Bigfoot: New HD enhancement of the Patterson-Gimlin footage.

originally posted by: game over man
There are more and older ape costumes than Planet of the Apes '68....if these guys were broke they could have stole one.

In 1979 or 1980, Bigfoot researchers interviewed some of the best costume makers in the world and the ones with the biggest budget. These were the people who were working on the second Star Wars movie, The Empire Strikes Back.

These people were among the best in their field and they said that the Bigfoot in the Patterson Film was probably a real animal. They said this because even they could not make an ape suit as good as what was seen in that 1967 film, because the film, when studied closely, showed muscle movement. Obviously Chewbacca was the best they could do, and Chew was nowhere near as authentic as Patty. Because Chew was filmed to not show any patches and flaws in his costume.

They said that only one person they knew could replicate a suit that might look like the Patty creature – and that guy was John Chambers - the guy who in 1968 made the Planet Of The Apes apes. And Chambers said he did not make a Bigfoot suit and probably could not even make a suit as good as what was seen in the film. In fact he too thought it was not a suit, but that it could very well be a real creature.

So if the people who make the suits say it is not a suit then it is not a suit.

And we are looking at the real thing.

i agree how can you say it is a costume. you can see the muscles in detail

I think when people first see it they see a rectangular cutout for the eyes and a line around the waste, like a jacket would make. They do not get into the subtleties or the blow-ups of what they are really looking at. They do not get into the details, they take one look and say "fake".

I asked my 10 year old yesterday why she does not believe in aliens. She said "Because they look too stupid." I guess if you look stupid you cannot be real.

All you really need to do is look closely at the how the costume moves below the waste, where instead of the normal buttocks, you can tell easily it's a suit. Look at it.

As stated, the people who actually make suits disagree.

You want butts - we got 'em!

www.youtube.com...

www.youtube.com...

www.youtube.com...

www.youtube.com...

www.youtube.com...

www.youtube.com...

www.youtube.com...

a reply to: Kurokage

The Patterson Gimlin film is film of an actual Sasquatch. This is not a "gorilla suit" as claimed by many. It is IMPOSSIBLE to recreate many aspects of Patty if the "gorilla suit" claims were true.

Of the many aspects of Patty that would be impossible to recreate with a suit the most telling aspect that would be impossible to recreate is that shock wave traveling though the right thigh muscle.

You can also see when Patty's right leg is bent how the quad muscle contracts and makes a slight bulge as a muscle does in contraction and then when she extends her leg you can clearly see that same quad muscle stretch out. Then when she steps onto the ground you can see the shockwave travel all the way up through the heavy quad muscle.

This is not a suit of any kind.

Watch from the 6:20 mark to the 7:13 mark.

originally posted by: Blue Shift
I kind of like the MK Davis enhancements better. I think he had access to the original film to make better scans. His enhancements also highlight areas of exposed skin on the subject, showing that the color bleed in the film can make it look like a suit but it's actually sparse hair (not fur) covering the body.

MK's enhancements also show muscle tone and movement, breasts, as well as other anatomical features that a costume designer could not have created back when the Patterson-Gimlin film was made.

a reply to: spiritualarchitect

Patti does seem to have a very muscular and moving butt in some of the breakdowns of the original film, I really do believe this would be very hard, dare I say impossible to do in an Ape suit.