Creature Suit Analysis - Part 6 - Comparative Anatomy

[Guest]

Bill, I thought the photo was made by Meldrum, the cast by Titmus but I can't confirm either. I'll try to pin down the source unless someone beats me to it. A little help?

Edited March 27, 2008 by Gigantofootecus

[Guest colobus]

I made that image, and made also the cast from the master mold in Meldrum's lab. That's the same cast impression as that shown in the most well known of the Laverty photos.

[Bill]

Guys:

Thanks for the info.

My question is still, when was the original cast made, and under what circumstances? If there's a link to that info (since you guys clearly know a lot more than I do) that would be fine.

Bill

[Guest Remember November]

Bill:

the cast was made by Bob Titmus 9 days after Patterson made his film. It is a cast of the same print shown in the Lyle Laverty photo below.

Edited March 27, 2008 by Remember November

[wolftrax]

I think you're being a bit dismissive here. Who exactly stated a stick created the bump, and how would they know? You think a stick created this?

JG: [Pause] Probably an unusual one from the casts that Bob Titmus made at the Patterson/Gimlin film site. There's a real break in the middle of it. For years we just assumed that it had stepped on a stick, but when Jeff Meldrum was studying the casts, he pointed out very quickly that there is a twig sticking out of the ground right beside it, but this had nothing to do with it. The imprint was made by a foot that bends in a way that human feet don't.

http://www.bigfootproject.org/interviews/john_green.html

Unless you ascribe to the tracks being created separately, then flopping rubber toes don't create deep impressions in the substrate. Flexible AND rigid? I dunno.

It becomes obvious that if the subject was a man in a suit, the feet would be flexible.

[wolftrax]

I'm going to clarify here, and restate what I was responding to.

Ok....so if Patty's foot bends at the midtarsus, then that is the mime's foot flexing at the midfoot....which is anatomiclly impossible.

So would there be a way to make the suits foot bend at a beifferent spot than the mime's?

I don't dismiss that sasquatch or Patty have a midtarsal break, it's just that these frames do not show it. I also have seen Tube's flexible foot leave what would be considered a midtarsal break, along with toe depressions. I have also done these experiments myself as well as with Tube.

The midtarsal break theory does have, or is theorized to have precedence. It is also argued against.

The Laetoli tracks have been theorized to show a midtarsal break, however Tim White, one of only a few who have actually examined the tracks in the ground, has stated they have an arch. However, it has been noted that the talus of Ausralopithecus afarensis resembles an apes more than humans in regards to flexibility. Exactly how this relates to the midtarsal break in bipeds, and more specifically to this track, has yet to be shown.

Is this a midtarsal break, or is there another explanation? I've seen the cast of some of the Laetoli tracks in Meldrum's lab. I've also created midtarsal breaks in experiments with flexible fake feet. It's not anatomically impossible, and since we can't see for sure if Patty has a midtarsal break in the film, it isn't a certainty.

Edited March 27, 2008 by wolftrax

[Bill]

Wolftrax:

By chance do you know of any existant mammals that do bend the foot there when walking? Bears maybe?

Just curious is the break in the foot there has some known examples from known animals.

Bill

[wolftrax]

Yes, Bill, apes do have the midarsal break. It's a characteristic of being arboreal. The foot flexibility gives the ape greater flexibily to grasp branches.

What's debated is how much of that was left as bipedal apes became bipeds and how it worked once they were bipeds. Afarensis seems to have the tarsus for a midtarsal break, but then again if it did it was very subtle, as it seems to be there in the Laetoli tracks but the tracks also look like they have an arch. One other note about the Laeoli tracks, is that the weight would begin on the heel, then shift to the lateral (outside) edge of the foot, and then finally extend out of the lateral digits, similar to chimps. In humans and our arch, our weight shifts to the hallux (big toe). The midtarsal break in Patty seems to show the weight shifting after the midtarsal break to the medial side of the foot, and equally being supported both on the medial and lateral sides of the metatarsals and the phalanges (toes and bones that connect the toes to the tarsals and ankle bones).

