Jump to content

20 mm lens experiment, P-G filmsite


Daniel Perez
 Share

Recommended Posts

55 minutes ago, Catmandoo said:

Ravens are spies for Sasquatch.

 

School me please. I've never heard that before.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BFF Donor
On 11/6/2021 at 4:22 PM, Bill said:

The 20mm is a Kodak Anastigmat fixed focus lens standard on an older Kodak camera, the Model "E"  it has a "C" Mount, like the Ektar lenses, which is why it fits on the K-100.

 

You will need a push-on type filter holder, especially if you go the Kodak Vision3 500T route. The filter holder for that lens is the "Kodak Series 4 adapter ring  16,5mm  5/8 inch". The adapter ring is the 1st piece. Then comes the series 4 filter and the threaded ring that holds the filter in place. Nice touch that you stayed with Kodak lenses.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

BFF Donor
1 hour ago, gigantor said:
2 hours ago, Catmandoo said:

Ravens are spies for Sasquatch.

 

School me please. I've never heard that before.

 

 

Ravens have been around for at least 2 million years.

Ravens as spies goes way back to Norse folk lore. Ravens would spy and report back to Odin.

Indigenous peoples of North America and First Nations of Canada ( keeping north of the Mexican Ravens ) have always kept Ravens in high regard as smart, clever and sometimes tricksters as when 'Raven stole the Sun'. There are several sayings about Ravens and predators. Every Raven has a bear and a cougar. Every bear has a Raven. Every cougar has a Raven. Ravens need predators to rip open a carcass. Ravens will lead predators to breakfast, lunch and dinner. A Raven, squawking overhead may be giving away your location or warning you that a bear or cougar is close by.  If predators are not in close proximity, why do Ravens follow humans? I do not have Purina Raven Chow to hand out but I am followed. Could be that they are placing dibs on my eyeballs. I have some experiments for Ravens that I will try in Nov. and Dec. I could get snowed out though.

Edited by Catmandoo
more text
  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Forgive my basic Q here:

 

If we are trying to determine something about lens size or camera speed or other issues, do we really need to be at the actual PGF Bluff Creek site to do that?  Yes, I know if we know a tree or other known object still exist at the PGF site we can use it as a known factor as a reference point.    It makes sense to come closest to testing the PGF site since this is where the encounter occured.    

 

Yet, I will admit not understanding what post #1 is supposed to be showing me.   

 

Wouldn't it be just as valuable/ useful to take a variety of lenses and test them in some open field, well-lit basketball gym, or whatever against a know object with a known height or width?

 

If we had access to a K100 camera and lenses (or those rotating on a camera) we could just film an known object and change lenses.   Couldn't this be done anywhere.   If a person or object is a known height then just take the distance Patty is supposed to be (105 feet at one point) and film the object or person with each lens.  Then, compare the diff films from each shot with a diff lens.    

 

If this can be done with a camera like Roger's and film like Rogers (what do you develop that now?) then this would be even better.   

 

What are we gaining at the bluff creek location that couldn't be done somewhere else with better conditions in lighting and so on?

 

I am just saying take a known object or person, film them with each lens and look at the results.   I know I am missing on this idea, so I will sit back and read away for clarification.  Thanks in advance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Or see how things stand up on any of the expedition sequence footage taken before Patty? Or the short footage from reel 2? One thing I could advise on, though, is that the light in mid February (20th?) should be at the same light angle as October 20th. Just in case one didn't wish to wait a whole year to do more testing.

Edited by hiflier
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Backdoc:

 

In answer to your question, in theory (in the perfect world), doing lens tests on site at Bluff Creek would be ideal, from a research standpoint. However, in practice, the setting has changed so much, it is unlikely that doing any test research filming there will yield an ideal result. The new growth obscuring the view from Roger's filming position, plus the fact his exact position is now about 10 feet up in the air, due to heavy erosion, makes replicating his footage unlikely (putting it mildly). Using a replica environment is the more pragmatic solution if it is accurately reconstructed from the extensive survey work done on site. But such replication is costly, so the issue of cost is a significant factor.

 

Either approach has issues that challenge the effort. So there is no perfect solution. Thus any researcher looking to experiment must weigh these challenges of each approach and select the one that researcher can best manage.

 

Bill

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

BFF Donor
9 hours ago, hiflier said:

Or see how things stand up on any of the expedition sequence footage taken before Patty? Or the short footage from reel 2? One thing I could advise on, though, is that the light in mid February (20th?) should be at the same light angle as October 20th. Just in case one didn't wish to wait a whole year to do more testing.

 

A winter time expedition would require the participants to walk in or ride horses and have pack animals.  All Forest Service Roads in the Six Rivers National Forest are closed from Oct 22nd to June 15th in an effort to protect the cedar trees from Port Orford Cedar root disease that is spread via vehicle tires.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

BFF Donor
10 hours ago, Backdoc said:

do we really need to be at the actual PGF Bluff Creek site to do that? 

 Bill Munns has pointed out the changes at the Bluff Creek location.  

The "actual PGF Bluff Creek site" is long gone.

You posted about using an open area to test cameras and lenses.  How about using a baseball diamond?  Many measurements have been taken. There would be plenty enough room for targets. There are serious obstacles. Rogers position, F352 ( F354 ) is assumed. Pattys positions are assumed. There is the camera path and the Patty path to lay out. The assumed paths are laid out in Bill Munns book 'When Roger met Patty. Page 128, figure 6-00, 'camera and subject paths'. Laying out the dynamics of the movements would be difficult '.

 

We still have the enthusiastic adventurers tromping through the underbrush. Unfortunately their access time is seasonal.

 

Edited by Catmandoo
spelling
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Catmandoo said:

 

You posted about using an open area to test cameras and lenses.  How about using a baseball diamond?  Many measurements have been taken. There would be plenty enough room for targets. 

 


Great idea on the baseball diamond.   
 

It’s neat we know the exact site.    I’m assuming the value of the PGF site besides the historical is the remaining landmarks such as some stumps and some big trees.    If that results in squeezing out info in size and scale then maybe they might lead to giving us the height of Patty.   Besides that, what value could the overgrown and ever-changing PGF site offer over any other site such as a baseball field for Some experiments?     

 


 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

(Let me add my Q was in no way trying to lessen the many good things Mr. Perez has done in his lens test in post #1.   The test was just beyond my understanding is all.  I applaud his many efforts and enjoy his interviews I have heard .  Continued respect)     

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BFF Donor

BD, an artificial test site would be difficult to do.  The Bluff Creek site has the trees and stumps for visual reference. They have moved a small amount. Lets call them 'monuments' for optical sighting. The Bluff Creek group has many measurements.  Several persons are/have working on 3-D computer representations. At least one is building a physical, table-top model ( I don't think PGF action figures are included ). The sun angle factor is still being examined. The enthusiasm is impressive.

 

The baseball diamond was an example of a wide open space, very level except for that mound thing and a lot of daylight. I would guess that to recreate Bluff Creek, one needs all of the measurements, a lot of focused  people, optical transit for lay out ( don't shoot anyone with a laser ) and a lot of luck. Subject path and camera path will be painful.

 

I am waiting for a forum member to whip out a computer 3-D model, circa 2021. Several exist.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...