# The Patterson-Gimlin film > On 20 October 1967 Roger Patterson, with Bob Gimlin, filmed a large, hair-covered, upright figure walking across a creek bar at Bluff Creek in northern… Source: https://mysteriesdept.com/mysteries/patterson-gimlin-film Publisher: Mysteries Department Licence: CC BY 4.0 (credit Mysteries Department and link the page) Updated: 2026-10-27T17:47:59+00:00 --- **MYS** 0CZ25NYE017E·Mystery · sighting # The Patterson-Gimlin film **0** [Follow][Ask a question](https://mysteriesdept.com/questions/key-questions?mystery=patterson-gimlin-film) The Patterson-Gimlin film ![Frame 352 from the Patterson Gimlin Bigfoot film](https://mysteriesdept.com/media/folio/patterson-gimlin-film-lead) Roger Patterson and Robert Gimlin · Public domain Date 20 October 1967⁠[[1]] Place Bluff Creek, northern California⁠[[2]] Filmed by Roger Patterson, with Bob Gimlin as witness⁠[[1]] Camera and stock Kodak K-100 16 mm camera; Kodachrome II⁠[[2]] Length 954 frames, about 400 of them sharp⁠[[2]] Camera speed Not recorded; argued to be 16 to 18 frames per second⁠[[2]] Camera original Missing since 1980; studied through copies⁠[[2]] Roger Patterson Died 1972⁠[[8]] Status Partly explained Questions 0 of 4 answered People [**Roger Patterson** Filmed the subject](https://mysteriesdept.com/mysteries/patterson-gimlin-film/people/FIG0CZ25PNW6AEN/roger-patterson)[**Bill (William) Munns** Creature-effects designer; film analyst](https://mysteriesdept.com/mysteries/patterson-gimlin-film/people/FIG0CZ25QN42QE3/bill-william-munns)[**Bob Gimlin** Witness and co-participant](https://mysteriesdept.com/mysteries/patterson-gimlin-film/people/FIG0CZ25PXP6CJK/bob-gimlin)[**D. Jeffrey Meldrum** Anatomist, Idaho State University; editor of The Relict Hominoid Inquiry](https://mysteriesdept.com/mysteries/patterson-gimlin-film/people/FIG0CZ25QDA5TKG/d-jeffrey-meldrum)[**Greg Long** Author of The Making of Bigfoot](https://mysteriesdept.com/mysteries/patterson-gimlin-film/people/FIG0CZ25RMC6KWN/greg-long) All 12 people › [**Isaac Y. Tian** Computer scientist, University of Washington; lead author of the 2022 restoration](https://mysteriesdept.com/mysteries/patterson-gimlin-film/people/FIG0CZ25QWY6N6Z/isaac-y-tian)[**Rene Dahinden** Investigator; last known to have the camera original](https://mysteriesdept.com/mysteries/patterson-gimlin-film/people/FIG0CZ25Q5G7JG3/rene-dahinden)[**Bob Heironimus** Claims to have worn the suit](https://mysteriesdept.com/mysteries/patterson-gimlin-film/people/FIG0CZ25RW61X0Y/bob-heironimus)[**Daniel O. Schmitt** Locomotion biomechanist, Duke University](https://mysteriesdept.com/mysteries/patterson-gimlin-film/people/FIG0CZ25RCJ2GW5/daniel-o-schmitt)[**David J. Daegling** Biological anthropologist; sceptical analyst](https://mysteriesdept.com/mysteries/patterson-gimlin-film/people/FIG0CZ25R4R29M8/david-j-daegling)[**Philip Morris** Costume maker; claims to have sold Patterson a suit](https://mysteriesdept.com/mysteries/patterson-gimlin-film/people/FIG0CZ25S405CXM/philip-morris)[**Marq Evans** Director of the documentary Capturing Bigfoot](https://mysteriesdept.com/mysteries/patterson-gimlin-film/people/FIG0CZ25SBT3EEH/marq-evans) Catalog key**MYS** 0CZ25NYE017E Roger Patterson's film of 20 October 1967, shot with Bob Gimlin beside him at Bluff Creek in northern California, runs to 954 frames of 16 mm colour film and shows a dark, hair-covered figure walking upright, which at one point turns to look toward the camera (the "lookback" frame)⁠[[1]]⁠[[2]]. It has been studied, copied, enhanced and argued over for nearly sixty years and is the best-known image offered as evidence of Bigfoot⁠[[3]]. The argument has two sides with academic champions. Jeff Meldrum, an anatomist at Idaho State University, and the creature-effects designer Bill Munns argue that the film is unaltered, sharp enough to study, and