Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Guest

The Pendulum Limbs In The Opening Frames

Recommended Posts

Guest

Well I don't think we need to get silly and suggest things like superhuman speed or anything, I think we can maintain a little more mature standard than that. What I do find interesting is that her hip movement, although not really looking human, because obviously she is not quite the same as us, does show some interesting movement there that could relate to the way they swing there feet up and slightly around to produce the more inline tracks than we typically see produced by people. Keep up the good work Romano, I am impressed with your demonstration of butt movement, verses inanimate padding.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Well I don't think we need to get silly and suggest things like superhuman speed or anything, I think we can maintain a little more mature standard than that. What I do find interesting is that her hip movement, although not really looking human, because obviously she is not quite the same as us, does show some interesting movement there that could relate to the way they swing there feet up and slightly around to produce the more inline tracks than we typically see produced by people. Keep up the good work Romano, I am impressed with your demonstration of butt movement, verses inanimate padding.

"Well I don't think we need to get silly and suggest things like superhuman speed or anything, I think we can maintain a little more mature standard than that,"

Thank you for making my point. Suggesting that Paddy's foot speed is superhuman, based on a two frame gif, is a bit silly, but it's no more silly than saying that there is observable contraction of the trapezius, and flexing of the tricept, based on the same gif. Neither is legitimate evidence. So, let's do try to maintain a little more of a mature standard, as you have suggested.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Noting the contraction of the trapezius , and the flexing of the tricept is not silly or immature, it is what the clip apparently shows. You are certainly welcome to your opinion of what you are seeing, but your opinion is just that, opinion. Your also more than welcome to decide for yourself what you consider legitimate evidence,as am I. I see the trapezius contract, I see the tricept rise and bulge, I see the her hip move and rise, among many many other features that indicate moving living muscle verses a padded suit. You see it differently, but make no mistake about it, your opinion does not constitute legitimate evidence, otherwise we would not see it being discussed here, so many years after the event. There is no need to make such a ridiculous statement as alluding to super speed, then attempting to tie it to my opinions in some sort of effort to derail some ones opinion that does not agree with yours. So I agree, lets try to keep it mature, you do not need to be offended and attempt such tactics, just because someone does not agree with you.

Edited by JohnC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

John, your primate photos do highlight the muscular nature of creatures in the wild. Good post. I don't see the same degree of wrist banding, but rather the cessation of fur at the transition to the hands. The banding is still of particular interest to me, as it looks especially overt in Patty, but as I have not yet read prior threads for a more in-depth discussion, I'm not going to posit as conclusion.

I too see movement in the gif posted, clearly the back and hips are swiveling as Patty walks. Nonetheless, I cannot exclude the notion that a suit would not twist slightly as an actor walked, in fact I would expect it to do so, as it must follow the physiology of the underlying man.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest thermalman

@ Romano ^^^. Patty is shaking what her momma gave her........;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

If you brighten that picture, the banding shows a little more clearly, it is meant as an example of features, that are similar, and do occur in nature. When this discussion take place, I always find myself talking to my computer monitor, saying, this is not a human, and if its not a suit, then we have to remember its hips and legs will certainly differ from ours. Going on the assumption the mid tarsal break is real, it would mean an achilles tendon that attach's further back from the shin,as it would use the front half of the foot to push off, rather than just the ball and toes. This would mean it would also use its shin muscles more, etc, so you cannot use a human leg for anything but a general comparison. You can not use human, or ape, comparisons, for nothing but general reference. I think that is important to remember. As for the calf muscle, when Patty walks, she appears to do this funky thing with her toes,and foot, where she does not land heal first. So, take a moment, raise one foot off the , then without touching the floor, point your toes down. What happens with your calf? What do you suppose would happen if your heal came back more, and the tendon attached a little farther back, would the calf muscle contract maybe even a little more than it just did? Google search pictures of apes HDL, and take a look at some you tube video's of Am Bam, I think it is, the ape that walks upright. I am not trying to change your mind, just pointing out some comparisons Compare the individual features you feel makes it a suit, and see if you can't see some examples of these features in nature. I have done it many times, and can pretty much find a reasonable example of the same sorts of things in apes, etc. Are they exact? Not always, but then this is not an ape or a human in the video, its either a suit, or the real deal. If its a suit, its one heck of a suit for 1967, and Patterson managed to get incredibly lucky on how it presented on film. Not to mention the anatomical understanding of a compliant gate, and how it relates to movement,and what biological differences there would probably be in a heavier, larger primate that spent its life walking on uneven forest terrain, verses how our feet developed from walking on open plains.

