Jump to content

P-G Filmsite, 1967 and 2018


Daniel Perez

Recommended Posts

OkieFoot
MODERATOR

I know I've said this before but according to wiki, Roger was intending to remain at Bluff Creek and do more searching and my impression was he wanted to search for the creature if the film did not turn out. So this was why he sent the film off to Al DeAtley to get it developed and see if Roger captured anything on film. I think Roger was smart enough to know his best chances of possibly seeing the creature again was in the next few days if the film was bad; the longer he waited the less his chances were. 

Why else would Roger have mailed off the film? Roger had not planned on leaving until the rains came the next morning and he feared getting stuck. If Roger had planned all along to take back the undeveloped film if he managed to get an encounter on film, then there was no need to ship the film to Al DeAtley. Roger could have done everything himself after he got home.  

 

I can see the alligator and the swamp story creeping in. The punch line of this story is; when you're up to your neck in alligators, remember, you're original objective was to drain the swamp. I think some are starting to get bogged down in details and speculation and losing sight of the fact that the developed film was at Al DeAtley's house on Sunday, Oct. 22nd. So regardless of who developed the film, we know it got developed by the 22nd. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
BFF Donor

Crazy Q of the day:   

 

Did Bob and Roger have any conversation after the PGF about shooting one.  That is, you got one on film and "these things do exist" Gimlin realizes.   Why not shoot one and bring back a body if you actually see it again?  As Gimlin and Bob kept looking I find it hard to imagine they didn't bring this up again.  It makes sense in that at least one of them must have had their gun closer/ checked their ammo.  When this was going on, I have to think someone would say, "I'll be ready if he comes back.  You know, we said we wouldn't shoot one but this might be our chance."   They must know (Or roger would at least) skeptics and so on have been asking for a body.

 

I'm surprised if this never came up again.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Okiefoot : If Patterson was unsure about "getting anything on film" then why not go after it right then and there while it is still in your grasp?

 

He had a second roll in his camera at that point and Gimlin was ready to go after it but Roger called him off.

 

There is also no guarantee that a second encounter would provide a better outcome or different result as far as "getting it on film"

 

This was always the risk you took in those days when you shot film and had to wait and have it processed. The question was always (no matter what the subject matter was) "did it come out"?

 

Patterson had already accomplished everything that he had set out to do which was film some bigfoot tracks and as a bonus he had also filmed an actual bigfoot.

 

In a real life scenario you would guard that film with your life, head home and have it processed while you are in very close proximity at all times.

 

A bird in the hand...

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
BFF Donor
30 minutes ago, OkieFoot said:

I know I've said this before but according to wiki, Roger was intending to remain at Bluff Creek and do more searching and my impression was he wanted to search for the creature if the film did not turn out. So this was why he sent the film off to Al DeAtley to get it developed and see if Roger captured anything on film. I think Roger was smart enough to know his best chances of possibly seeing the creature again was in the next few days if the film was bad; the longer he waited the less his chances were. 

Why else would Roger have mailed off the film? 

 

That's just it though.  Why mail the film out at all.  You got it and can develop it any time.  You might have 'Bigfoot' and you might not.  Either way sticking around to see it again with over half of a reloaded film and a Fresh Sighting would increase the chances to see it again.  Leaving and coming back doesn't do that.

 

 

Quote

 

 

Roger had not planned on leaving until the rains came the next morning and he feared getting stuck.

 

makes sense there.  

 

Quote

If Roger had planned all along to take back the undeveloped film if he managed to get an encounter on film, then there was no need to ship the film to Al DeAtley. Roger could have done everything himself after he got home.  

 

...and he had a lot of options once he thought he had captured Patty on film.  Once she was on film they could have stayed as long as they wished provided they had enough supplies and wouldn't freeze to death.  The film was not like a Gallon of milk.  It was not going to go bad.   They think they got it on film    Step 2 leave the scene and plan to come back?    this makes sense only in that they wanted to come back with special tracking dogs which they assumed would help them have a second encounter.

 

Quote

I can see the alligator and the swamp story creeping in. The punch line of this story is; when you're up to your neck in alligators, remember, you're original objective was to drain the swamp. I think some are starting to get bogged down in details and speculation and losing sight of the fact that the developed film was at Al DeAtley's house on Sunday, Oct. 22nd. So regardless of who developed the film, we know it got developed by the 22nd. 

 

I'm with you. I am just asking some hard Q.  I trust the overall story has enough going for it to be true.  Just want to ask the hard Q as I leave the door open it might not be.  