shows anatomy and movement that fit a real animal and not a costume of the period⁠[[2]]⁠[[3]]⁠[[4]]. The biological anthropologist David Daegling and the locomotion biomechanist Daniel Schmitt argue that the measurements behind such claims rest on too many unknowns to exclude a person in a suit⁠[[5]]⁠[[6]]. The journalist Greg Long published the claims of a man who said he wore the suit and of a costume-maker who said he sold it⁠[[7]]. Neither the suit nor any animal has been produced. The record has hard limits. The camera original went missing in 1980, so all analysis works from copies⁠[[2]]. The camera's running speed, which fixes the subject's walking speed and so much of the biomechanical argument, was not recorded; the best case puts it at 16 to 18 frames per second⁠[[2]]. In 2025 and 2026 a documentary, Capturing Bigfoot, presented a newly found reel of a costumed walker on 1966-dated film and statements from Patterson's widow and son; Munns, who examined the reel for the film-makers, argues it is a later replica, not a rehearsal⁠[[8]]. Of the 4 questions on this site, 0 are answered. The most likely answer to “What does the Patterson-Gimlin film show?”, not yet confirmed: a person in a fur costume, filmed by Patterson. ### Key questionsset by the editors [**What does the Patterson-Gimlin film show?** ](https://mysteriesdept.com/mysteries/patterson-gimlin-film/questions/QST0CZ25WS63QQ8/what-does-the-patterson-gimlin-film-show)Most likely: a person in a fur costume, filmed by Patterson [All 4 questions ](https://mysteriesdept.com/questions/key-questions?mystery=patterson-gimlin-film) ## What happened Patterson filmed the figure at Bluff Creek on 20 October 1967 with Gimlin present, using a hand-held Kodak K-100 loaded with Kodachrome II; the camera moved throughout and he ran while filming for part of the sequence, so much of the footage is shaken or blurred⁠[[1]]⁠[[2]]. Patterson sent the film to a laboratory for contact prints in 1967 and had five frames made into 4x5 inch transparencies, which his widow, Patricia Patterson, still held in 2013⁠[[2]]. John Green and Rene Dahinden obtained Canadian rights and had copies made from the camera original; in 1970–71 a distributor, American National Enterprises, made further copies and kept the original⁠[[2]]. After the company's bankruptcy the original passed to a new owner and into storage in Los Angeles, from which Dahinden checked it out in 1980; there is no record of its return⁠[[2]]. Patterson died in 1972⁠[[8]]. **Map of the country** [Open the full map](https://mysteriesdept.com/mysteries/patterson-gimlin-film/map) [+][−] 1 **Bluff Creek film site, Six Rivers National Forest, California** Creek bar Within 10 km 2 **Los Angeles, California (film storage, 1970s–1980)** City A region A regionNatural Earth ### Timeline **Timeline** Squeezed where little happened. Each mark is a published claim, by how it stands:AcceptedMost likelyStill possibleDisputedRuled out ## The accounts The two men present are the only witnesses to the filming, and the film is their account. Patterson's and Gimlin's own statements were not reached for this record; Tian, Munns and Meldrum describe Gimlin as witness and co-participant⁠[[1]]. Later accounts bear on the costume question. In 2004 Greg Long published the claims of Bob Heironimus that he wore a suit for Patterson, and of Philip Morris that he sold Patterson a gorilla costume⁠[[7]]. In the 2025–2026 documentary Capturing Bigfoot, Patricia Patterson and Clint Patterson are reported as saying they know or believe the film was hoaxed, and Clint as saying he saw his father burn a fur suit. Neither was present at the filming⁠[[8]]. ## What was recorded The film is 954 frames by the standard count, of which about 400 are sharp⁠[[2]]. The best surviving copies fall into groups by origin: Patterson's 1967 contact prints, the