Jump to content
Bill

Think Like A Hoaxer

Recommended Posts

Bill

OM:

 

I know I have it, but I'll have to dig through my archives to find it. Will post when I have it.

 

Bill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bill

Old Mort:

 

Here's the image you requested.

 

Bill

Roger_casting_track_full.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
OldMort

Thanks Bill...

 

Is it still unknown whether this was shot on Kodachrome or Ektachrome?

 

Edited by OldMort

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bill

All known copies have the sides between the sprocket holes masked off in copying, so original camera film stock edgecodes are not on the copies.  So we don't know if it's Kodachrome or Ektachrome.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
OldMort

That's what I thought but I appreciate you verifying that.

 

I was interested in that specific "pour" image because it shows more of the surrounding landscape than most versions.

 

Its still pretty much impossible though to orient it to any specific area on the PGF sandbar, or confirm if indeed it was shot there even.

 

Looks like the general topography but beyond that who knows...

 

 

Edited by OldMort

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bill

I have tried to connect the landscape with anything in the PGF, and nothing connects. And the theory that this cast is the same in the footprint footage is a bogus theory, because the landscape doesn't resemble the terrain around the footprint cast in the trackway footage. Plus Roger's lack of beard shadow here doesn't compare with his beard shadow when he's by the tree holding two cast prints. So, in my opinion, this was not taken the same day as the PGF event, and is not one of the PGF casts Roger made. I realize there are many differing opinions on this, however.

 

So there are still a lot of unanswered questions about this footage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
OldMort

I totally agree with your opinion.

 

Its a shame that Green and Dahinden had to snip up all this footage for their "presentation" reels.

 

It seems like they lost track of what was what and where it came from after a while....

 

But of course they probably weren't expecting ongoing analysis 50 years after the fact either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bill

Actually the primary source for the casting footage is the ANE production of "Bigfoot: Man or Beast". I assume Green and Dahinden also got copies, but all my main scans come from the ANE Copy 8 and Copy 14 footage.

 

We can only hope that some new footage segments turn up, and might have more intact versions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ShadowBorn
BFF Patron
4 hours ago, Bill said:

Old Mort:

 

Here's the image you requested.

 

Bill

Roger_casting_track_full.jpg

In this picture you would think that you would be able to see more then just one print. But all we see is Patterson making cast of only one print that clearly shows a print with compression.  It should be easy to spot other prints on this soil base. Since  we can clearly see how the soil is surrounding the print from where this creature stepped. This one print does show a print of a extremely heavy creature.  I do not want to say that this print could be a hoax out of respect for the filming of Patty. But not seeing more tracks with in this photo like the one that he is casting well it lead me to believe otherwise.Again just my opinion. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SweatyYeti

Here is the image with some color correction applied...

 

Roger-casting-track-full2.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bill

One theory on why there are no prints before or after it is that it was a fabricated print strictly to demonstrate how a footprint cast is done. Roger demonstrated the process again in the documentary he showed in theaters. So Roger is known to make footprint indentations for demonstration of casting purposes.

 

There is no actual claim by Roger himself that this footage was at Bluff Creek or was of the actual trackway found that day, as far as I know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Patterson-Gimlin

Great information. Thanks for sharing. I think you are right it is a demonstration of casting a print. 

The question remains are all the prints he made casts real or fabricated. 

 

Tiny Toots makes great points and has good opinions. All well and good,but the fact was conveyed at the end. 

No specimen No proof. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bill

I don't offer any appraisal of footprint casts, but the PGF is real, and the trackway filmed is real. Any rigorous analysis will support this conclusion, to the highest certainty photographic evidence can achieve.

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
xspider1
On 3/8/2019 at 11:57 AM, Backdoc said:

 

For some, it's like a math problem.  No matter what you multiply by zero the answer is always zero.  If the hardline skeptic does this the conclusion always ends with "There is no Bigfoot".  

 

The trick here is for both sides to dispassionately weight the information as it comes in and consider it. There are times a bit of information might not be helpful to one's cause.  It can't be disregarded just because we don't like what the information tells us Skeptic or Believer.

 

Well said, Backdoc.  And, in terms of doubting that the PGf subject was real, there is another analogy that applies: Nothing from Nothing leaves Nothing.  I see no reason to "believe" that it would have been possible for the PGf subject to have been hoaxed and almost every reason to believe that it wasn't.

Edited by xspider1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PBeaton

My opinion, from talkin' to Bob about it/the tracks/casts, this is Roger makin' a cast of the left foot from the film sight October 20th 1967. 

 

If you look at the ground, that dark area turns off towards the upper right, my opinion, the darkness could likely be caused by the moister in a lower in elevation. That may have been helpful in capturing a decent print, thus Roger cast it.

 

It's also my opinion, the sasquatch filmed was walkin' towards the right.

 

The tracks cast by Roger as told to me by Bob, correlate to what Richard Henry described in his diagram/map of the PGF site, as well as the photos from George Haas at the film site of John an Jim studyin' the remains of the casts/tracks.

 

Bob told me he never filmed Roger makin' a demonstration cast.  

 

I believe the casts were made just to the left of this clip.

giphy.gif

 

 

Richard Henry PGF Site, BFT 11-2004 (2).jpg

Edited by PBeaton

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...