The late historian Daniel J. Boorstin once said…”The greatest obstacle to discovery is not ignorance, but the illusion of knowledge.” This remarkable film, I.E. the Patterson Sasquatch film, has served as a vehicle for many such “illusionists.” Early on, it was prevented from being shown in its pristine forms, and thus became the fodder for any, who wanted to suggest the nature of its subject. The prevailing thoughts about the film depended less on what the film actually contained, and more upon the qualifications of the presenters of conjecture. These ones wore their qualifications out on their sleeves and presented themselves as “foremost”, as if they had no peer, and indeed, no peer was allowed. Generations of observers have been the victims of such ones. Poor handling of the film, not by Roger Patterson, but by the people that subsequently came into possession of it, has served to gift us all with a cycle of ignorance, that was born of this “illusion of knowledge.” Good images do not need the power of suggestion to speak to someone. I hope that you recognize what you are seeing here at this site. You are seeing the light of day…and it is illuminating our past. To those who can put aside the 40 plus years of jargon loaded knowledge mongering… these images offer us all a keyhole peek into another world, that perhaps may have once been our own. This film fosters a kind of ambivalence, in a way that no other film can. The film both attracts and repels, and perhaps many of us are afraid for it to be real. Yet…the physics of light and recording media did its job that day, as well as the camera person…and…we are stuck with it, and…my eyes…and your eyes…don’t have the need of much interpretation when the images are as good as they are…presented here. Thank you for stopping by this site. It was built with you in mind, persons who know their own mind… and believe their own eyes. M.K.Davis
It should be obvious that there is something of size being carried by or attached in some way to the left arm or hand. Compare to the right hand for size registration. The question is…what is it? Only seconds later it is no longer in the left hand as she raises the left hand into view. Now…what are we looking at? Click on the image to animate.
Here’s the file with a built in delay. Click on the image to animate.
Here’s an enlargement of the area. Click on the image to animate.
Only a few seconds or steps further the left hand is seen to be holding nothing. The size of the left hand is now normal. Click on the image to animate.
What happened to the enigmatic object that was there…and then not there? See if you can see it here. What is it? You be the judge. Click on the image to animate.
The first walk sequence is very violent and shaky. Many people think that there is nothing from that part of the film of any worth. Surprisingly, as much as the camera person is shaking the camera, there are clear photos and clips that can be pulled from that part of the film, with lots of good data. Here’s a clip of several frames from behind. Notice the longer hair coming down the neck and onto the back. Also notice that the ribs show through the skin on the back. Click on the image to animate.
What’s this on the left side. Look at the animation above and pay particular attention to the left arm area. Is that something being carried? You be the judge. Click on the image below to enlarge.
Here’s a still from this first walk sequence. Once again, you can see longer hair down the back of the neck, and wrinkled skin over the ribs along the left side. Click on the image to enlarge.
Here’s another still that shows the ripples on the back caused by the ribs. click on the image to enlarge. Once again, the hair shows to be much larger down the back of the neck and onto the back. Click on the image to enlarge.
Notice, with this contrast boost, that the ribs show through the skin quite well along the back. I must say that this look in the first walk sequence does not have the same appearance along the back, as the second walk sequence. I have been unable to find this type of appearance in the second walk sequence. Perhaps this is not the same Sasquatch?. There is a scene change between the two sequences and there is no way to verify by film, how much time elapsed between the two film sequences. We simply do not know if the two sequences contain the same Sasquatch. Click on the image to enlarge.
Many people argue about the height of the Patterson film subject. While nothing is exact, there can be a reasonable determination using known parameters. Here’s a still that uses the foot itself to measure the height. Click on the image to enlarge.
Here’s an animated fade image. The young man is Al Hogdson’s son Mike. He is six foot and one and three quarters of an inch tall. Now according to the image above, the film subject is going to be between 6’1″ and 6’5″ depending on how she is standing, straight or bent over. This image of Mike is approximately the same place and line of sight as that of the film subject. This should make this reasonably accurate. The film subject is now more erect so she is reaching her full height here. You be the judge. Click on the image to animate.