five transparencies, the Canadian copies, the American National Enterprises copies and later scans⁠[[2]]. Munns and Meldrum examined splices, focus, resolution and copy artefacts and concluded the camera original was not edited and that the copies can be studied as true images of it⁠[[2]]. In 2022 Isaac Tian, with Munns and Meldrum, aligned eight independent prints of 150 frames around the "lookback" frame (F354) by computer, stabilised them against the background and composited them, producing the cleanest version yet without manual retouching⁠[[1]]. The single most important unknown is the camera speed. The K-100 could run at 16, 18, 24 or more frames per second, and the setting on the day was not recorded; at 16 fps the shutter is open about 1/32 of a second, enough to blur a hand-held shot⁠[[2]]. Munns and Meldrum put the speed at 16 to 18 fps; the 2022 restoration plays back at 16⁠[[2]]⁠[[1]]. The subject's height, stride and speed, and therefore whether a human could match them, all depend on this value and on the site geometry. ## The explanations The costume reading holds that a person in a fur suit walked for the camera. Its academic case is that the film cannot be shown to exceed human ability, because estimates of height, limb proportions and gait carry large uncertainties from the unknown frame rate, distance and lens⁠[[5]]⁠[[6]]. Its documentary case is the testimony of a claimed wearer and maker, published in 2004, and of family members in 2025–2026, together with a newly found reel of a costumed walker staged much like the 1967 film⁠[[7]]⁠[[8]]. No suit has been produced, and the claims have not been tied to physical evidence. The animal reading holds that the subject is an unknown hominoid. Its case is that the surface anatomy (skin folds, fat distribution) matches real ageing human and ape bodies rather than costume artefacts, that the film is unaltered, and that the figure's proportions and gait are outside what a suit of the period would produce⁠[[3]]⁠[[2]]⁠[[4]]⁠[[9]]. It rests on the existence of an animal for which there is no specimen. On the 2025–2026 reel, the documentary's makers say it was shot before October 1967 and so was a rehearsal; Munns argues that a 1966 date code on the stock shows only that it cannot have been shot before 1966, and that details such as the costume's white feet fit a replica copied from the film's high-contrast prints⁠[[8]]. The documentary's own evidence for the date was not reached for this record. ### Published claims **Published claims and their status** | Year | Who | Claimed | Status | Reason | |---|---|---|---|---| | 1973 | John Napier⁠[10] | The scientific evidence taken together points to a hoax of some kind, though nothing in the film proves it conclusively. | Most likely | Still the view of most mainstream anthropologists who have examined the film, but no suit or performer has been proved⁠[6]⁠[7]. | | 1999 | David J. Daegling and Daniel O. Schmitt⁠[5] | Estimates of the subject's height and gait rest on too many unknowns, the camera speed, distance and lens, to show that no human could have made them. | Accepted | The camera speed and the site geometry are still unmeasured, so the uncertainty they describe remains⁠[2]. | | 1999 | Grover S. Krantz⁠[9] | The subject's measurements and gait are not those of a person in a suit, so the film shows a real animal. | Disputed | Mainstream anthropologists reject it because the measurements depend on an unknown frame rate and site geometry, and no specimen of the animal exists⁠[5]⁠[6]. | | 2004 | Greg Long⁠[7] | Bob Heironimus wore a gorilla suit for Patterson, and the costume-maker Philip Morris sold it to him. | Still possible | Testimony given decades later and never tied to a surviving suit or to contemporaneous records⁠[7]⁠[8]. | | 2004 | David J. Daegling⁠[6] | The film cannot be shown to exceed human ability, and a person in a costume is the likeliest explanation. | Most likely | No measurement has excluded a human, but no suit or performer has been proved either⁠[2]⁠[7]. | | 2006 | D. Jeffrey Meldrum⁠[4] | The figure's morphology and gait are those of a real relict hominoid, not a costumed human. | Disputed | The argument depends on the unrecorded camera speed, and no specimen, bone or DNA of the proposed animal has been found⁠[6]⁠[2]. | | 2013 | Bill Munns and D. Jeffrey Meldrum⁠[2] | The camera original was not edited, the surviving copies are true images of it, and the camera ran at 16 to 18 frames per second. | Still possible | No evidence of editing has been published, but the camera original is lost and the frame rate has never been measured independently⁠[2]⁠[1]. | | 2013 | Bill Munns and D. Jeffrey Meldrum⁠[3] | Skin folds and fat distribution on the subject match real ageing human and ape bodies, not the flaws of a costume. | Disputed | It answers one argument for a costume without excluding a well-made suit, and no specimen of the proposed animal exists⁠[6]. | | 2022 | Isaac Y. Tian, Bill Munns and D. Jeffrey Meldrum⁠[1] | Aligning and compositing eight independent prints by computer gives the cleanest version of the lookback sequence without manual retouching. | Accepted | A reproducible image-processing method set out step by step; it improves the record without deciding what the figure is⁠[1]. | | 2026 | Marq Evans (Capturing Bigfoot)⁠[11] | A 16 mm reel developed in 1966 shows a costumed rehearsal, so the 1967 film was staged. | Still possible | The 1966 date code bounds only the earliest use of the stock, and no laboratory dating of the reel's processing has been published⁠[8]. | | 2026 | Bill Munns⁠[8] | The reel shown in Capturing Bigfoot is a later replica copied from high-contrast prints of the 1967 film, not a rehearsal. | Still possible | An argument from costume details by an advocate of the film's authenticity, with no processing date to support it⁠[8]. | ## What would settle it A suit, or contemporaneous records of its purchase and use, linked to the film by physical detail, would settle it for a costume. A specimen would settle it for an animal. Short of either, three things would narrow it: recovery of the camera original⁠[[2]]; an independent determination of the camera speed (for example from camera-shake frequency or from the K-100's mechanism) and a survey of the site, which together fix the subject's size and speed; and a published, independent laboratory dating of the 2025 reel's processing, not only its stock⁠[[8]]. ## Questions 0 of 4 questions are answered. **Key questions** [All 4](https://mysteriesdept.com/questions/key-questions?mystery=patterson-gimlin-film) **0** [What does the Patterson-Gimlin film show?](https://mysteriesdept.com/mysteries/patterson-gimlin-film/questions/QST0CZ25WS63QQ8/what-does-the-patterson-gimlin-film-show) 0 of 3 sub-questions answered·0 Most likely: a person in a fur costume, filmed by Patterson ## Evidence 15 findings [What does the Patterson-Gimlin film show?](https://mysteriesdept.com/mysteries/patterson-gimlin-film/questions/QST0CZ25WS63QQ8/what-does-the-patterson-gimlin-film-show)9 findings [A person in a fur costume, filmed by Patterson.](https://mysteriesdept.com/mysteries/patterson-gimlin-film/answers/ANS0CZ25XRE00SP/a-person-in-a-fur-costume-filmed-by-patterson)Most likely +[Bob Heironimus says he wore the suit; Philip Morris says he sold Patterson a gorilla costume.](https://mysteriesdept.com/mysteries/patterson-gimlin-film/evidence/EVD0CZ25Y085A2K/bob-heironimus-says-he-wore-the-suit-philip-morris-says-he)Suggestive +[Patterson's widow and son are reported to say they know or believe the film was hoaxed; the son reports seeing a fur suit