Interesting panoramic overlay of the Patterson Gimlin film showing exactly the size of “Patty” compared to a human.
M.K. Davis writes “This amazing overlay of two old films give a new perspective for a piece of history from long ago.”
Sasquatch Chronicles Blog
19 Responses to “Panoramic overlay of the Patterson Gimlin film”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Robert P
She’s about 3 inches taller
Dave T
If it’s accurate, MKs a little off on figuring her height. When she’s in the same spot as the guy that’s used in the comparison, she’s atleast 4-6″ taller. That puts her at 6’9″ to 7′ in my estimation.
Rodney P
I thought the same thing Dave when I looked at it Patty looks 6’9″ or 7’0″ at least compared to the guy that’s 6’5″
Irene A
There is something off…“Patty” is slightly taller than the man at the start of the walk…but as she walks further away, her height is smaller than the man. Maybe the lens and perspective are off a bit? Interesting video regardless. Thanks, Wes!
Chris I
That’s exactly what I was thinking. She’s about 7 ft.
Craig D
MK, it’s not the “f” stop that determines the focal length (the “f stop” determines the size of the aperture of the lens–how much light is let into the lens–how “fast” or :”slow” the lens is). F stop also determines depth of field…(how much in the foreground and background is in focus). What determines dimensions of “size” based on foreground and background is the “length” of the lends (wide angle 28 or 25 mm; or long distance, 135 or 200 mm). I think Meldrum mentions that Patterson’s lens was 70 mm. that is, slightly “telephoto” (meaning, it makes things far seem closer).
Paula B
I did enjoy this, MK Davis. Thanks! You’re on point with the explanation of f stops/depth of field.
Very interesting.
Jon K
She seems taller at first and shorter after- like she was closer at first and farther after. Very interesting i didnt know this John Green film existed. What a great reference
Karen C
Dave T. has my vote, I agree that’s what I saw too…
Marian B
Hey,Karen
Have you ever told us about your encounter? Either in an episode or the forum? I would love to hear it please.
Marian?
Duke S
The first 2 overlays Patty appears a full head taller than Jim, than the size differential seems to diminish, which wouldn’t be possible if they were using the same exact path. This makes me wonder if they got the path right when Jim walked it.
michael n
I think the point everyone is missing (no offense intended to anyone here) is that the damn dirty ape is REAL!!! Who cares how tall how far what she had for lunch….its a real sasquatch! ! THE only true clear video we have of one for the public to view.
Rob C
Always love MK’s take. Good stuff
michael n
Its a shame that it only took one guy……..one guy with no proof whatsoever to say that was me in a suit to cast doubt on this truly fantastic film.
michael n
Sorry…..afterthought is my worst enemy….lol. if anyone can watch this film and think its a guy in a suit they should never ever go out into the woods……ever!!!
Gail W
MK does great work, I can’t think of anyone who has spent as much time with this film, but I have to bring a few things up for thought. Remember, the subject in the John Green film is standing erect, Patty was walking slouched over plus her legs are bent at the knees and are never fully extended. If you closely watch the end, she takes a straighter path towards the tree line, the other subject veers to the right slightly. Bob Gimlin tells that it rained hard the night they were leaving, he said they almost did not make it out with his truck and trailer. If memory serves me, I do believe there was a large rain event between the Patterson-Gimlin film and when John Green came to investigate the site. I seem to remember seeing an old interview where someone talked about the roads being washed out and they had to borrow a bulldozer to clear a road. You take in account that there may have been some changes in the elevation of the area due to the rain.
Charles R
It seems a lot of fine folks here are seeing the same thing I am. I am far from a lens or camera expert or even novice of any kind. It seems Craig D above knows a thing or two. In the first pics Patty is a head taller 7 foot. In last pics she is same height. She can not be both. In all pics she is much larger of frame especially the early pics. Another thing for certain and in this case distance does not matter. Patty has a whole different walking gait than Jim. His is typical human that all uninjured humans walk with. Hers is 73 degrees or more back, legs to not full extend, lean is forward and steps are longer in stride. My my, one thing for certain here is she is a Forest Giant.
Synbios
MKDavis called everyone idiots and armchair detectives for not believing a video about some leaf fluttering about once. He can be abit boneheaded and stubborn sometimes. However he does put the time in and he is a great asset when it comes to stuff like this.
I still wont forget the dried leaf though.
Bryan G
Great analysis, but I do agree that Patty appears noticeably taller by about 4-6 inches.