I was just reading in a book where before Patterson made the film, some casts where made near the area of some large feet, some not quite as large feet, and then some small feet, and the theory was it was a Male, Female, Juvenile. Later, after the Patterson film, they compared them to Patty's cast, and where surprised her's matched the larger tracks, it wrecked their family theory, but it confirmed potential evidence that Patty was there long before Patterson filmed her.

To me, all these things are part of puzzle.

Edited by JohnC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PBeaton

Romano, Was tryin' ta get a better look at the area, tried snappin' photos(8 in a sec.) an slow motion video of her on my momitor, but pretty poor quality, sorry. At times I think I see it, but it still looks like the trap meetin' the delt. Perhaps Bill has better quality images we can see at some point. Well, not sour if this work, or help ? Frame 334&5 maybe ? Pat...

post-279-0-21530800-1360015851_thumb.jpg

Edited by PBeaton

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Noting the contraction of the trapezius , and the flexing of the tricept is not silly or immature, it is what the clip apparently shows. You are certainly welcome to your opinion of what you are seeing, but your opinion is just that, opinion. Your also more than welcome to decide for yourself what you consider legitimate evidence,as am I. I see the trapezius contract, I see the tricept rise and bulge, I see the her hip move and rise, among many many other features that indicate moving living muscle verses a padded suit. You see it differently, but make no mistake about it, your opinion does not constitute legitimate evidence, otherwise we would not see it being discussed here, so many years after the event. There is no need to make such a ridiculous statement as alluding to super speed, then attempting to tie it to my opinions in some sort of effort to derail some ones opinion that does not agree with yours. So I agree, lets try to keep it mature, you do not need to be offended and attempt such tactics, just because someone does not agree with you.

Just to be clear, I did say that there may have been contracting of the trapezius, and flexing of the tricep occurring. It’s just that it is not actually observable in the gif. Now if you believe that you can actually see contracting and flexing of certain muscles, that’s fine, but it does not alter the fact, that a switching two frame gif, separated by ten frames, does not show movement, but rather the illusion of movement, and that’s the point that I was making.

Accusing me of being “offended†by something that you said, and implying that you are, somehow, more tolerant of other’s views and opinions is quite astounding considering just a week ago in this same thread:

JohnC, in response to another member’s post:

"One of the things I think is important in these kinds of discussions is honesty. You honestly cannot see the area of brightness between the shoulder and the back change as the arm swings forward? You really cannot see that, and realize it implies movement in the over shoulder, showing the shoulder move forward with the arm? If you cannot see that, then I don't know what to say, because its like telling the sky is not blue, or the grass is not green, and expecting me to believe you believe that. I could probably search the net, and provide you examples of the same type of movement, in every thing from body builders, to gorilla's, as has been done so many times before. I question your claim to have had read the previous threads on all this, it really has been beat to death, and every aspect of the butt, etc, that you can point out, examples can be given of it occurring naturally. There is an entire thread on Patty's butt, I suggest you read it, and view the pictures, and be honest with yourself in your assessments.

I am going to do my best not to participate in this again, its all so repetitive, and more often than not, the skeptic will take obvious examples of the same traits in nature, and try to proclaim them subjective. This is nothing more than an exercise in frustration. I have never been one to attempt to persuade someone of the authenticity of the film, instead what draws me into the discussion is when I see people attempt to make false claims. Saying the shoulder does not move, is simply that, a false claim. It moves, the dark area's and light area's change as the arm swings. Period. It is not subjective, or opinion, its very clear they change. If you cannot see this, then you are not objective, and there is no sense in discussing anything with you an further. Go get a copy of Long's book, you will like it."

Romano, Was tryin' ta get a better look at the area, tried snappin' photos(8 in a sec.) an slow motion video of her on my momitor, but pretty poor quality, sorry. At times I think I see it, but it still looks like the trap meetin' the delt. Perhaps Bill has better quality images we can see at some point. Well, not sour if this work, or help ? Frame 334&5 maybe ? Pat...

Pat, I believe the frames that you have posted are not far enough along the track way. The angle is not right. The frames that you have snapped appear to be taken just before, and during the beginning of the look back The view needs to be a little more from the rear and further down the track way.

