Something's Afoot...

Thought some here might like to follow what I'm working on. At this point I'm still in the construction phase but will be moving on shortly to the casting phase. For anyone looking to learn about casting, copying casts, or similar issues it might be worth taking a look.

Ummm.... I'm sorry to have to tell you this, but, well, it really looks fake. I mean, it's great that you are taking the time to investigate how to go about doing this, but dear me, it does look fake.

Look, here's a real track, at least I think it's real, I saw the track but not the thing that made it. Notice the toes, how they are round, scrunched up, how the ball of the foot makes a deeper impression than the rest, how all the toes scrunch together, and the big toe is really big and oval, and stuff?

what toes? lol

Teresa beat me to it.

As for the foot the purpose is to test various casting methods and take a look at how different things can effect the process.

Interesting - I think the best threads always come from people sharing what they are doing.
I was wondering, why the clay foot. why not just straight from a Hydrocal or plaster foot cast - seal it with silicone mold release or even Johnson paste wax can be used and still retain very fine details - then latex rubber directly over that, something like Kreemtex?

The point was to produce a cast that would have as limited an amount of surface detail as possible. Hence the clay model to create the cast.

gotcha, thanks

TF1 is complete. Time to move on to the fun stuff.

Sorry for the long delay but the test foot has finally seen action.

Casting artifacts ahoy.

There's been enough people reproducing these casting artifacts (Tube was the first I think) I'd call this one done. So much for 'dermals'.

Can't wait to see the rest of your experiments!

Well that's how science works. Rinse and repeat as needed.

Nice work!

I meant good on ya for the work.

I know. I just wanted an excuse to get in my random shampoo bottle quote of the day.

Hi

Another Great Quote from Sam the Man

Peace
Tim

?? The presence of spurious dermal ridges produced under experimental conditions does not serve to eliminate the possible existence of such evidence. The discussion and examples provided in Krantz's book are a case in point, IMO.

I think the possibility of real dermal ridges is a real possibility, but we need to seperate out the unreal from the real in order to tell what is really real. I'm just trying to keep it real.

When the alleged dermals do not match any known ape in regards to size and pattern, but do match that seen in the artifact experiments, then yes it does eliminate the possible existence of such evidence until more solid evidence, like a sasquatch foot, is found, and only then if the pattern and size matches. Just taking an honest look at the evidence and these tests, though, it becomes obvious we are seeing artifacts.

lol

This may be a stupid question but why do the artifacts show up in the first place? What causes them? And why the hell do they look so much like dermal ridges? I guess that was three questions. Keep up the good work BM!! Very very interesting!

The artifacts are caused by dessication. Dessication occurs when a casting is poured directly into a print that has been made in soil that contains dessicants. As to why they look so much like dermal ridges I and others would argue the fact that those same "dermal ridges" are in fact misidentified casting artifacts

ETA - You can find much more information on the process and implications here.

Anyone that's ever wondered about using barrier sprays in casting might want to check out the latest update.

Simple hairspray, cool! Thanks BM.

Like I mentioned in the blog I was originally going to use a fixative designed for preserving graphite and charcoal artwork but settled on the hairspray. At around 3 bucks and change it's a simple and cheap alternative and it's much easier to find.

The updates roll on....

I'd like to thank those who have provided positive feedback so far. I apologize for the delays in some of the postings but hope the results are worth the wait.

How do the dermals that Jimmy Chilcutt examined compare to these artifacts?

Great work, BM.

One of these casts has "dermal ridges". The other has casting artifacts.



Photo credit to Tube

The one on the right is the one with true dermal ridges?

Check out this link for the answer.

Pardon me if this question has been asked...

We now know hairspray will prevent casting artifacts, but has it been used as the barrier spray to capture any type of dermal ridges or fingerprints before? If not, then your E-F section is really not the same as the old bridge, and that's helpful to know. Either way, I appreciate the thoroughness of your documentation.

In my most recent test I used hair spray as a barrier agent and managed to capture my own fingerprints. Is that what you're asking?

No, in other people's research, has hairspray been used as a barrier spray to capture dermal ridges or fingerprints?

http://home.clara.net/rfthomas/papers/elkins.html

http://txsasquatch.blogspot.com/2006/01/jimmy-chilcutt.html

Unfortunately, that article doesn't say what kind, if any, barrier spray was used to create the cast.

Now I see. I honestly don't know. Matt (Tube) was just mentioning the other day he had used silly puddy to record dermals which wouldn't require a fixative. To be honest I wasn't sure it was going to work. When the spray is applied to the dry ash you can actually see the liquid from the spray being absorbed up into the ash. My fear was that the absorption process would wipe away the fine detail of the fingerprints but that didn't prove to be the case.



Having interviewed Pat Akin (the finder/caster of that track) at length I can assure you no barrier spray was used.

That's what I thought. Hence, why the whole casting artifact vs. dermal ridges debate started to verify the results.

A little mentioned but big part of the problem is the lack of providence in regards to many tracks. Before latex molding it was common for casts to be replicated by pressing them into a fine substrate and pouring a mold in the impression. In such a case even an expertly cast track could begin to exhibit artifacts in subsequent castings. In the case of the Elkins Creek cast the original was unfortunately destroyed in an accident, leaving us with only generational copies.

Awh, I understand now, thanks.

What's your next phase or study?

That's a really good question. I have several different options I'm considering so the best thing I can say is "stay tuned".