Hi Bill,
Wellcome to the forums. Fist of all, thank you for addressing my comments. Its really interesting and exciting to discuss this subject with people who are really intersted in dicussing it and do have real information to exchange.
Forst of all, I will need, at least throuygh the following two weeks to be very brief on any interchange; I'm a bit overloaded with work.
...snip...I explain exactly why suits, in general need helpers. I've worn them for movies. And I explained how people can condition themselves to more endurance in a suit. And I explained how amateurs can wear them as well. I explained about padded suits and suits that allow for air circulation inside (like stroller costumes for theme park employees. I covered all the considerations. You just failed to read them.[/
No, I haven't- at least those made in the last month or so. Sorry, I haven't had the time to check BFF after this, so I will not be aware of any new stuff.
I must stand by my statements; basically I feel that a person, specially if used to hard work, could perform as Patty, specially because he (whoever he was) would have two helpers. Or at the very least, one. Not to mention that the "Patty performance" was not very long.
Now, do you agree or not? If not, why?
The principle difference in technologies, between stop motion animation and real time filming is that the fur can be groomed before every single frame of film is taken (for a stop motion model). In live performance filming, one can groom a suit only until the camera roll, then the suit and the motion of the actor inside may ruffle the fur and expose seams, and the assistant grooming the fur has no potential to step in during filming to correct it. Live filming represents an entirely different set of rules about how fur can or cannot be groomed. Comparing it to stop motion work is truly apples and oranges, in terms of seam hiding processes and potential.
I partially agree with you, and my posts on the issue shows why. Of course the building and filming techiches are different. The true question is: Considering seams can be hidden in miniatures filmed at close range (by a number of means) would the seams of a full-sized costume be visible at PGF's resolution?
My opinion is no or barely.
Now, from this point, let the discussion begin.
"Curious that you feel one person's expressing his opinion is a "red flag regarding his objectivity". Don't every one of you here in this forum express your opinions in nearly every thread. I said the breasts tend to be more humanistic than apelike, and that I didn't see anything about them which I felt was particularly unnatural in that context. And I discussed at leangth exactly how a person could fake them, with 60's technology. Did I base any conclusion on a perception of "looking natural"? No.
Bill, here's the problem:
"I didn't see"
Its the very same issue we've been dealing with for a long time. Personal impressions. As you just said, you did not see anything particulary unatural. Well, I see. In this particular issues, saying "it looks real for me" is just not enough. You certainly are familiar with Monty Python's "The meaning of life". Well, there's a scene of several bare breasted women running. No silicone. Please point me to a single one whose breasts move like Patty's breasts.
Frankly I don't think they're an issue that determines true or false. They could be real, they could be fabricated. Arguments can be advanced either way. Neither would be conclusive in my opinion.
I would agree with you if it weren't for the words you wrote above, regarding not finding anything wrong with Patty's breasts.
"Lack of anatomic understanding/knowledge is not expected in an individual whose work is costume making and building animal replicas. "
Interesting criticism, considering I won two "Best In World Recreation" awards at the World Taxidermy Competition, 1988 and 1992, for my anatomically perfect sculptural figures of real animals, including primates. I was invited back in 1995 and 1997 to judge and lecture at that event. And Breakthrough Magazine published over a dozen articles on my realistic wildlife sculptures and techniques. Correa Neto, may I ask your resume of anatomical study or expertise as well, so you can verify that you have anatomical understanding and knowledge. Or must I presume yours while defending mine?
Bill, I think I was clear from my posts. I see I wasn't. So, I will try to be more clear.
I think that regardless of your qualifications, personal bias have seeped in your analysis of Patty's breasts. Please understand that qualifications apart, what impress me and can make me change my mind are evidence and arguments. So far, the reasons you exposed to back your positions on how hard it would be to build a Patty costume, specially the parts I have outlined, have failed to convince me, regradless of your CV. These are two things apart.
Now, if you want to know more about my personal background, please drop me a PM and I will send you some info.
