Guest Crowlogic Posted August 18, 2008 Share Posted August 18, 2008 Nope .... I wasn't implying anything that you came up with ..You sure got a lot out of my post that isn't there.. Try reading it again in the context of the post I was replying to ... Well Greg Who had the cheaper suit? Roger or POA? Who had the better suit? Roger or the POA? IMO Roger had the better suit. Or to put it another way Roger's suit gave a better appearance and continues to give a credible appearance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Skeptical Greg Posted August 18, 2008 Share Posted August 18, 2008 Well Greg Who had the cheaper suit? Roger or POA? I have no idea, but that wasn't the point. Patterson only made one suit and he had years to cobble it together. There were hundreds in POA, and the makeup had to be redone every day. Who had the better suit? Roger or the POA? IMO Roger had the better suit. Or to put it another way Roger's suit gave a better appearance and continues to give a credible appearance. You are entitled to your opinion, but I will reserve mine until I see Patty up close and in 35mm .. I agree, Patty would seem less credible if she had on a jacket and pants ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Sasquatcher Posted September 12, 2008 Share Posted September 12, 2008 Not in 1967. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest GrapeApe Posted August 2, 2009 Share Posted August 2, 2009 Hey there! New to the forum but just wanted to add that with numerous reports that I've read of BF's in or around garbage cans/dumpsters/etc., that this might explain "flabby/overweight" wild animals. The same stuff that made us fat or flabby would be in the garbage as well. I don't know but ......maybe. :whistling: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Skeptical Greg Posted August 2, 2009 Share Posted August 2, 2009 (edited) " Flabby/overweight " wild animals would probably beasier to catch, also .. Edited August 2, 2009 by Skeptical Greg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest GrapeApe Posted August 3, 2009 Share Posted August 3, 2009 (edited) Ahhh,....first, you have to find them! Flab usually comes as a result of sitting still for a long time as well as eating too much or eating fattening food. At least, in most animals. All I know is that there are some pretty chubby lookin' squirrels around my garbage cans! :whistling: Hard to find something that lays low for long periods of time in the woods. Well, who knows? Maybe "Patty" just didn't lose the "baby weight" yet! Edited August 3, 2009 by GrapeApe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Crazy Ape Posted August 6, 2009 Share Posted August 6, 2009 Bill... I have nothing to add really to the context of the conversation, I just wanted to chime in and say I for one appreciate you bringing your expertise to the subject. Your posts are very informative and thorough, and bring more than a few fresh perspectives to the squatch world. I don't post very often, but yours and Jeff Meldrum's threads got me off my electronic duff. I also just saw the MonsterQuest episode earlier tonight (Wed. 8-5, History Channel) that you appeared in. Pretty cool approach that you take with your exercise in determining Patty's real height, in addition to your "head" recreations. Really enjoyed it. It's pretty fun to watch a master at work, especially when it's applying what he or she knows to a subject that's lacked very many credible people taking a serious look at it until relatively recently. I think (at least I hope) that I speak for a lot of people who are open minded about the topic when I simply say 'thanks'. And at the very least, it was kinda cool to say to the person I watched the show with..... "Hey, I just read that guys latest post about Patty's flab." Nice to put a face to a name. Keep up the stellar efforts. Most of us truly appreciate the time you take to do it. BTW... I have no idea where you're located, but I just moved to So Cal (Playa Del Rey), so if you ever need another wheel man for your monkey cart, I'd do it for nothing more than the experience! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TxDragon55 Posted August 6, 2009 Share Posted August 6, 2009 Look, I know I will more than likely make some people mad in here but this my two cents worth. I have watched the P/G film severaltimes over both online and on television. To me I do not beleive that it is a hoax. I feel that Mr. Patterson shot the film with a 15mm lens replacement instead of the normal 25mm lens that cameras came with. It does not take a rocket scienctis to change the lens..pradon the pun.."its so easy a caveman could do it". With the technical equiment we have at hand today proves that theory. Even IF mr. Patterson was a milloinair he just could have been able to reproduce a suit for a very large man to wear for such a hoax of this magitude. When Hollyweird made the POA film they had some of the best F/X people in the business working on that film. I have had the honor to see some the work done by F/X personal of this time period and I dont think they could have come up with the type of suit needed to reproduce "Patty" without the help of a computer which was not avilabile at the time of the P/G film. So in my own personal oppion I feel that the P/G film is real and they did see a B/f and made B/F history. And by the way..sorry for the typos just got up and have not my 2nd cup of coffee yet. :whistling: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Posted August 6, 2009 Author Share Posted August 6, 2009 Crazy Ape; Thanks for your comments. I am trying to make a factual contribution to this film's analysis, but that simple and useful goal does seem to sometimes get lost amid the often contentious bickering. TxDragon55: I don't believe we've met, but your comments are certainly welcome to the discussion. Bill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 6, 2009 Share Posted August 6, 2009 Bill, I really appreciate the time and effort you have put into the film. I think it's given all of us quite a bit more to think about as if we didnt have enough bigfoot lore swirling around in our collective brainpans already :whistling: Considering your background and Hollywood/Museum piece credentials I have a question. Forgive me if it has already been asked by someone in the past; if you had unlimited resources and time could you produce a believable suit or animatronic creature today? