Jump to content
JustAGuy

A new first gen. copy of the PGF film may have been discovered

Recommended Posts

JustAGuy

I saw this posted to Reddit's r/Bigfoot within the last hour and thought I'd share it here. No idea if the underlying story is real or just tease:

 

XvF4QDD.jpg

 

https://www.reddit.com/r/bigfoot/comments/d07po7/a_copy_of_the_pg_film_was_just_found_details/

 

Relevant quotes in the above thread by Reddit user snowhorse420 (who has 5k+ karma points on Reddit, which may not mean anything except that he's been around Reddit for a while): 

 

"A copy of the PG film was just found... details coming out now but it looks like it’s a first gen copy from the original. It’s very exciting stuff and has new frames not seen before." (emphasis mine - JustAGuy)

 

"Well the sale of the film is currently being negotiated. I will know more in a few days. Bill Munns is on it and will be doing analysis. From what we can tell it’s the original footage and b-roll from the ANE documentary from 1969."

 

"... it’s getting into the right hands as we speak and the wheels are turning. I have access to beckjords collection and a third gen copy from patricia patterson. I have legal docs from patricia patterson regarding the film as well. This was suspected to be the lost second gen copy of patricias but it looks like a first gen copy used for the documentary."

 

That's all I know, but it sounds very intriguing. Mods, feel free to delete or move if this post is too light on facts, somehow inappropriate, or otherwise violates a rule.

Edited by JustAGuy
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Twist

Interesting.   I’ll be curious to hear Bill Munns take on it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bill

I have no knowledge of it and I am not examining it in any way. So my association with it is not true, unless it's a delayed report from three years ago about a copy donated to the Willow Creek museum, and "Finding Bigfoot" hired me to evaluate the copy. I have not evaluated a new copy since then.

 

So the report if definitely bogus in respect to me and any participation I might be involved with now.

 

 

ADDED:

 

The film can is a 1200' or a 1600' reel, so the only thing it could be is Roger's Theatrical documentary, maybe reel two (Mike Rugg received reel one, but no PGF stull on that reel). Also, ANE's doc came out in 1971, and Roger's theatrical was from 1968-1969

 

So it sounds like whomever is describing it is lacking in real knowledge of the matter. But how the writer can claim my involvement, is really a flat-out lie, unless it's an analysis from several years ago.

  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bill

I just signed up with reddit, and posted a comment directly there (although another person copied what I wrote her e and put it there with amazing speed.)

 

Curious to see where this goes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Twist

Thanks for the update Bill.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bill

You are welcome. I can't imagine how this got started, but hopefully, we can put it to rest soon.

 

A new copy would be an incredible discovery, but only if it is wrapped in truth,  not lies.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JustAGuy

Thanks @Bill for replying so quickly and completely! I saw the original post on Reddit and was obviously intrigued and wanted to know if there was any truth to it, and you certainly cleared that up.

 "I have no knowledge of it and I am not examining it in any way." is definitive. Thanks!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bill

you're welcome.

 

I just can't figure if the post is a scammer, or a really misinformed simpleton.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Catmandoo

I don't visit reddit.  The film can is in very good shape. It does have "Bluff" written with sharpie. Vintage 2019 sharpie perhaps.

 

Did you ever watch antique road show where the expert crushes the expectations of a person who has been ripped off with a worthless fake? On the other hand, antique road show experts have found price less items that people picked up at thrift shops, estate sales and yard sales.

 

Time will tell. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
wiiawiwb

The plot thickens and now we wait. Tick-tock, tick-tock...

 

Not holding my breath on this one!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wolfjewel

Thank you, Bill, for always responding quickly in a responsible, professional way, when something in your area of experience and expertise occurs. You are an asset to BFF. Hopefully members with more in-depth  knowledge than I have will continue to support you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bill

The discussion over on reddit seems to have cooled down, and the original claims have not been substantiated in any way, so it's looking like a joke, scam or similar false claim.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bill

CORRECTION:

 

I have been contacted by someone I know to be reliable, and provided photos showing film cans more consistent with the story, so there may be some validity to this story, but it was inaccurately described when originally posted on reddit. The new photos show an old film can (a 1200 or 1600' reel can) with an old label reading "A.N.E." which would have been appropriate for a vintage 1970's film can label, plus a box of Kodachrome film, but a 50' magazine film stock (and Roger didn't use 50' magazine cameras, John Green did to film McClarin). The Kodak box has a process "use by" date of 1969, but that is not the manufacture date, just the "good until" date. Only a date code on the film, once processed, would give the manufacture date code of the film stock. 

 

I have not had any direct contact yet with the people in possession of the film.

 

I will be posting this on reddit as well.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
wiiawiwb

That's amazing Bill.  Thank you for you efforts in unearthing what's going on and keeping us posted. We really appreciate it.

Share this post


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

The new photos show an old film can (a 1200 or 1600' reel can) with an old label reading "A.N.E." which would have been appropriate for a vintage 1970's film can label, plus a box of Kodachrome film, but a 50' magazine film stock (and Roger didn't use 50' magazine cameras, John Green did to film McClarin). The Kodak box has a process "use by" date of 1969, but that is not the manufacture date, just the "good until" date. Only a date code on the film, once processed, would give the manufacture date code of the film stock. 

 

This is really interesting stuff! I'm especially curious about the box of Kodachrome film.

 

Are you able to share if the box is a packaging box for the unexposed film as seen below?

497137647_Kodachrome25.thumb.jpg.7d9ef73f82b17eff1eb79334690d0d68.jpg

 

 

Or is it a box which contains processed film from the Kodak Lab?

1704254881_Kodachrome26.thumb.jpg.5836f478a79cc602ee2e4b2b31ed23a0.jpg

 

This second type of box was used by Kodak when the film was returned to the customer after processing.

John Green and Rene Dahinden both recall that Patterson's film was contained in such a box at the first screening of the film in Yakima on October 22, 1967.

Odd though about the 50' magazine - perhaps the box is for demonstration purposes only and has nothing to do with the PGF... 

Any conjecture about what this box is supposed to contain?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...