The answer is a resounding yes! There are many copies of this film out there. Most of the better ones have never been seen in public. The location of the original copy is not known, but I suspect that wherever it is, it is in pristine condition. This plethora of copies that are circulating around are mostly amateurishly made, and even at that, are copies of other copies until the resolution is nearly gone. Not only that, but some have taken the liberty to crop the copies until there is hardly any usable information in them. Here are some examples. In the frame below, the field of view is considerable. This was taken from one copy, that came from a Bigfooter in Canada whom most have assumed had the very best from the film.
Now here is another “full frame” in other words this was what was shown on the projector screen with none of the image on the sides or bottom or top lost. It is from the same source. Clearly this has been cropped. But what kind of “professional” would crop away HALF of the film’s subject matter? Click on the image to enlarge
Here’s another frame, again…from the same source. Click on the image to enlarge.
Here’s the cropped image from the same source. Click on the image to enlarge.
And last but not least…click on the image to enlarge.
…and here is the crop. Click on the image to enlarge.
My point is that because it comes from a certain source in Canada, is this source beyond question?. If he tells you that he has provided the best there is…how do you know that this is true? I’ll give you an example…in 1968 he released this photo in a book that he had written. Click on the image to enlarge.
When you read the caption from the photo above…notice the disclaimer…”as released to the newspapers”. At the same time that this photo was being published, this same person had in his possession an image of the quality as the frame below…yet…did NOT release it. Thankfully this man does not possess everything of quality, or we would know NOTHING of any significance about the film. The image below was graciously provided by Patricia Patterson, the widow of Roger Patterson. It is of superb quality, and is a sample of what could have been. Click on the image to enlarge.
The fact is…that there is NO certification of the film as to whether it’s a degenerated copy or whether it’s the best there is or what. The fact that the above image exists simply means that what we have been told about the film and what it contains is simply UNTRUE. The film’s handlers as of late, have not explained the quality of the above frame other than to say that I have altered it in some way. …again… this is UNTRUE.
Here are some links to short clips in slow motion that demonstrate the cropped nature of some of the copies. Here is the wide field clip. Click on the image to run the video.
Here is the severely cropped clip. Click on the image to run the video.
This clip was very hard to put together. There is a break in the film about midway. This is because the film went completely blurry and the frames could not be interpreted in any way. The film then continues until the film subject actually bends over forward. At that point the first walk sequence ends. It ends on a very blurry frame, so I back it up to the next clearest frame. Click on the image to animate.
Here’s the clip in color and without the background. Click on the image to animate.
This clip will take you all the way to the last clear image on the first walk sequence. In that last image, the subject has fallen forward, with the buttocks showing toward the camera. The second sequence begins on another part of the sand bar, and need not be connected at all with the event seen here on this post. This file, at the last, oscillates back and forth so that the upright posture and the fallen posture can easily be understood. Click on the image to animate.
Many people wonder where that original film that Roger had is, and how it can be examined. There are many stories. Roger Patterson was a smart man. It has never made sense to me, that he would continue to show the original until it was damaged and destroyed. When I read the November, 1968 Argosy interview of Roger Patterson and Robert Gimlin, Ivan T. Sanderson disclosed the information below regarding the original film and what was done with it. I tend to believe this. Click on the image to enlarge.
I removed the post I had up earlier due to an error with some of the trees. Perspective can be one of the most difficult things to sort out. Rather than try it myself again, I am posting the image with no arrows. If you so desire, perhaps you can figure which trees in the aerial photo match the trees in the frame 352 inset. Print it out and draw lines and let me know what you come up with. The large image is from Chris Murphy’s book “Meet the Sasquatch” which can be purchased at Hancock House publishers. Click on the image to enlarge.
When I previously posted this, I did not have all the frames to the walk across. I have since completed this with all the frames from this sequence of the film. Here it is for your perusal. Click on the image to animate.
Here’s the same animation with the inset cropped around the subject. Click on the image to animate.
Are you aware that the Sasquatch in the Patterson film takes her eyes off the ground in front of her for about four seconds during her look back, without a misstep of any kind, on ground that is both uneven, and full of debris? Try that in your yard sometime. She must be a very skilled walker. Click on the image to animate.