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Posted August 6, 2009 Author Share Posted August 6, 2009 Dantallus: "Considering your background and Hollywood/Museum piece credentials I have a question. Forgive me if it has already been asked by someone in the past; if you had unlimited resources and time could you produce a believable suit or animatronic creature today?" I think the question may have been asked a few times over the last year and a half, but I doubt that i could find the answers, so I certainly wouldn't fault you if you couldn't either. The forums become vast repositories of usefull info scattered amid a lot of superfilous chatter. So to answer you question anew, If an effort today was well funded and time was generous, something very close could be made, not as an animatronic (they still can't walk freely in open landscapes) but as a costume. The knee thing (short lower leg) could only be replicated by a suit person of similar anatomy (that can't be cheated with a longer leg made to look short) and the head shape is problematic because of the flat top shape relative to the apparent eye position on the fact. It would be fascinating to try though, if funding were available. I would actually love to see how close I could get to the film, and think it would be a fascinating thing to try. Bill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Sasquatcher Posted March 15, 2010 Share Posted March 15, 2010 (edited) Look at the size of her trapezius muscles! They are HUGE. That would be quite a suit to create all these muscles (which move under the skin as she walks.) Edited March 15, 2010 by Sasquatcher Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Posted March 15, 2010 Author Share Posted March 15, 2010 Sasquatcher: Rick Baker was probably the first to try and put anything like a trapezious muscle into a suit (for "Tarzan, the legend of Greystroke" released around 1983-4) because he had stretch fur and could fashion the body suit flowing up into the head and putting the split from body to face alone the head midline, ear to ear over the top. Before that, masks almost always split along the neck or shoulders and so a trapezious structure was a problem with those kind of mask designs. So seeing somebody try to simulate the trapezious muscle in a suit in 1967 would have been extraordinarily rare, if done at all. Bill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JohnWS Posted April 30, 2010 Share Posted April 30, 2010 I know you may well be generalising here, but it just occurred that as you have mentioned National Fibre Technology's products in the past, it may be misunderstood that that is what you are referring to here. It's well documented that Baker used a spandex material that was custom died to represent the mottled-skin tones revealed through the hair (the desired artistic effect - not a compromise). Individual hairs were hand-tied into this densely woven material - so in fact the suit material was pretty much a custom job. I don't know if this is the case here, but previously Baker had employed a piece of stretch material, hand tied with hairs to blend the back of the neck up into the crest of the skull (no doubt supported by a flexible dimensional understructure). Perhaps a third variant of the Humped Diagonal Split? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Posted April 30, 2010 Author Share Posted April 30, 2010 JohnWS: "It's well documented that Baker used a spandex material that was custom died to represent the mottled-skin tones revealed through the hair (the desired artistic effect - not a compromise). Individual hairs were hand-tied into this densely woven material - so in fact the suit material was pretty much a custom job." Just about everything NFT does is a custom job. Every order they did for me (such as the Gigantopithecus fur, my AST Ape suits, my chimpanzee science museum models, etc) were all custom orders to my specifications of hair color blend, density, guard hair to base fur color and ratio, hair length, etc. The uniqueness of the NFT company was that they were set up perfectly to do custom orders of almost anything the client could imagine and specify. If the density of the hair is thick enough, you never see the base spandex itself, but if you order thinner hair densities, you would see the backing if hair is bristled up. So Rick may have died the skin tone mottling effect into the backing, once NFT made and delivered his order. I've never heard of anyone successfully hand ventilating a spandex woven stretch base. The ventilating needle keeps snagging on the weave. All ventilating I've seen done was on some form of lace, and it is so thin, with a lot of open spacing, that dying that base won't make much difference in creating a mottled skin tone, because if you can see the lace, you can see whatever is under it as well. So what's under it would need the skin tone mottling. But I will agree that Rick always did his work with bold innovation and he was one of the true leaders of the transformation of makeup effects into the craft it is today. Bill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts