Creature Suit Analysis - Part 8 - Neck Hackles

[Guest soarwing]

.... In my world- we design and build things every day- I dont see the problems.

If its a suit- its a garment- so one would expect anyone who does garments would have those skills as an example.

.... Of course it would take skills but it wouldnt take skills at a level that any reasonably technically capable person wouldnt have.

Maybe I'm not seeing it but what "skills' or level of expertise are there that would make replication so "impossible" The ability to sew? follow patterns? use common sense, personal initiative and a phone to buy materials?, cut/shape padding with a hot knife? make stuff out of latex?

- - - How can you reconcile the above with your earlier opinion that: (In your dialog with Bill)

"Here are our mutual take aways:

The materials were available- thats a fact

IF Patterson made this suit- he was the luckiest SOB on earth

There is nothing in the PGF that "screams" fake"

- - -

Why would Patterson have to be the "luckiest SOB on earth" if what we see in the PGF could be built by - in your words - " any reasonably technically capable person"?

- - -

BTW:

I never used the word impossible, nor did I say it couldn't be done.

That's your strawman.

Edited February 6, 2008 by soarwing

[Guest longtabber PE]

And I would agree, there is a difference between those two words. Just because they make special tiles for the space shuttle, that doesnt mean NASA will send me one... So, while something is available, its not always attainable (able to be purchased or given).

Bill and I discussed that last night as well ( as in this thread) and I didnt really think about from this angle until thinking about crows post.

One possible answer is "tunnelvision"- everybody gets it from time to time.

Its the difference in mindset and search parameters between

1) searching for a specific thing with specific qualities for a specific function

2) conducting a global search to see whats out there and will it work

As far as "finding" the stuff ( and this "unattainable degree of difficulty") I asked my buddies abner and vern and heres what the good old boys said: ( this is how one would find anything)

Vern: Abner, ah wanna build me wun of dem monster suits but i dont know were to get the stuff and I aint never built a suit but I think i can. I been building stuff all mah life.

Abner: well verne, its a suit aint it- lets go ask the tailor

they ask the tailor- he says his furs are too expensive but go to the fabric store on 5th- they go

vern: maam, I want to build me one of them hallween suits like a monster and i need some stuff to do it with

Lady: Sir- we have all kinds of patterns and stuff over there on aisle 3 and lets look at some of our vendor catalogs to see if theres any fur you like. We can probably help you or give you information on how to make things too. Its one of the ways we take care of our customers sir. We also have all types of foams in our upholstery section. We dont work with foam but old man Jake at the furniture store does and he's been making furniture for years. I'm sure he would help you shape it and maybe cover it.

Vern gets the addresses and stuff- vern calls mayble the operator and asks to be connected to Acme at BR549- Vern asks for them to mail some samples so he can decide what he likes best. he calls jake and gets information.

Why is the above simple search process to find and obtain raw materials so difficult, impossible, unlikely or beyond the abilities of mortal man or was otherwise "impossible" for anyone to accomplish in 1967?

[Guest soarwing]

.....Why is the above simple search process to find and obtain raw materials so difficult, impossible, unlikely or beyond the abilities of mortal man or was otherwise "impossible" for anyone to accomplish in 1967?

- - -

It's not impossible if you're the "luckiest SOB on earth".

[Guest longtabber PE]

- - - How can you reconcile the above with your earlier opinion that: (In your dialog with Bill)

"Here are our mutual take aways:

The materials were available- thats a fact

IF Patterson made this suit- he was the luckiest SOB on earth

There is nothing in the PGF that "screams" fake"

- - -

Why would Patterson have to be the "luckiest SOB on earth" if what we see in the PGF could be built by - in your words - " any reasonably technically capable person"?

- - -

BTW:

I never used the word impossible, nor did I say it couldn't be done.

That's your strawman.

I dont do straw men- in that thread, I was addressing that comment basically to the world- not you specifically.