Edited by Backdoc
Link to post
Share on other sites
OkieFoot
MODERATOR
1 hour ago, OldMort said:

Okiefoot : If Patterson was unsure about "getting anything on film" then why not go after it right then and there while it is still in your grasp?

 

He had a second roll in his camera at that point and Gimlin was ready to go after it but Roger called him off.

 

There is also no guarantee that a second encounter would provide a better outcome or different result as far as "getting it on film"

 

This was always the risk you took in those days when you shot film and had to wait and have it processed. The question was always (no matter what the subject matter was) "did it come out"?

 

Patterson had already accomplished everything that he had set out to do which was film some bigfoot tracks and as a bonus he had also filmed an actual bigfoot.

 

In a real life scenario you would guard that film with your life, head home and have it processed while you are in very close proximity at all times.

 

A bird in the hand...

 

 

 

They both did try to track Patty from where they last saw her but were unable to find her again and since it was getting late in the afternoon, they finally called off their search. Don't forget they also wanted to cast some tracks.

 

As far as anyone today trying to say why did Roger do this when he should have done that is all just speculation 50+ years later. We can't put ourselves in Roger's head 50 years later. I would say he had his reasons for doing what he did. Regardless of what Roger did or didn't do, it doesn't change anything; the film got developed and was at Al D.'s house on the 22nd.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, OldMort said:

Okiefoot : If Patterson was unsure about "getting anything on film" then why not go after it right then and there while it is still in your grasp?

 

This right here.  You wouldn't leave the scene for hours as this creature continued to walk away with hope of coming back and tracking it.   Why not follow it further right then and there?   

Link to post
Share on other sites
SweatyYeti
34 minutes ago, OkieFoot said:

 

As far as anyone today trying to say why did Roger do this when he should have done that is all just speculation 50+ years later. We can't put ourselves in Roger's head 50 years later. I would say he had his reasons for doing what he did.

 

That's the way I look at it, too, Okie. ;) 

 

I don't see Roger's claim, of having shipped the film out right away...as being some great "red flag", regarding the film's authenticity.

 

It's easy to second-guess Roger's and Bob's activities, or their claimed activities...but, it's a little harder to deal directly with the evidence visible on the film subject's body. 

 

 

6 minutes ago, Twist said:

 

This right here.  You wouldn't leave the scene for hours as this creature continued to walk away with hope of coming back and tracking it.   Why not follow it further right then and there?   

 

Because the creatures are extremely elusive??  Is that a good enough reason? :) 

Link to post
Share on other sites

No point in going after it if he has no fresh film in his camera.

 

To reload the camera, he needs to do the following:

 

1. Get fresh film (probably in the saddlebags of his horse that ran away).

 

2. Get the metal film can needed to put the exposed film in so it doesn't get ruined when taken out of the camera.

 

3. Find a spot where he can sit comfortably and put a poncho over himself, so he's in shade instead of sunlight to change films.

 

4. Get the film can and tape, and then open the camera, take out the exposed film, put it in the can and tape it shut, then open the new roll and load it, taking time to set the feed and takeup loops properly so the film doesn't rip sprocket holes because of a bad loop.

 

5. Test the film running through the gate and test the loops.

 

6. Close the camera, and then wind it so the spring has full tension.

 

You are probably looking at 5-10 minutes, plus how long it took to find the horse and get stuff from the saddle bags. 

 

What's the chance your scared subject is still nearby and can be found again, after that delay?

 

I personally would assume the subject was long gone, and I'd focus on evidence at the sight to corroborate the event, trackway, etc.

 

 

ADDED

 

When a fimlmaker is on a remote location, sending film out for processing, instead of holding it until the filmmaker returns to civilization, is standard operating procedure, especially if you feel that you have something special on the film. You want it processed to know it's a good take, properly exposed, in focus, and not scratched or otherwise damaged. If Roger had not made any decision yet to fold it up and go home, then sending the film out for processing is perfectly normal and reasonable.

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Backdoc said:
3 hours ago, OkieFoot said:

I know I've said this before but according to wiki, Roger was intending to remain at Bluff Creek and do more searching and my impression was he wanted to search for the creature if the film did not turn out. So this was why he sent the film off to Al DeAtley to get it developed and see if Roger captured anything on film. I think Roger was smart enough to know his best chances of possibly seeing the creature again was in the next few days if the film was bad; the longer he waited the less his chances were. 

Why else would Roger have mailed off the film? 

