Jump to content
hiflier

Patty's Shoulder Width

Recommended Posts

JustCurious
15 hours ago, MIB said:

Well, yes, but if the claim is Patty was a MAN in a suit rather than a WOMAN in a suit ... then ... y' know ... measure men.  :)

 

MIB

 

Maybe that's where the skeptics have had it wrong all these years.  This thinking it has to be a man in a suit instead of trying to put a woman in a suit.  Personally, I'm way past anything in a suit or trying to convince others who see a suit.  I know Squatchy will go to his grave seeing a bloke in a suit and I'm not going to waste the intellectual energy trying to argue that point with him (or others like him). 

 

I'm totally interested in Patty herself.  Her body movement, proportions, actions, etc.  I have very personal reasons for knowing she's real and no one can convince me otherwise either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MIB

I have to disagree.  I think you're missing the crux of the matter.   Bob Heironimus claimed to be the man in the suit.   I'll repeat that .. MAN in the suit.   In fact, the most vocal of the scoftics still insisted it was Bob in the suit and nobody else.    If it was a woman in the suit, it wasn't Bob.  

 

IMHO it should be **Patty's** shape you should consider when asking male vs female.   You might say there are "two outstanding reasons" (snort, chuckle) for assuming she's female so then you have to look at her shoulder width, hip width, height, ratios, etc.   Those are decidedly non-human.  

 

When all thing anatomical are weighed, it is quite a bit less likely that it could be a woman in there if it were indeed a suit.   That works even less well than the epic failure for it to be a man in a suit.

 

MIB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
bipedalist
BFF Donor
On 10/25/2017 at 4:36 PM, MikeZimmer said:

I have a vague memory of shoulder width discussions from the days when Gigantofootecus was active with his photogrammetry calculations. This may have been on the old site. There was also an image of a kid in a bulky snowsuit that forced his arms to stick out horizontally at about the same time. Does this ring a bell for anyone? I think that premium members have access to the old site.

 

Most of the images and graphics on the old site that accompanied discussions were trashed by a script that stripped alot of information from posts, if it was back on BFF 1.0

 

This was highly unfortunate for a lot of work went into those discussions and posts, but really nothing can be done about it at this time. 

 

I report this second hand as I do not have direct awareness about how that all came down though I was associated with the forum as a mod sometime back in that era. 

Edited by bipedalist
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bigfoothunter
11 hours ago, JustCurious said:

I'm totally interested in Patty herself.  Her body movement, proportions, actions, etc.  I have very personal reasons for knowing she's real and no one can convince me otherwise either.

 

When those other things are looked at in detail along with the evidence on the ground - the man in a suit nonsense gets more ridiculous.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hiflier
BFF Donor

Yes, those elements do make the man in a suit argument ridiculous. But this thread and what Dr. Grover Krantz said back in the mid 1990's that corroborate it knocks the man in a suit idea out of the park, and out of the running. Therefore, by default, it knocks the skeptics out of the running as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MikeZimmer
12 hours ago, bipedalist said:

 

Most of the images and graphics on the old site that accompanied discussions were trashed by a script that stripped alot of information from posts, if it was back on BFF 1.0

...
 

Thanks bipedalist. Some of the work about shoulders was also on the new site, but I have not a clue what search terms might find the snowsuit image. "Snowsuit" did not do it.

Edited by MikeZimmer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hiflier
BFF Donor

Maybe this from here:

"I was looking at an old thread recently and found a few posts by norseman on the effect of stuffing a kid in a snowsuit, the effect being to make it pretty impossible for the kid to lower his arms and then move them properly. This is a pretty common place observation for people with kids who live where there is winter.

 

The point here is that given the obviously massive thorax of Patty relative to height, whatever it is, a mime such as Bob H., or the vast majority of folks, would not be able to fit in such a padded suit, and then move the arms from the shoulder joint in the natural and easy swing that we see in the film. It just could not happen. This is a common sense point, that needs little beyond the admission of the obvious, Patty is built like a masonary reinforced outbuilding.*

 

 

* Yeah, I know that is not the most common way of putting it, but in deference to the power of the moderators, I try to maintain a little decorum. ;-)

Edited January 17, 2015 by MikeZimmer "

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hiflier
BFF Donor

OK. I'm not claiming to be any good at graphics but, with the permission of Bill Munns, I did a little bit of work. And, folks, I mean a LITTLE bit and it took me four hours just to learn how even with internet help. All it is really is jut a visual to help put things into perspective. The black line Mr. Munns installed in the left most frame is the sole of the foot. He lined up the top of the head in the second frame and kept the overall proportions between the two images and (yep, little ol' me) popped in the skeleton.