The thing that Tube and I found, was that using large flexible feet in sand, was that it was almost a natural way to walk with a compliant gait, and that a depression that resembled what is said to be a midtarsal break in Patty's track was quite common.

Edited March 27, 2008 by wolftrax

[Guest]

We see what could be toe flexion, or could also be rubber toes flopping around. I'd have to look at the frames before they were enhanced to make sure it isn't some sort of background noise that was enhanced before making any further comments on it.

The cast is 14 1/2", if you ever get a chance to see it in person hold it up to your feet. Mine is a size 11 and my arch matches up to the same spot as in the cast, with my foot being in the main body of the foot, while the toes would hang loose.

You would also see the geometric shape to what is called the midtarsal break, like a tube or stick was underneath the substrate, and indeed this was what it was considered to be.

I f the toes are flexible enough to flop around, could the toes still be stiff enough to leave impressions? (Assuming the toe flexation is not a film artifact.) Bill? Any help here?

Ooops, I missed the post above that covered this. The toes in the film do seem to flex up for a longer time than one would expect if they were loosely flopping around.

Edited March 27, 2008 by Kooch

[Bill]

Wolftrax:

Thanks,

I recall watching Tim White do a demo of the Laetoli footprints in some documentary, and remember the suggestion the weight had to shift to the outside of the foot. So that's what you're referring to.

*****:

Okay, building a fake foot that bends can be done several ways. One is the cheap way, just a soft foot worn on the real foot, and it bends just as the real foot does.

If you put some kind of hinged framework in the fake foot, then comes the question of how the hinging action is controlled. Is it just a loose hinge, gravity affected? It it spring loaded to either flatten until forced to bend, or bent unless forced to flatten. And what controls the force to change it?

These are all potential design problems with making false feet work with bends. It's not impossible, but it does take some engineering imagination and probably some trial and error R&D to get things working just right.

I'd never thought before about hinging at the midtarsil break, but I had often wondered about hinging a bigger foot at the ball and base of toes, like the human foot does.

I've never personally built such a mechanism, so I can't say "this is what I did", as i can say with other suit elements, and I don't know offhand of any other successful foot hinged mechanics for film suits (they might be out there, just I'm not aware of them). So all I can say is the various hinged feet structures are possible, but do require some degree of engineering imagination to build and make work.

As far as floppy toes, they would not likely make any impresion in the earth. You'd need solid toes and a strong action of pulling them down flat to make the impression, and then a release to let them flip up to more easily make the next step (by flip up, I mean the foot actually bends upward and the toes hold a level pressure on the ground, but the toes are bending up relative to the foot arch section.

Not sure if I'm explaining it well. Diagrams would help.

Anyways, possible, not easy, and the theory and the practice are probably far apart.

Now, question for anybody:

if the foot casts above were from the Patty event (hope I'm figuring that correctly), does anybody know if there was any discussion or analysis of a midtarsil break in any research prior to that event? In other words, if somebody was making faked footprint impressions, did they know the break was being studied and thus made a fake foot impresion device to reproduce what had been previously researched? Or did the midtarsil break analysis only begin long after the casts were made? Just curious.

Bill

[Guest]

Thank you, Bill. The question you have asked is a good one. I think Meldrum was the first to bring it to attention, but I can't say it wasn't studied before him. Or the late Grover Krantz, maybe?

Edited March 27, 2008 by Kooch

[Guest Remember November]

[wolftrax]

I think the analysis conducted here is based on an assumption of where the hair meets the heel, and assumes the only exposed areas are the plantar area (sole) of the foot.

[Guest Remember November]

I think the analysis conducted here is based on an assumption of where the hair meets the heel, and assumes the only exposed areas are the plantar area (sole) of the foot.

Can you show us where you think the hair meets the heel?

[Guest Remember November]