In reconciling this

>>>IF Patterson made this suit- he was the luckiest SOB on earth

There is nothing in the PGF that "screams" fake"

- - -

Why would Patterson have to be the "luckiest SOB on earth" if what we see in the PGF could be built by - in your words - " any reasonably technically capable person"?

The answer is in the information I obtained inbetween the 2 posts. Bill and i discussed primarily the usage of the common available "fur" type cloths and that was our focus. After his detailed class on suit construction and the fact there arent "obvious" seams and the naps that would have had to match for true integration to be almost "invisible"- I went away convinced it would indeed take someone at the level of master craftsman to make a suit out of those materials.

However- since that post- watching the vid looking at key points and having several conversations with people in textile with far more knowledge than I- I discovered there were many more variants out there that I didnt consider and much more available and ways to work with them that were also available.

The pendelum swung back. Thats all

- - -

It's not impossible if you're the "luckiest SOB on earth".

LOL, see the other post- a lot more information now than then- it changed the whole situation

[Incorrigible1]

Either Robert Patterson was the luckiest SOB on earth, or the cagiest hoaxer of all time. All in all, one hell of a guy, either way!

[Guest longtabber PE]

Either Robert Patterson was the luckiest SOB on earth, or the cagiest hoaxer of all time. All in all, one hell of a guy, either way!

One way or the other- he made it in the history book and made a little money- not bad

also tho- theres nothing etched in stone saying the alleged suit was made by his hand so regardless of what he may or may not have known- it may just be as simple as WHO he may have known

[Guest soarwing]

I dont do straw men- in that thread, I was addressing that comment basically to the world- not you specifically.

In reconciling this

>>>IF Patterson made this suit- he was the luckiest SOB on earth

There is nothing in the PGF that "screams" fake"

- - -

Why would Patterson have to be the "luckiest SOB on earth" if what we see in the PGF could be built by - in your words - " any reasonably technically capable person"?

The answer is in the information I obtained inbetween the 2 posts. Bill and i discussed primarily the usage of the common available "fur" type cloths and that was our focus. After his detailed class on suit construction and the fact there arent "obvious" seams and the naps that would have had to match for true integration to be almost "invisible"- I went away convinced it would indeed take someone at the level of master craftsman to make a suit out of those materials.

However- since that post- watching the vid looking at key points and having several conversations with people in textile with far more knowledge than I- I discovered there were many more variants out there that I didnt consider and much more available and ways to work with them that were also available.

The pendelum swung back. Thats all

LOL, see the other post- a lot more information now than then- it changed the whole situation

- - -

Fair enough.

Great info.. thanks longtabber.

Although I'm skeptical that the availability of certain textiles in 1967 can make the difference between being the "luckiest SOB on earth" and : anyone with moderate technical ability could have produced the PGF suit.

If - in 1967 - there were other KNOWN examples of the two textiles (as used in suits) that you considered to make the recent distinction, I'd be more likely to accept your wildly differing opinions.

[Guest longtabber PE]

- - -

Fair enough.

Great info.. thanks longtabber.

Although I'm skeptical that the availability of certain textiles in 1967 can make the difference between being the "luckiest SOB on earth" and : anyone with moderate technical ability could have produced the PGF suit.

If - in 1967 - there were other KNOWN examples of the two textiles (as used in suits) that you considered to make the recent distinction, I'd be more likely to accept your wildly differing opinions.

Let me give you a bit more detail. Bill and I focused strictly ( i guess "our" tunnelvision) on fur ( stretch and various backings) ONLY from the clothing side of the textile industry ( its what hes used and its the side i have worked in)

I was unaware of the depth of the industrial side of the textile industry. Bill specifically asked me was I aware of other types and methods and my answer was "not that I'm aware of"

I made it a point today as I told Bill I would and investigate any other options thus I have called several people and 1 specifically is a known guru. I got another education today regarding that side of the industry.

