Jump to content

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


Recommended Posts

The track prints were obviously too deep for a human in a costume to make naturally.

The problem is that the tracks are too deep for the film subject in any guise to make.

http://www.csicop.or..._and_footprints

Dennett's conclusion supporting a skeptical view of Patterson's film is ironically similar to a pro-Bigfoot organization, the North American Science Institution, finding that the film subject's weight was 1,957 pounds!

Link to post
Share on other sites
PBeaton

Sweaty, why do you not post the images unedited? As seen in the "Reasons Not to Consider the PGF a Hoax" thread, your "Enhancements" tend to mislead people.

wolftrax,

Are you talkin' bout the images I've told you on multiple occassions SweatyYeti posted FOR ME . My images, nothin' ta do with SweatyYeti except for his kindness postin' them for me. I told you they weren't enhanced, I don't know how ta do that, I simply snapped photos from tv or computer screen(can't recall at the moment). Your continued suggestin' SweatyYeti "enhanced" images when I've told you he posted them on my behalf...might be misleadin' people. Are you still talkin' bout the images he posted for me ? An are any of the images you have used been altered in any way...you know...enhanced ?

Pat...

Link to post
Share on other sites
wolftrax

No, I do not mess with the brightness or contrast on images for exactly that reason, that it tends to distort things.

You're telling me you took photos from your TV or computer, you don't rememember which, what was the source you took photos of?

Link to post
Share on other sites

No, I do not mess with the brightness or contrast on images for exactly that reason, that it tends to distort things.

You're telling me you took photos from your TV or computer, you don't rememember which, what was the source you took photos of?

Which undistorted images are you using? MK's?

Link to post
Share on other sites
PBeaton

No, I do not mess with the brightness or contrast on images for exactly that reason, that it tends to distort things.

You're telling me you took photos from your TV or computer, you don't rememember which, what was the source you took photos of?

wolftrax,

They would be from MK's work, as his are quite nice. Tv or computer as I said, can't recall ? I'm thinkin' computer...but am not sure? What's the problem ?

Pat...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dennett's conclusion supporting a skeptical view of Patterson's film is ironically similar to a pro-Bigfoot organization, the North American Science Institution, finding that the film subject's weight was 1,957 pounds!

Glickman used a formula that he stated may not apply. Since when was the NABS a "pro- Bigfoot organization"?

Dennett's qualifications were what again?

Link to post
Share on other sites
wolftrax

wolftrax,

They would be from MK's work, as his are quite nice. Tv or computer as I said, can't recall ? I'm thinkin' computer...but am not sure? What's the problem ?

Pat...

If you don't even remember if it was from your TV or computer and what the show was, how do you know you even took the photos? You also said you took two images and then put them together, how did you accomplish this?

Edited by wolftrax
Link to post
Share on other sites
PBeaton

If you don't even remember if it was from your TV or computer and what the show was, how do you know you even took the photos? You also said you took two images and then put them together, how did you accomplish this?

wolftrax,

Really ? Don't you remember ? I've told you this before, I do thin's ol' school. Take two picture, go get them developed, place them side by each, take another picture of the two pictures together, get my brother to download it for me, he emails the image to me, an then I emailed it to SweatyYeti. How do I know I even took the photos, ha ! ha ! Again...really ?

Read above to find the answer to how I accomplished it. Or you could ask again... :rolleyes:

Pat...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Take two picture, go get them developed, place them side by each, take another picture of the two pictures together, get my brother to download it for me, he emails the image to me, an then I emailed it to SweatyYeti.

Good grief, man. You use film? I'll bet some of the younger posters don't even know what that is. How many times have you seen the PGF referred to as "video"? :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites
PBeaton

Good grief, man. You use film? I'll bet some of the younger posters don't even know what that is. How many times have you seen the PGF referred to as "video"? :lol:

LAL,

Ha ! Ha ! I do still use film now an again, but I went high tech not long back, got me one of them there digi camers ! ha ! ha ! But I still don't know how ta download, save, etc., etc. I'm useless with/on a computer. Ol' school like "reckon" I reckon... :)

Cheers !

Pat...

Link to post
Share on other sites
wolftrax

wolftrax,

Really ? Don't you remember ? I've told you this before, I do thin's ol' school. Take two picture, go get them developed, place them side by each, take another picture of the two pictures together, get my brother to download it for me, he emails the image to me, an then I emailed it to SweatyYeti. How do I know I even took the photos, ha ! ha ! Again...really ?

Read above to find the answer to how I accomplished it. Or you could ask again... :rolleyes:

Pat...

That may explain why the image was changed or degraded. However, as you can see, the edge of the foot is not where you thought it was.

Link to post
Share on other sites
PBeaton

That may explain why the image was changed or degraded. However, as you can see, the edge of the foot is not where you thought it was.

wolftrax,

Again, are you tellin' me what I see ? Once again, I disagree with you. Angle of heel to forefoot, the bend in my opinion is indeed what I see, an example of MTB.

Pat...

Link to post
Share on other sites

I do still use film now an again, but I went high tech not long back, got me one of them there digi camers ! ha ! ha ! But I still don't know how ta download, save, etc., etc. I'm useless with/on a computer.

Ah, you should be able to remove the card from the camera and insert it in the card reader thingy somewhere on your computer or download using the cable that (I hope) came with the digital camera. Wonderful things will happen. You may not have lost much resolution doing it your way but reading from the card or from My Pictures would be better, not to mention easier and faster. Pictures can be uploaded directly to the board or uploaded to an image hosting service and posted from there. There's help here.

We'll have you doing Patty .gifs in no time. :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites
PBeaton

Ah, you should be able to remove the card from the camera and insert it in the card reader thingy somewhere on your computer or download using the cable that (I hope) came with the digital camera. Wonderful things will happen. You may not have lost much resolution doing it your way but reading from the card or from My Pictures would be better, not to mention easier and faster. Pictures can be uploaded directly to the board or uploaded to an image hosting service and posted from there. There's help here.

We'll have you doing Patty .gifs in no time. :lol:

LAL,

I'd expect, but my brother tried showin' me how ta download once...went in one ear an straight out the other...flat out like a lizard drinkin' ! Ha ! Ha ! Never been one for the tech toys etc. :blink:

Pat...

Link to post
Share on other sites

...went in one ear an straight out the other...

Then don't listen. Just do it! Remove SD memory card (you do have one, don't you?) from camera and stick it where it fits. If a technodummy like me can do it so can you. -_-

Think of the time you'll save!

ETA: Is there some reason a flexible foot can't bend both ways?

Edited by LAL
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • gigantor unlocked this topic
×
×
  • Create New...