You've come a long way, computer technology wise, from where you were in the not so distant past. :) Did you purchase or download an ap that allows you to do that?

Edited by Romano

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Romano, what is the time frame of a trapezius contraction? IOW, how many frames and what frame rate would we need to show a muscle contraction has occurred? More importantly, what is the maximum time between frames that we can detect a muscle contraction? The frame rate is everything here.

You can attribute the change in shape to a change in body/camera position, but just because 2 frames are 1/2 second apart doesn't mean that they don't demonstrate a change in shape. Patty's butt doesn't just hang there like a diaper, it changes shape between those 2 frames and not suspiciously. When I created that GIF you posted, it was intended to refute the "motionless diaper butt" claims. It shows the butt does change shape over 1/2 second.

I was also wondering how the shoulder pads would work on a suit. The material doesn't tuck under the shoulder pad, otherwise, you would see that in later frames. The arms were supposedly attached so if these are old style hockey pads then I suggest slapping on a pair, put on a gorilla suit and film it under the same conditions as the PGF (not too much to ask is it?). Then create an animated GIF that shows us how the anomaly works. No one said it was easy being a skeptic. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PBeaton

Romano, They are as you suggested, from just before look back. Best I could come up with, image from Bill's site, just saved image, then zoomed in on it. Brother an his family got me laptop for X-Mas, Windows 8, still tryin' ta figure it out, ha ! ha ! Like postin' here, can't seem ta figure how ta type it out better, instead of one long run on sentence. Haven't figured how ta get curser thing ta shift down ta type below. Never was much with these things, ha ! ha ! Oh well. The image I posted, I thought, showed the shoulder area so-so, an may or may not show where the trap comes down an attaches above the delt, frame 335 for instance. Looks like the light is reflectin' of top front of shoulder area. Could the slight movement between frames in your gif not account for variation in the subjects profile, thus givin' the appearance in change because there is actual change ? :drinks: Pat...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Yes, I can see by the size of the font your tolerance shining through Romano, I did I say I would do my best to stay out of it, obviously I am finding it just to attractive of a topic, despite its repetitive nature. Is there something in those statements you are not understanding Romano? Are you seeking clarification? What exactly is the point of that tantrum?

BTW, I disagree with your opinion, I think it does show movement, clearly.

Edited by JohnC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

IMO, Romano's gif shows lighting/shadow changes that appear as shoulder movement to a greater degree than the gif I had posted. However, the shoulder overall still appears, to me, as a stiff shoulder pad and not a bone+muscle structure that pivots as the arm swings. I'm not saying it's a pad, but overall these opening frames show anatomical features that resemble pads, to my eyes, more than they do wide muscular traps with fur.

In the Sweaty gif (the one I posted) the arm is in a different location at the start versus the end of the seven frames, yet the shoulder appears in the same position, or plane, at the start vs end. The minor light refraction changes between the start and end appeared to me as minor reflectivity changes as she walked and the camera angle shifted.

However, in the interest of accuracy, here's a compilation of the frames that show the collar bone in the Sweaty gif:

post-22065-0-61751500-1360187850_thumb.j

And here's the sequence doubled in size (which introduces some interpolation but is easier for humans to see).

post-22065-0-57620600-1360187865_thumb.j

There are subtle changes. The degree and import are subject to personal evaluation, as it's difficult to know how much the shifting is caused by overall body pivot vs shoulder plane angle change, or forward motion-induced lighting change vs shoulder plane angle change.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PBeaton

HardDataLover, Regadin' the collar bone/clavicle, to be honest, I don't think it is actually visible. As it would be situated in front of the trapezius muscle, perhaps the acromial end where it joins the acromion process of the scapula. The trap attaches to the two, but I don't think we can see it, not from this view. Myself, I think the shoulder looks natural in appearance an movement. Pat...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Romano, what is the time frame of a trapezius contraction? IOW, how many frames and what frame rate would we need to show a muscle contraction has occurred? More importantly, what is the maximum time between frames that we can detect a muscle contraction? ...

Before I answer your questions, and respond to the rest of your post, I am asking, respectfully, if you would answer two questions that I have, first:

First question: Do you, personally, see contraction of the trapezius, and flexing of the right tricep relative to the gif in question?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
Yes, I can see by the size of the font your tolerance shining through Romano,

You have determined, by the size of the font that I used in my post, that I am not a very tolerant person??? :growl: That's very disturbing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...