burned.](https://mysteriesdept.com/mysteries/patterson-gimlin-film/evidence/EVD0CZ25Y8238VP/pattersons-widow-and-son-are-reported-to-say-they-know-or)Suggestive +[A reel of a costumed walker staged much like the 1967 film exists on 16 mm Kodachrome with a 1966 date code.](https://mysteriesdept.com/mysteries/patterson-gimlin-film/evidence/EVD0CZ25YFW20QE/a-reel-of-a-costumed-walker-staged-much-like-the-1967-film)Suggestive +[Estimates of height and gait carry large uncertainties from the unknown frame rate, distance and lens.](https://mysteriesdept.com/mysteries/patterson-gimlin-film/evidence/EVD0CZ25YQP5P83/estimates-of-height-and-gait-carry-large-uncertainties-from)Supported −[Surface features attributed to costume flaws occur in real ageing human and ape bodies.](https://mysteriesdept.com/mysteries/patterson-gimlin-film/evidence/EVD0CZ25YZG50K2/surface-features-attributed-to-costume-flaws-occur-in-real)Suggestive [A real, unknown hominoid (sasquatch).](https://mysteriesdept.com/mysteries/patterson-gimlin-film/answers/ANS0CZ25Z7A4HSQ/a-real-unknown-hominoid-sasquatch)Disputed +[Munns and Meldrum find the film unaltered and sharp enough for analysis.](https://mysteriesdept.com/mysteries/patterson-gimlin-film/evidence/EVD0CZ25ZF4377G/munns-and-meldrum-find-the-film-unaltered-and-sharp-enough)Supported +[Munns and Meldrum argue the surface anatomy matches real bodies rather than costume artefacts.](https://mysteriesdept.com/mysteries/patterson-gimlin-film/evidence/EVD0CZ25ZPY6EQH/munns-and-meldrum-argue-the-surface-anatomy-matches-real)Suggestive +[Meldrum and Krantz argue the figure's morphology and gait are not those of a costumed human.](https://mysteriesdept.com/mysteries/patterson-gimlin-film/evidence/EVD0CZ25ZYR3WTK/meldrum-and-krantz-argue-the-figures-morphology-and-gait-are)Suggestive −[No specimen of the proposed animal exists.](https://mysteriesdept.com/mysteries/patterson-gimlin-film/evidence/EVD0CZ2606J1MF1/no-specimen-of-the-proposed-animal-exists)Established [At what speed did the camera run?](https://mysteriesdept.com/mysteries/patterson-gimlin-film/questions/QST0CZ25X1048GJ/at-what-speed-did-the-camera-run)3 findings [16 to 18 frames per second.](https://mysteriesdept.com/mysteries/patterson-gimlin-film/answers/ANS0CZ260P66F5A/16-to-18-frames-per-second)Still possible +[Munns and Meldrum say the speed has been established at 16 to 18 fps.](https://mysteriesdept.com/mysteries/patterson-gimlin-film/evidence/EVD0CZ260Y07656/munns-and-meldrum-say-the-speed-has-been-established-at-16)Suggestive +[16 fps was the K-100's minimum and typical for amateur film without sound.](https://mysteriesdept.com/mysteries/patterson-gimlin-film/evidence/EVD0CZ2615T3125/16-fps-was-the-k-100s-minimum-and-typical-for-amateur-film)Suggestive [24 frames per second.](https://mysteriesdept.com/mysteries/patterson-gimlin-film/answers/ANS0CZ261DM5RV4/24-frames-per-second)Still possible +[The K-100 offered 24 fps, and the speed setting on the day is unrecorded.](https://mysteriesdept.com/mysteries/patterson-gimlin-film/evidence/EVD0CZ261NE3RNH/the-k-100-offered-24-fps-and-the-speed-setting-on-the-day-is)Speculative [Is the costume reel shown in Capturing Bigfoot a rehearsal for the 1967 film or a later replica?](https://mysteriesdept.com/mysteries/patterson-gimlin-film/questions/QST0CZ25X8T2VC4/is-the-costume-reel-shown-in-capturing-bigfoot-a-rehearsal)2 findings [The reel was shot before the 1967 film, as a rehearsal.](https://mysteriesdept.com/mysteries/patterson-gimlin-film/answers/ANS0CZ262520X6X/the-reel-was-shot-before-the-1967-film-as-a-rehearsal)Still possible +[The stock carries a 1966 manufacturing date code, earlier than the 1967 code on the Patterson film.](https://mysteriesdept.com/mysteries/patterson-gimlin-film/evidence/EVD0CZ262CW48HS/the-stock-carries-a-1966-manufacturing-date-code-earlier)Suggestive [The reel was shot after the 1967 film, copying