is that Bob's chest and shoulder widths are distinctly narrower than Patty's....yet Patty's arms hang straight down, and move fluidly and naturally, all the way up to the shoulder.
The padding, in this case, involves an inside dimension....the distance between the inside of Patty's arms.

Padding-out Bob's chest to equal the width of Patty's chest would most likely not allow for the fluid, natural-looking movement of Patty's arms, that we see in the film.

Pattywalk5.gif



How about if we see that Gorilla suit in motion....with all it's distinct body contour, and fluid arm movement...comparable to Patty's.

Now that would be some real insight. :)
 
Last edited:
Kitakaze wrote:
What's to like? I see a blurry photo of BH with arbitrarily drawn lines on one side and artistic interpretation with arbitrarily drawn lines on the other.
Click to expand...


The lines I drew were not drawn arbitrarily. They were drawn at the outer edges of the subject's chests....to show the difference in their widths.

You're not too bright....are you?
 
No one knows Patty's actual shoulder width or chest size or anything else, or if it's a suit, the dimensions of the suit.

The estimates made from the film itself, or by comparing people to Patty are just that, estimates. They could be way off.

The idea of drawing lines on what may well be a suit and saying "See, the shoulders are this wide!", is pretty strange.

Patty's motion is just like a human being's. So all this fluidity garbage is nothing more than attempted obfuscation. Patty walks like a man, which is exactly what the experts who first viewed the film said, and it's exactly what Roger Patterson said.

The creature portrayed is a primate and clearly hominid rather than pongid. Its erect
attitude in locomotion, the gait, stride and manner of that locomotion, as well as the relative proportions of pelvic to pectoral limb are all manifestly human, together with the great development of the mammary glands.
Click to expand...

to quote Dr. Osman Hill regarding Patty's walk and body. Manifestly human.

These latter-day attempts to wedge in the idea that Patty walks funny are just more attempts at obfuscation by the believers.
 
Last edited:
How about if we see that Gorilla suit in motion....with all it's distinct body contour, and fluid arm movement...comparable to Patty's.
Click to expand...

Again we see Sweaty trying to create facts out of things that are actually questionable. What distinct body contour? What fluid arm motion? From a 1.5mm high figure on old grainy 16mm film? A figure that has been processed more times than anyone knows?
 
We need to peg down when the idea of the funny walk got started.

No one mentions anything about a funny walk when the film is released as far as I can tell. The walk is always described as just like a man.
 
 
SweatyYeti said:
Padding-out Bob's chest to equal the width of Patty's chest would most likely not allow for the fluid, natural-looking movement of Patty's arms, that we see in the film......
Click to expand...
You need to stop referring to the ' width ' of Patty's chest until you show how such a measurement was obtained ..

Why do you use Vision Realm as a source then ignore their conclusions - that Patty was 5' 7" ?
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom