Jump to content
SweatyYeti

Patty's Feet.....and The Footprints

Recommended Posts

xspider1

Very interesting, Sweaty. I would think that there are many things that can be considered in terms of what you have noticed about the foot/leg movement in relation to the prints. Perhaps Patty favors her right leg due to an injury (hernia)?? Different morphology applies to left and right feet just as it does with left and right hands. Too cool! B)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Crowlogic

BTW the photo where Laverty's pipe next to print is a good scale device to measure track size. Also shhhhh keep this quiet as posting photos of the track line prints undermines the arguments that the tracks are phony and could not have survived the rain that came after the filming. Hahaha this shows beautifully that there were deep tracks and that the tracks did survive the rain quite well.

All of that said the most problematic issue of the flexing foot goes back to the costume issue. If it is a costume with large fake feet then expect lots of odd things happening that may not be due to genuine biology. However the depth of the tracks seems IMNSHO to be a difficult thing to fake reliably as it would have required excavating soil as opposed to stomping tracks using a form. Remember both Roger and Bob Gimlin were not heavyweights.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thepattywagon

Sweaty, Is the far bottom right cast pic from the first footprint pic in your post?

Looks like it to me.

Also, it always looked to me like Patty's left heel kind of leans in toward the right leg as she lifts it. In other words, her left leg, from the knee down to the heel doesn't come off the ground in a completely vertical manner. It appears to **** inward during the lift.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thepattywagon

Ha ha! Just went back and saw that I was not allowed to use the verb "c*ck". Oops. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SweatyYeti

Very interesting, Sweaty. I would think that there are many things that can be considered in terms of what you have noticed about the foot/leg movement in relation to the prints. Perhaps Patty favors her right leg due to an injury (hernia)?? Different morphology applies to left and right feet just as it does with left and right hands. Too cool! B)

Thanks, xs... :) ...there is a lot there to look at, and analyze.

Regarding the vertical lift of the 'rear half' of Patty's left foot...I don't think the 'loose costume slipper feet' is a viable explanation for it...since the left and right feet of a costume/suit would most certainly be made exactly the same.....while Patty's feet are moving/bending differently.

In addition to that reason....there's also the precise duplication of the angles associated with the left foot and the knee, from one step to another. It would be difficult to walk so consistently...and smoothly...with your feet sliding around inside 'loose slipper-type' feet.

One possibility might be that the left foot is 'double-jointed', at the mid-tarsel joint???....similar to how a human hand can be double-jointed...

Double-jointedHand1.jpg

That might sound a little 'far-fetched', or like 'wishful thinking'...(not very 'probable')....but, it does seem like, at the very least, a possible explanation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PBeaton

SweatyYeti,

Cooool ! I'd thought in the past to do a little research or studyin' into the movement of her legs, never did get around to it much. As I've said, I think that horizontal ridge across her right thigh is a ol' injury, thought it for years. When Doug Hajicek noticed the possible hernia on right thigh lower down, I thought, sure, may have somethin' ta do with injury further up on thigh(the horizontal ridge). A injury could easily account for variation in movement, flexability etc. Now I'll have to spend a little time lookin' into it, very interestin'.

Regardin' the midtarsal break, thanks to your help, I think I've been able to explain or show what I see in that section of the film I noticed. Not only is it interestin' the subject has a midtarsal break, but as I've said, that the foot bends where it does, in my opinion makes it highly unlikely...near impossible, a human foot in a costume could replicate it. wolftrax had mentioned a bit back about a size 11 shoe or somethin like that, in a costume would be similar(can't recall exact words, sorry wolftrax if I'm off by much). However, the subjects foot bends just infront of its shin, I'm size 9 1/2, round a 10 inch foot(I think off the top of my head), my foot bends at the ball of foot, like yours, now look at your foot, bend your toes back, notice anythin'...the bend in my foot occours about 4 inches infront of my shin. A persons foot in a costume would still have to bend well ahead of its shin.

Interestin' thread SweatyYeti, lookin' foreward to the observations an comments. :thumbsup:

Pat...

Edited by PBeaton

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SweatyYeti

Sweaty, Is the far bottom right cast pic from the first footprint pic in your post?

Looks like it to me.

Yeah, I'm pretty sure that that cast is a cast of the 'Laverty photo' footprint, PW.

Also, it always looked to me like Patty's left heel kind of leans in toward the right leg as she lifts it. In other words, her left leg, from the knee down to the heel doesn't come off the ground in a completely vertical manner. It appears to **** inward during the lift.

That's interesting...I'll have to check it out, later... :) I don't have time to right now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SweatyYeti

BTW the photo where Laverty's pipe next to print is a good scale device to measure track size. Also shhhhh keep this quiet as posting photos of the track line prints undermines the arguments that the tracks are phony and could not have survived the rain that came after the filming. Hahaha this shows beautifully that there were deep tracks and that the tracks did survive the rain quite well.

All of that said the most problematic issue of the flexing foot goes back to the costume issue. If it is a costume with large fake feet then expect lots of odd things happening that may not be due to genuine biology.

However the depth of the tracks seems IMNSHO to be a difficult thing to fake reliably as it would have required excavating soil as opposed to stomping tracks using a form. Remember both Roger and Bob Gimlin were not heavyweights.

Yeah, Crow....Patty would look more like a staggering, drunk Bigfoot, walking away from Roger... :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PBeaton

If I recall, both feet, heel appears in an toes out durin' swing phase. You often see people tryin' ta raise thier feet when tryin' to replicate her walk, the heel in toes out is usually overlooked. I noticed at times it looks like as leg swings forward, the knee goes out to some degree, reminded me of watchin' the other great apes walkin' bipedally, heel in, toes out, an there thighs/knees seem outwards, only to a greater degree of course. Not sure if that's what you're talkin' bout Thepattywagon ?

Pat...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SweatyYeti

SweatyYeti,

Cooool ! I'd thought in the past to do a little research or studyin' into the movement of her legs, never did get around to it much. As I've said, I think that horizontal ridge across her right thigh is a ol' injury, thought it for years. When Doug Hajicek noticed the possible hernia on right thigh lower down, I thought, sure, may have somethin' ta do with injury further up on thigh(the horizontal ridge). A injury could easily account for variation in movement, flexability etc. Now I'll have to spend a little time lookin' into it, very interestin'.

Regardin' the midtarsal break, thanks to your help, I think I've been able to explain or show what I see in that section of the film I noticed. Not only is it interestin' the subject has a midtarsal break, but as I've said, that the foot bends where it does, in my opinion makes it highly unlikely...near impossible, a human foot in a costume could replicate it.

wolftrax had mentioned a bit back about a size 11 shoe or somethin like that, in a costume would be similar(can't recall exact words, sorry wolftrax if I'm off by much). However, the subjects foot bends just infront of its shin, I'm size 9 1/2, round a 10 inch foot(I think off the top of my head), my foot bends at the ball of foot, like yours, now look at your foot, bend your toes back, notice anythin'...the bend in my foot occours about 4 inches infront of my shin. A persons foot in a costume would still have to bend well ahead of its shin.

Interestin' thread SweatyYeti, lookin' foreward to the observations an comments. :thumbsup:

Pat...

Thanks for your lengthy response, Pat... :) I don't have time to respond to it right now...I have to head back out, to do another service call. But I'll respond later on this evening, for sure.

Just one thing, for now...I agree with you regarding the location, and extent of the bend in Patty's left foot. I don't see any way that that can be replicated by a human foot...in any type of 'costume foot'. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Nice SweatyYeti. An easy line of logic to follow indicating that the observed characteristics in the film show up in the trackway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
wolftrax

One of the problems with the images in question is that the camera is from behind the figure. I took a sequence from a different angle in the film, scaled to size, and put them up together to compare:

beatonsfootbendcomp2.gif

As we can see from the different angle, the shadow that supposedly indicates a midtarsal break is much lower than how it appears from behind. Take the more side view, line up where that flexion is supposedly taking place, and match it up to a frame showing the length of the foot, and it's not in the location of the midtarsals.

mtbcomp.jpg

But again, look at the top animation. The feet are obscured by the ground plane when in contact with the ground, while the foot is planted you cannot see the top of it. This is an obstacle in trying to observe where flexion is taking place exactly, but we can see from this that the "Shadow" is not in the location of the midtarsals.

Added to that, the Laverty photo and the corresponding cast that came from that looks very geometric, it looks like a pole running diagonally across the foot. Regardless, it is not impossible at all to make an impression that looks like a midtarsal break with a fake foot:

IMG_4981%5B1%5D.jpg

http://orgoneresearch.com/2009/10/19/bigfoots-mid-tarsal-break/

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
wolftrax

PattyLeftFootLift3Steps.jpg

These images all show that the foot is obscured when in contact with the ground, and point of flexion is obscured as well. Add that depth to these images:

beatonsfootbendcomp2.gif

mtbcomp.jpg

And the point of flexion is nowhere near the midtarsal region.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SweatyYeti

Nice SweatyYeti. An easy line of logic to follow indicating that the observed characteristics in the film show up in the trackway.

Thanks, Rick... :) It is pretty impressive, that there is that degree of correlation between the observed angles of Patty's feet...(both left and right)....and the amount of bending at the mid-foot, in the footprints.

PattyLeftFootBendLavertyPrint1.jpg

It does indicate, at the very least, a 'reasonable probability' that Patty made the tracks. The question now, is....how strong a probability, does it indicate??

Edited by SweatyYeti

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...