Jump to content
Guest tallmonkey

Patchwork Patty?

Recommended Posts

Guest tallmonkey

I've always wondered about the patchy looking appearance of Patty's fur in these Cibachrome images. Other captures even appear to show puckers and wrinkles. Has anybody else noticed this, or am I just imagining things

CLICK TO ANIMATE:

post-1375-076454800 1304968168_thumb.gif

post-1375-064077100 1304968535_thumb.gif

Edited by tallmonkey

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

sun light ....remember old film too ......I'm amazed you guys here see so much detail .....I need glasses

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
xspider1
BFF Donor

Welcome to the BFF tallmonkey (nice screen-name). Those are some really bad copies of frames from the PGF. If you search online, there are many better images of Patty in which her fur doesn't look any 'patchier' per se than, for instance, that of a typical Gorilla? : )

post-131-072985600 1304972318_thumb.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BFSleuth

I worked with Cibachrome prints before. One thing about Cibachrome is that it enhances contrast. Color saturation is great, but if your original picture has any level of contrast you will end up with extremes of lights and shadows. It is very difficult to control. The best images for Cibachrome printing have low contrast (similar level of shadows and highlights throughout the image).

It would not be surprising to see areas of highlights and dark areas in the hair become amplified with Cibachrome.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

I don't know about patchiness, but now all I can see is this image of Santa/Jesus/King Arthur on Patty's backside.post-212-074996500 1304975588_thumb.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Incorrigible1
BFF Donor

I've a great grilled cheese sandwich you'll really enjoy, Saskeptic.

Welcome to the forum, Tallmonkey. There's a whole lot of information coming to light by persistent investigators, like Bill Munns. Pull up a chair and have a gander about the forum. You'll learn a lot, just as I have.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BobZenor

Her hair seems to have some serious counter shading going on. I have been wondering about that for a long time how fake fur on high areas would look darker. Even if she is a real creature it makes me wonder if the hair is just naturally darker on the high spots or if it is some optical effect. Counter shading is very a common effect in animals for camouflage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest tallmonkey

Thanks for the welcome you guys...

I'm not 100% convinced that the subject of the P-G film is a guy in a suit, but I'm currently exploring that possibility. Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't the Cibachrome images supposed to display higher resolution than any other images taken from the film? Anyway, here's an animation and some stills made from the Cibachromes showing what could possibly be fabric-like wrinkles, as well as some possible man-made seams or suit segments. That's kind of what they look like to me anyway...

CLICK TO ANIMATE THE FIRST AND LAST IMAGES:

post-1375-065652700 1304989353_thumb.gif

post-1375-052388800 1304989505_thumb.jpg

post-1375-097974400 1304989529_thumb.jpg

post-1375-040862200 1304989556_thumb.gif

Edited by tallmonkey

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest tallmonkey

It appears that this snap has been artificially lightened but it makes the "patches" I'm talking about really stand out. Could these indicate sewn segments of a fur suit and if not, what could account for the appearance of this "patchiness" if this is a naturally occurring phenomenon?

post-1375-014212800 1304990044_thumb.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
xspider1
BFF Donor

That's would be a LOT of seams for a suit, tallmonkey. Way too many, I think. Some image manipulations can make any image look wierd. What some skeptics call a 'diaper butt' (the first image you posted and highlighted above) is actually Patty's left hand.

Hairy primates seem to exhibit natural looking 'lines' and 'bulges' and 'light spots'. Trying to explain those characteristics as a costume just makes less sense than comparing them to other know primates, imo:

post-131-077732400 1304998873_thumb.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Her hair seems to have some serious counter shading going on.

I does? I've often been struck by the apparent uniformity of the Patty pelage. Of course, gorillas and chimps can be pretty uniform in coloration, so it doesn't really mean anything if Patty lacks countershading or obvious patterning.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PBeaton

Thanks for the welcome you guys...

I'm not 100% convinced that the subject of the P-G film is a guy in a suit, but I'm currently exploring that possibility. Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't the Cibachrome images supposed to display higher resolution than any other images taken from the film? Anyway, here's an animation and some stills made from the Cibachromes showing what could possibly be fabric-like wrinkles, as well as some possible man-made seams or suit segments. That's kind of what they look like to me anyway...

CLICK TO ANIMATE THE FIRST AND LAST IMAGES:

tallmonkey,

Welcome ! As for subjects hair/fur, it reflects the sun differently based on angle to the sun, protrusions etc. Much like any other animals would do in my opinion. Much of what you draw lines to thinkin' possible seems or fabric wrinkles are actually located in spots/areas that are known to be there in other primates. By that I mean, the waist line for instance, it's likely simply the intersection of obliques to waist/hip area, the obliques bein' full an thick, it's somethin' visible in us.

Pat...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Heep-um-Poop

One of the best known fur buyers in Minnesota has commented on the fur being almost perfect and that it could not be replicated to look as good as it does in the pictures. This guy handles thousands of pelts each years. Id have to give him the benefit of the doubt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

I don't think we can put much stock in any of the highlighted areas shown in these images. The images have been enhanced to some degree which brings out things that may or may not be there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kitakaze

Welcome to the forum, tallmonkey. The patchiness you refer to I think is well illustrated here...

Bigmillion8.jpg

Bigmillion5.jpg

Of course, you can compare that to the gorilla and chimp images above and make up your own mind. I think Patty on film is most interesting as a sort of walking Rorschach, and not any piece of actual wildlife footage. Here is a comment from an FX artist forum I belong to...

I've been an effects artist for a while now and I have never met anyone who had a high opinion of the Patterson suit. No one. Not a one. To the contrary, it's kind of a running joke. I think the main reason that no one has ever stepped forward and said "I made it" is simply because the work is so damned bad.

Show the PGF to FX artists and they almost all see a bad suit. Show it to Bigfoot enthusiasts and of course many of them see what they want to see - a living Bigfoot. What the PGF is is subjective, so however you see it, realistic or hokey suit, no one can tell you what it really is. That's the fun and the madness of it.

Edited by kitakaze

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×