 

And as per this thread it's to show a ratio of average height to shoulder span for a Human and how that sized=s up to Patty's shoulders. It doesn't matter the scaling if the reference for Patty and the skeleton are both set at 6 feet then the shoulder measurements can be extrapolated or measured direct. In this case (6 feet tall) the shoulders of the skeleton are about 20 inches- a bit bigger than Heironimus. If Patty was taller then of course the shoulders will be wider. Same for the skeleton- everything will move in proportion. If and when I teach myself to do actual overlays then it will be better, but for now........:  

Patty 4.PNG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MikeZimmer
On 2017-10-27 at 8:19 PM, hiflier said:

Maybe this from here:

 

Thanks Hiflier. That's the material.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SweatyYeti
On 10/25/2017 at 10:11 PM, wiiawiwb said:

In addition to the good things you've brought to bear, I think we should look at the shoulder width to upper arm ratio. To his credit Sweti, has been a pioneer when it comes to recognizing that the upper arm proportion of Patty is just not right. Combining Hiflier and Sweti might just pave the way.

 

 

Thanks for the mention, Wiia. :)  

 

I have already posted some analysis of Patty's upper-body, and shoulder width.....several years ago....on both the BFF and on JREF. The images probably aren't displaying, at this point, though. 

 

Here is a quote of mine on JREF, from 2009.....replying to a post of Gigantofootecus'/Odinn's...

 

Quote


Thanks for the support, Odinn. smile.gif

You're correct.....the "left shoulder is way out".....and that's because the (Poser 7) skeletons do not account for Patty's exceptional upper-body width.
 

 

 

One key point regarding Patty's exceptional shoulder width, is that it means her elbows would reach further away from the center of the body/spine...with her arms stretched out to the side, than an average human's would. And then, factoring in the exceptional length of her upper-arms.....the differential in the reach of the elbows would be even greater.

 

Using actual numbers....if Patty's shoulder width is 4" greater, per side, than an average human's....and if her upper-arm length is 3" longer than an average human's....then, with her arms out-stretched....her elbows would reach 7" further away....(per side)....from the center of the body, than an average human's would reach. 

Even though we don't see Patty with her arms fully outstretched to the side....the "extra" lengths of the shoulders and upper-arms still place Patty's elbows in a position which is measurably beyond where a human's elbow would reach. 

 

These two film frames show Patty's right arm out away from the body....with the exceptional 'reach' of the elbow...

 

Patty_Elbow_Reach_Two_Frames2.jpg

 

 

Here is a comparison with an 'average human'. Placing 3 dots on the subjects...

 

Patty_Elbow_Reach_Two_Frames3.jpg

 

 

.....we can see that the total area of a triangle involving the 'center of the body' and the 'elbow position'....(points unaffected by a suit, and padding)....is significantly larger on Patty, than it is on an average human subject.

That triangle accounts for the exceptional width of the shoulders....in addition to the exceptional length of the upper-arm.

 

 

What can, and should, be done....is an entire 'Upper-Body Geometry' analysis. It would include measurements of Patty's upper-arm length.....upper-torso width....shoulder width....'elbow reach'....and the space/gap between the side of the torso and the upper-arm.

 

The 'open space' between the side of the torso and the upper-arm is a key detail...because, if a person's 'torso width' is widened, via padding...then the (limited) open space between the upper-arm and the side of the body disappears, or becomes greatly diminished. That is one way of telling whether the subject's actual shoulder-joint has been altered/hidden by a bulky suit. (If a suit is made which widens a subject's shoulder-width....it would naturally also be made to widen the torso. Otherwise, the subject would look kinda silly.)

 

 

Edited by SweatyYeti
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Redbone
SSR Team

I spent 5 minutes on this while drunk... would have been 1 minute sober but I forgot what I was doing between steps.

Patty is wider.

patty overlay.gif

 

Edited by Redbone
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hiflier
BFF Donor

Well, you're just ridiculous Redbone ;) I've been at it for hours and STILL don't have an overlay. My thoughts off the bat? The skeleton is a bit too high to the hair on Patty's head a bit of room. Lowering it some would also place the elbows and hands lower to so that the fingers are closer in alignment? If you do that then Patty's shoulder span becomes even larger. But I truly Thank you and SW for helping to drive home the significance of this. May it never get left by the wayside again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Redbone
SSR Team

I'm giving in and going to bed, but if you need something different let me know.

I lowered the bones a little bit.

patty overlay 2.gif

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
xspider1
BFF Donor

^ Interesting gif, Redbone and some excellent points above, SweatyYeti.  That makes it obvious that the entire skeleton of the PGf subject is much wider (proportionally) that a human skeleton.  And, there's just no way that can be faked that realistically with a costume (which is why that has never happened and probably never will).  This is a good topic, thanks.  :good:  

Edited by xspider1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JustCurious

Going back to the OP, here is a visual representation of what is being described: sag lines.jpeg

 

Note that shoulder pads that reach to just short of the elbows achieve width in the shoulders.  You can tell where the human hand is and arm extensions are inserted to keep the arms from looking too short.  However, notice how droopy the extended arm looks and how unnatural the shoulder looks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×