Creature Suit Analysis - Part 9 - A Study of Probability

[wiiawiwb]

Makes perfect sense Bill.

What doesn't make sense, to me, is an untrained, fledgling amateur making a suit that can not even be made today or, if it can be made, has yet been displayed for the world to see. And then to find that unhumanly-proportioned person to don the suit and grace the dance floor (sand substrate).

Not buying it.

[Guest kfoster]

In the post by Tontar above with the inset of Patty's lower extremity in the action of a couple of steps, he had some question about possible bunching of material at the junction of the rear upper thigh and the buttocks. I guess I don't see bunching there, but do see an action of the fur very similar to the action at the same location on some of the walking bears I have studied, especially well fatted boar coastal grizzlies. That particular location in the film also helps me get some idea of hair length in that portion of the body, which is somewhat hard to determine in many locations on the body.

Also the film shows that Patties thumb leaves a consistent horizontal line on the outside of the thigh, which may make things look kind of squared off there. The line on the thigh helps me interpret where her hand/thumb arrangement is located. I am 6'2" tall, but have an arm spread of 6'3", and my thumb contacts my thigh higher on my thigh even when trying to walk with my legs bent to a similar degree as Patty and leaned forward some. Patty's arms are just so much longer relative to her height and leg length than exhibited in me. However, somewhere in the world there may be someone built with relative dimensions as exhibited in Patty. I know one man who lives in my city that 6'3" tall, but has legs shorter than mine, and his shoulder level is about 2 inches shorter than my shoulder height too. He is all neck and looks kind of odd.

Patty's compliant gait, whereby she does not fully straighten her leg prior to foot contact with the ground is very similar to watching a human sprinter. When a human sprints, the upper body also moves along one horizontal plane rather than bobbing up and down as is exhibited when a human walks. A human sprinters leg also comes up very high behind during each cycle. Also, a line of tracks in the sand where a human has sprinted will show no straddle, as one foot is directly in front of the other, as if the runner were running down an invisible tight-rope. Many tracks I have investigated of sasquatch show little to no straddle when the sasquatch seemed to be walking right out at a fair clip, but does show some straddle when the sasquatch apparently slows way down and the tracks are less distant from one another.

As for the compliant gait, our library has a very old tracking book that addresses tracking humans. It was an old enough book that it was concerned with determination of differences between how a white man used to wearing shoes and a native American used to wearing soft moccasins leave tracks. The concern in the book was that white men might don moccasins and commit a crime and the natives would be blamed, but the tracks could determine the more habitual heavy heel impact of a man used to wearing hard heeled shoes and also that the white men would have more angle of gait by habit. The person used to walking in moccasins step softer to avoid damage to the heel and also evidently with a more compliant leg angle at impact that straightens the foot and also results in less straddle. It also said in the book that a white man used to wearing hard shoes would soon start using the softer steps after wearing soft moccasins habitually. I would be interested some day to personally examine a line of tracks of some South American natives that still live all their lives without shoes to see the differences that apply in humans.

[Guest Apeman]

I was both intrigued and befuddled by the images Tontar posted here last year from the movie One Million BC but only managed to recently recall that at the same time I was updating my NetFlix queue. So I finally watched the movie and figured out why the figure I was "seeing" in his still capture was so skinny- A: because it's obscured by the foreground.

As a reminder, here is Tontar's montage:

and here is my effort to show what's happening with the costumed actor passing between some foreground objects:

Nothing incredibly dramatic but I assume there are others who were misreading the image like I was so I did this to help illustrate. I agree with Tontar's observation that this OMBC figure (and others) have some remarkable similarities to the PG figure as I tried to show with this poor composite of the movie figure slightly building on what Tontar did already:

In addition, something I don't think I've ever seen mentioned here is the similariy with the feet from the costumes as seen here when the OMBC apemen were rolling on the gorund during a fight:

Anyway, make of this whatever you choose, I just wanted to flesh out a little more info from the costumes in that classic movie... in case any of you don't want to have to 'suffer' through a few scenes of Raquel's furkini yourselves.