As a matter of fact, my guru made a bit stronger case AGAINST it being made out of conventional clothing grade fur types than Bill did. he came right out and said regarding textile technology then until nonwovens and modern processes were developed sure, anyone could make a suit but because of the properties of wovens- you couldnt disguise the seams from cutting/forming under MOTION ( you could brush them invisible while static but the second they were stressed- they would separate and show) if your life depended on it. He also reminded me that in any production run, the naps and hue variances of the process would make all shaping visible to anyone who knew how to look for them ( as any QC inspector would) ESPECIALLY in sunlight as well as the woven/tuft processes make the backing "stressed" so it would buckle even if bonded to any substrate such as foam padding.

He said the only way you could hide all that was to get pile 5-6 inches long that literally covered everything like a mop head. ( which isnt the case in the PGF)

Thats when we went to the more industrial knits and the almost infinite backing substrates and the rules changed. Since it would be the same fibers in the pile ( fur) and the process differs in the interlocking of the substrate- the visual appearances wouldnt change but all mechanical properties would.

as far as using 'known" samples- you have them.

Just look at any synthetic fur of the day- since it would be the same fiber- they would look identical ON THE SURFACE- but with a more flexible process ( knitting) and on backings such as gauze cloth or latex mesh ( or a thousand others)- it would be much more flexible, move easier, be LIGHTER and more suitable to bonding to say foam, bladders etc ( since they would be chemically similar) and with prestress built in- they wouldnt bunch like the harder/denser wovens would. They would be more 'skin like"

I'm feeling pretty good today- i got an education last night from a master suit maker and got enlightened from an industry guru today. I've learned a lot in the last 24 hours regarding materials and processes that could have built such a suit.

[Bill]

Wow, I leave the fort for a few hours and the debate gets hot and heavy.

:evillaugh:

I'm picking up from my post #42, and softening up Melissa (which could be an exciting thread of its own)

Melissa, in your post #43, about the shuttle tiles, it actually goes to the heart of this whole fur issue, in that we have Longtabber's wonderful research and knowledge to confirm the fabric industry had the capability to make a stretch fur cloth (like the ones that finally surfaced in the 1980's) but we have no apparent proof such a product actually existed until the 80's, and we have the practical consideration that going to any big and easy to find fabric industry mill would entail a massive machine run (1000 yards or more, enough for 400 suits) plus maybe some serious R & D money if we didn't have an existing furcloth sample in hand to say "match this, please".

The delimma is that there is the theoretical "it's possible" and the "it's not likely" we are trying to balance. That something can exist does not mean it does exist, and that something may indeed truly exist does not mean a given person can get it.

Each person has a degree of effectiveness or competence in finding things, some people find things through respected industry channels, while other people find things by just hunting around odd places.

Now Longtabber clearly is an "industry guy" with associates in the fabric industry, and a wealth of experience locating products by the industry standard process of going to a B2B directory like the Thomas Registry, and finding a vendor.

Very few Hollywood people are "industry guys" (or gals), who had any experience at all operating on the product search/find processes of larger businesses and industries. We are scavangers, essentially, looking around at anything we can find, including metal parts and electronics surplus stores, junk yards, medical supply and dental supply sources, store manniken shops, etc.

I for one did try several times to go to a big company and ask them about their products, and their entire mindset, their way of inventorying their lines and their product specifications, plus their volume mentality usually ended up in an utter waste of time for me. It went nowhere. I might want a gallon of a special latex liquid (and a gallon would last me a few months, at least) but the sales rep I get routed to by the receptionist loses all interest in me as soon as I admit I'm not looking for 55 gal. drums.

So I can say that I have, and I know others among my peers did as well, tried to go the "big industry" product search route, and it usually was a waste of time. We needed something "now" (almost never had any lead time), we needed a small qualtity (by big industry standards, our volume was laughably small), and we rarely had the precise industry specifications, and in the industry-correct jargon, to even articulate what we wanted to them. I once went round and round with a latex chemical engineer, when he wanted to know the tinsle strength and the blah-blah shear index of my need, and I just wanted some latex that has a good memory and low residual adhesion. We literally couldn't talk to each other, and I recall this guy was trying sincerely to help me.