 

That's just it though.  Why mail the film out at all.  You got it and can develop it any time.  You might have 'Bigfoot' and you might not.  Either way sticking around to see it again with over half of a reloaded film and a Fresh Sighting would increase the chances to see it again.  Leaving and coming back doesn't do that.

 

I agree that none of us can second guess what they did back then with accuracy.  We do not know all the factors that contributed.  

 

BUT according to Okie Roger wanted to stay and search.  And yes it would have been work to reload the camera but that timeline vs. the hours it took to send the film off would have been huge in my opinion.    Being behind the creature an hour vs. six hours is big.  

 

None of this proves one way or another the authenticity of the film but its fun to speculate and debate.  IMO we have learned as much as we can from the PGF that will determine real vs. fake until a BF is on the slab and it does or does not look like Patty.   As I stated before my interest in the film is the details and backstory, the bigger picture is what it is to me at this point in regards to BF being a living breathing creature.  

 

Edit*  The PGF will always be fun for me as long as there is a mystery around it!   😎

Edited by Twist
Link to post
Share on other sites
SweatyYeti
10 minutes ago, Twist said:


None of this proves one way or another the authenticity of the film but its fun to speculate and debate.  IMO we have learned as much as we can from the PGF that will determine real vs. fake until a BF is on the slab and it does or does not look like Patty.  

 

Some of us have learned all we really need to learn. 

 

The subject has exceptionally long arms...with exceptionally long upper-arms, and relatively short lower-arms....(hence.....no 'arm extensions'.) And we see the subject bend it's wrist, and curl it's fingers.

 

And that's only the tip of the "realism iceberg".  ;) 

 

 

Quote

As I stated before my interest in the film is the details and backstory, the bigger picture is what it is to me at this point in regards to BF being a living breathing creature.  

 

 

That's your interest, Twist....along with the rest of the skeptics. Because that is your only hope, of trying to portray the film as a hoax.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, OkieFoot said:

They both did try to track Patty from where they last saw her but were unable to find her again and since it was getting late in the afternoon, they finally called off their search. Don't forget they also wanted to cast some tracks

 

Well not exactly...

 

http://www.bigfootencounters.com/

 

From the interview of Patterson and Gimlin in November of 1967.

 

Jack Webster: Now, how far did you follow her?

 

Patterson: I really didn't follow her any much further than when my camera ran out of film, and I knew that it was out. And Bob got on his horse and went after her then, and from that point he seen her more than I did. I never seen her again.

 

Jack Webster: How far were you able to follow her?

 

Gimlin: I watched her until she went up the road about 300 yards, and she went around a bend in the road and that's the last I seen of her.

 

It is at this point that Patterson calls Gimlin back as he is unarmed and concerned that their might be possible danger from another sasquatch in the area. So it is clear that Gimlin did not follow Patty as he is still within shouting distance.

Webster continues:

You were on foot there without the rifle?

 

Patterson: I was on foot without anything and I yelled to Bob to come back and we would think this thing over...

 

Jack Webster: Was that just about the time you broke off the chase you might say?

 

Gimlin: Right, that was, when I last seen her go around the curve. And at that time I proceeded to gather up Roger's horses... etc.

 

In other words, there was no further attempt to follow Patty once Roger had completed his roll of film.

Their next steps were for Gimlin to identify where Patty had come on to the sandbar and then for both of them to examine the track way that she had made there.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by OldMort
Link to post
Share on other sites
OkieFoot
MODERATOR

^^

Mort, I was going by Bob's interview with John Green in 1992. On the immediate aftermath of the encounter, he told John they caught Roger's horse and the pack horse, got the new film out, and Roger got under the poncho to change out the film. He told John, "Then we tried to track the creature on up from where we had last seen it." He also said they didn't have much luck.

He also told John since it was getting dark and they also wanted to take casts of the tracks and go into town since they didn't know if they got anything on the film, they called off the search. 

So according to Bob they did try tracking Patty after getting new film in the camera. He never said just how long they tried but they apparently did make an attempt. Although It really doesn't matter how much or how little time they spent trying to track Patty because we know what all they did afterwards and we know the end results.

Link to post
Share on other sites

^^^ Well that's the problem with much of the story Okie, there are so many contradictions.

 

Which account are we to believe? The one a week or two after the encounter or the one 25 years after the fact?

 

I wonder what Gimlin would say about it If asked today...

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by OldMort
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • gigantor featured this topic
  • gigantor locked and unlocked this topic
  • gigantor locked this topic
  • gigantor unlocked this topic
  • gigantor unfeatured this topic
×
×
  • Create New...