Jump to content
Drew

Trying To Draw The Look Back Frame

Recommended Posts

xspider1

Yep, those are cool drawings, Drew! +   thx 

 

Roger also knew about a 5th species of Bigfoot (called 'gigantodenialalotocus'):  B 

 

post-131-0-39203900-1392788069_thumb.jpg

jj

Edited by xspider1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

This is my most recent one.

 

wbuc.jpg

You should make this one into T-shirts or at least a poster. Reminds me of some Campbell soup cans or multicolored Marylin Monroe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Here is a slightly clearer view of the look back.

 

 

Interesting piece of hair apparently on the right jaw, kind like with old Asian men; long, space, grey and scraggly. It stands out moving with the turning head against a shoulder and breast that doesn't. I thought the shoulders should have turned more with the head movement, but hey, everyone else always said that their heads can't turn like this because it is below the shoulders and the massive jaw would hit the chest.

Some of you might not know this but stabilizing a film or group of images like this can cause this effect to be pronounced. If the point of stabilization chosen is the right shoulder, it will appear not to move much through the series. Kind of like stabilizing on a scene with wind blown tree limbs and arresting all movement in a centralized branch, letting everything else move and rotate around it.

If this was a hoax by Patterson, making it female turned out to be quite subtle. So subtle that it almost fails in being identified as such. I don't think it was Patterson that first pointed out that it was female though. Why hair covered when for certain he had seen female gorillas with hairless breasts? Why have them so full when the other great apes are deflated and hanging? Certainly deflated, hanging hair covered breasts would have been even harder to see in the film. Large, full and hairless would have been bluntly obvious and if a hoax, prone to wardrobe malfunction and construction seems.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kitakaze

If this was a hoax by Patterson, making it female turned out to be quite subtle. So subtle that it almost fails in being identified as such. I don't think it was Patterson that first pointed out that it was female though. Why hair covered when for certain he had seen female gorillas with hairless breasts? Why have them so full when the other great apes are deflated and hanging? Certainly deflated, hanging hair covered breasts would have been even harder to see in the film. Large, full and hairless would have been bluntly obvious and if a hoax, prone to wardrobe malfunction and construction seems.

 

PATTERSON said he is very much certain the creature was female "because when it turned towards us for a moment, I could see its breasts hanging down and they flopped when it moved."

 

As described by Patterson to the Eureka Times-Standard on October 20th, 1967.

 

"Why hair covered when for certain he had seen female gorillas with hairless breasts?"

 

Mort-K%C3%BCnstler-Patterson.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Backdoc

if Patty is real there is a 50/50 chance it would be female.  Wow!  Must be a hoax!

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...