People deep in a major industry often forget they have their own industry jargon and entire operating procedure for how products are specified, evaluated, and distinguished, a world apart from how somebody outside the industry would talk, know or understand.

I started in 1968, and it took me 40 years to find Longtabber. What you can build depends on what materials you can find, and nobody stocked fur or hair "in case" they got a suit order. They waited until they got a firm contract, with a deadline to deliver in 3-12 weeks (something like that), and they had to have the hair found and bought in a week or two at most.

What we could find was what we used, and any "theoretically, you can find it" doesn't cut it with the reality of our business. And I have to assume if a non industry guy (Patterson) tried to find fur for a suit, he'd be in the same boat.

That's real world, imperfect, make due with what you can scrounge up soon, reality. And my assumption is that if Patty is in fact a suit, she was made under these real world less than theoretically perfect circumstances.

Moving on to Titus post #48

Thanks for the compliment, which goes all around to everybody contributing here.

OklahomaSquatch:

The shadow patterns aren't directly conclusive (seeing real individual hair strands standing bristled up and relaxing would be wonderful, but the film resolution does not permit and no enhancement will fix that) but seeing shadows on a film is indirectly a means of analysing what is making the shadows, and inferring from that the action of that which makes the shadow.

So the shadow patterns do still have merit to study.

Melissa, post #51

That actually has been my driving concern all along, that while I have to concede maybe it's possible, I look at it and have a real hard time seeing it is probable, and that's with me actually building one (a suit) in my head, seam by seam, foam pad by foam pad, literally going through the whole job, step by step, detail of craft by detail.

Matt (OklahomaSquatch) in post #53

You are correct. Fur has a capacity to move in some ways. Foam shaped muscles have a capacity to move, flex, expand, and compress in some ways. But the elastic tension of the furcloth will fight with the muscle padding for control, and who wins is based on the physics of each material, as well as the human mime's motions. Adhesives, zippers, glued seams, and the like also impose areas of rigidity that force motions of padding or fur to "go elsewhere", to bend or buckle in areas of less resistance to the bending or buckling.

You can leave the outer suit as a "skin" seperate from the underlying padding, and indeed dress a person first into the padding and then dress them into the fur, or you can fuse the fur and padding together, (both options have been tried ) but neither is going to move like muscle because their physics and structural architecture are different. It isn't that they are shaped differently, you can shape them like musculature. It's that they move differently than real muscle and real skin. And nobody's replicated that with anatomical credibility.

Crow Logic post #54

Your ball bearing search is a wonderful example of my description above, of hunting for things with a scavanger mentality, rather than a business to business specify/order/ship mentality. It's percisely how we found most of the stuff we used. And sometimes we lucked out, sometimes we didn't. It was very unpredictable, finding things you needed.

Punisher post #58

Using a hot knife to cut foam does burn the edge cut surface, and that burned part does usually make that part hard. But not so hard that it becomes unuseable. And soft foam, used for muscle padding is usually cut with a turkey carving electric knife. rigid foams like styrofoam are more likely cut with a hot knife or hot wire.

And using an electric turkey carving knife to cut flexible foam is exactly the scavanger mentality we use. It wasn't made to cut foam, but it's available and it works. We use what we can get.

Schillerville in post #60

Actually, I'm personally of the opinion that if its a hoax, it couldn't have been done unless some Hollywood people were involved, not only building it but there the day it was filmed. I can't imagine anybody without signifigant suit fabrication experience and experience on set managing and grooming it (an amateur) pulling off what I see.

Soarwing and Longtabber

I hesitated to get into your enchanting dialogues because I'd never finish typing. Not meaning to ignore you guys in this reply to the other threads.

Bill

[Guest longtabber PE]

Bill

Bill, regarding this

>>>Melissa, in your post #43, about the shuttle tiles, it actually goes to the heart of this whole fur issue, in that we have Longtabber's wonderful research and knowledge to confirm the fabric industry had the capability to make a stretch fur cloth (like the ones that finally surfaced in the 1980's) but we have no apparent proof such a product actually existed until the 80's, and we have the practical consideration that going to any big and easy to find fabric industry mill would entail a massive machine run (1000 yards or more, enough for 400 suits) plus maybe some serious R & D money if we didn't have an existing furcloth sample in hand to say "match this, please".

The delimma is that there is the theoretical "it's possible" and the "it's not likely" we are trying to balance. That something can exist does not mean it does exist, and that something may indeed truly exist does not mean a given person can get it.

I was looking at it from the "big plant' perspective and full size ranges. I was unaware that there were literally hundreds of "jobber plants" established as satellites for small runs with their own supply chains in all 50 states that could have made/sold by the roll or to order ( in a min quantity) I even got a name of one that was known to exist them doing this exact thing and had outlets in Washington State. I also didnt consider the complete industrial side either so going to auto supply houses ( that sold upholstery items), hardware stores, furniture stores, upholstery shops in addition to the normal fabric outlets would probably have catalogs etc to get these items.

These products and their advertising were in fact even MORE available to the general public than I would have believed.

>>>Using a hot knife to cut foam does burn the edge cut surface, and that burned part does usually make that part hard. But not so hard that it becomes unuseable. And soft foam, used for muscle padding is usually cut with a turkey carving electric knife. rigid foams like styrofoam are more likely cut with a hot knife or hot wire.

When we did that- we used either a side grinder or dremel to sand off the hard edges.

[Bill]

Afterthought

Seems I get these flashes of inspirational wisdom immediately after clicking the "send message" button. Curious how that thing happens so often.

Short lesson in "real world" Hollywood survival.

In 1984, a tuly wretched film, "Return of the Living Dead" was being planned, and I'd worked with the producer successfully on a prior film, so I bid and got the job doing the zombies. But they wanted some zombie figures so emaciated that no human actor could fit inside, so they went to a company that did big entertainment technology projects, massive stage concerts (like Michael Jackson's ones in the 80's, when he was still black). So this company is set to do the talking half corpse zombie animatronic, while I'm set to do the usual masks and prosthetics of people.

But funding gets hung up, so we wait, and wait, and finally, we get a go on the film. And we have 6 weeks to prep it. So we have to go from Zero to Done-ready to film in six weeks. As an experienced film guy, I hit the ground running and I'm buying materials as fast as my deposit check is cleared by my bank. I have almost everything I need bought in one week, including a lot of specialized stuff I find at salvage shops, scrap stores, and the close-out bargin bins of fabric stores, etc. The big entertainmant company also starts their human machinery a whirling to do their animatronic.

At three weeks into prep, the half way point, we have a production meeting with all crew heads, to review where we stand. I report on all my progress, how many zombies are done, how far along the more mechanical zombie stuff I'm doing is assembled, etc. And the big entertainment company sends three department managers to the meeting with a macquette (a design model roughed out in super sculpty t show their idea), and they intend to use the meeting to refine the "scope of work" document they need, to pass on to their people, so they can start to plan the job, so. . . etc. 50% into the alloted prep time, and they have "zip". They have a mindset of procedure they intend to follow, oblivious to the fact that they are about 1% done with 50% of the time elapsed.

Right after the meeting, they were fired, and another FX kid was brought in to jump on this half-corpse (they figured I was maxed out with assignments, which I was).

Big business methodology doesn't cut it in Hollywood. You have a few weeks, maybe a few months to do most jobs (or at least then, the 60's 70's even well into the 80's) and you hit the groung running from day one, full bore, flat out, grabbing anything you can get, picking up anything local, or occasionally UPS Overnight, if the vendor has it on their shelf for sure, and you can't waste much time searching for potential vendors of something you've never bought bofore.

So, from experience, you don't call a big company, talk to a sales rep, send then a "Request for Quotation", then issue a Purchase order, and wait 8 weeks for the shipping department to send it out. That whole big company routine fails you every time you try it, so at some point, you just stop trying it. You remain a scavanger, because it works, and that's all that matters in Hollywood. You make it work, or you're history.

(actually sometimes you're history even when you do make it work, as I and several other crew leads were dumped on that job by a director who, shall we say, had an explosive temper and resided in an alternate reality.)

Longtabber, I know you're really trying hard to show us the way to find these resources, and finding them is easy for you, but the movie biz has it's own alternate reality of what's easy and what's hard. I can do some things effortlessly and well that you can't do, and you can do some things effortlessly and well I never could do. In a sense, we are each a product of the industry we worked in and so we survive and operate by the perimeters of our business, our effective reality, not an alternate business' effective reality.

Bill

[Guest Crowlogic]

Bill

Do remember Full Moon Productions? They made and perhaps still make quirky sci fi and horror flicks. Puppet Master was one of their better efforts. But they usually included trailers on the VRC tapes that talked about how the movies were made and how they did some of the special effects. The design theory for the effects was simple, cheap and effective which they were. I seem to recall the FX people priding themselves of creating some of the stuff they did from almost nothing.

Edited February 6, 2008 by Crowlogic

[Bill]

CrowLogic:

That's because "almost nothing" is usually what we were given then, as raw material for our miracles.

Only after the "Golden Age" kicked in (after American Werewolf" and "The howling" did studios realize if they gave the Makeup/FX people better budgets and more prep time, (and maybe even R&D time, WOW!!), we could do really spectacular stuff.

And the people did deliver, until the infamous CGI revolution stole most of the creature guys' glory.

But, yeh, we did pride ourselves in making something neat out of the oddest assortment of junk and oddities.

:evillaugh:

Bill

[Guest longtabber PE]

Longtabber, I know you're really trying hard to show us the way to find these resources, and finding them is easy for you, but the movie biz has it's own alternate reality of what's easy and what's hard. I can do some things effortlessly and well that you can't do, and you can do some things effortlessly and well I never could do. In a sense, we are each a product of the industry we worked in and so we survive and operate by the perimeters of our business, our effective reality, not an alternate business' effective reality.

Bill

Aint that the truth LOL

But while we are looking at this thru our respective careers ( along with their own parameters)- in this instance- the focus needs to actually be the situation from Patterson's eyes ( or whoever may have made this suit)

As far as i have ever heard- the alleged maker of this suit had literally "infinite' time to research, design,build and maybe even rehearse this "event" ( possibly even making modifications etc while constructing said suit)

Unless someone knows of some reason why this film had to be shot on that day ( and no other) or there was a rush ( as in a short window)- who can say that this suit wasnt planned in detail, practiced on, experimented on over say a period of 6 months or more ( a year for that matter) and what we are seeing is the result of a well planned construction? Who can say the "idea' for this wasnt hatched in 1966 or even before?

You and I are slaves to our masters and their ever decreasing timelines ( not to mention having to jump thru hoops with every change order) but as far as i have ever heard- none of those apply to someone allegedly making a suit for this film. If there was no timeline constraint- I see nothing prohibiting the alleged maker ( whoever that person may be) from having plenty of time to plan the construction, research for materials, do plenty of experimenting and perfecting, build it at a leasurely pace and spreading the costs out for maybe even a year or more.

The next step being that if all the above were done- you could have a high quality suit built thats the product of a paced out effort- no different than any other home project.

[Bill]

Longtabber:

Excellent thought. An amateur could indeed take years to do this, at any leisurely pace. But he'd have to do it without film industry help, because film industry people, so good at intense short term miracles, don't have a lot of "staying power" for a liesurely open ended task that drags on for years, unless it's a true labor of love they themselves initiate and put their name on.

Also, if they volunteer to help the outsider who's taking his time, they usually end up putting the urgent paying jobs first, and constantly bumping the "help the amateur" project to the back burner, and then drop out as a participant, after bumping it too many times.

Again, goes to probability. Most projects like this, with some industry help, fail to ever reach completion. And with no industry help, again, we have the "Amazing Amateur" theory.

:evillaugh:

Bill