it.](https://mysteriesdept.com/mysteries/patterson-gimlin-film/answers/ANS0CZ262MP2G6B/the-reel-was-shot-after-the-1967-film-copying-it)Still possible +[The costume's white feet match how the sole appears on high-contrast copies, not on the camera original.](https://mysteriesdept.com/mysteries/patterson-gimlin-film/evidence/EVD0CZ262WG725V/the-costumes-white-feet-match-how-the-sole-appears-on-high)Speculative [Where is the camera original?](https://mysteriesdept.com/mysteries/patterson-gimlin-film/questions/QST0CZ25XGM4S72/where-is-the-camera-original)1 finding [It was lost after Rene Dahinden checked it out of storage in 1980 and may survive in a private collection.](https://mysteriesdept.com/mysteries/patterson-gimlin-film/answers/ANS0CZ263C4143J/it-was-lost-after-rene-dahinden-checked-it-out-of-storage-in)Most likely +[There is no record of the film being returned after Dahinden checked it out in 1980.](https://mysteriesdept.com/mysteries/patterson-gimlin-film/evidence/EVD0CZ263KY357X/there-is-no-record-of-the-film-being-returned-after-dahinden)Supported ## Artifacts The films, photos, papers and objects this mystery rests on, each with its own key and its distance from the original. **Artifacts** [See all 5](https://mysteriesdept.com/mysteries/patterson-gimlin-film/artifacts) Video3 steps from object [The camera original reel](https://mysteriesdept.com/mysteries/patterson-gimlin-film/artifacts/ART0CZ264V04RMH/the-camera-original-reel) Roger Patterson (camera); digitised copy of unrecorded generation, via the Internet Archive · contested Scan2 steps from object [Five 4x5 inch Kodak transparencies of selected frames](https://mysteriesdept.com/mysteries/patterson-gimlin-film/artifacts/ART0CZ265AM1T88/five-4x5-inch-kodak-transparencies-of-selected-frames) Bill Munns · private Document1 step from object [The costume reel shown in Capturing Bigfoot](https://mysteriesdept.com/mysteries/patterson-gimlin-film/artifacts/ART0CZ265T87JJM/the-costume-reel-shown-in-capturing-bigfoot) Documentary producers (private) [See all 5 artifacts](https://mysteriesdept.com/mysteries/patterson-gimlin-film/artifacts) ## See also [ **Loch Ness** A Scottish loch where over a thousand people have reported a large animal since 1933. ](https://mysteriesdept.com/mysteries/loch-ness) [ **2004 Nimitz encounter and the Navy videos** A 2004 report by US Navy aircrew of a white, wingless object off Baja California. ](https://mysteriesdept.com/mysteries/nimitz-encounter) [ **Ball lightning** Glowing spheres reported in thunderstorms and recorded by instruments once, in 2012. ](https://mysteriesdept.com/mysteries/ball-lightning) [ **Phoenix Lights, 13 March 1997** A V of lights and a row of flares seen by thousands over Arizona on 13 March 1997. ](https://mysteriesdept.com/mysteries/phoenix-lights) ## References 1. 1.[Tian, I., Munns, B., Meldrum, J. 2022. Mathematically Optimal Restoration and Stabilization of the Patterson-Gimlin Film with Computation Feature Detection. The Relict Hominoid Inquiry 11: 263–287.](https://mysteriesdept.com/sources/SRC0CZ25KR43GMJ/mathematically-optimal-restoration-and-stabilization-of-the)cited 9 times here**SRC** 0CZ25KR43GMJ 1. 2.[Munns, B., Meldrum, J. 2013. Analysis Integrity of the Patterson-Gimlin Film Image. The Relict Hominoid Inquiry 2: 41–80.](https://mysteriesdept.com/sources/SRC0CZ25K8G0T3T/analysis-integrity-of-the-patterson-gimlin-film-image)cited 20 times here**SRC** 0CZ25K8G0T3T 1. 3.[Munns, B., Meldrum, J. 2013. Surface Anatomy and Subcutaneous Adipose Tissue Features in the Analysis of the Patterson-Gimlin Film Hominid. The Relict Hominoid Inquiry 2: 1–21.](https://mysteriesdept.com/sources/SRC0CZ25KGA6F5Y/surface-anatomy-and-subcutaneous-adipose-tissue-features-in)cited 4 times here**SRC** 0CZ25KGA6F5Y 1. 4.[Meldrum, D. 2006. Sasquatch: Legend Meets Science. Forge Books, New York.](https://mysteriesdept.com/sources/SRC0CZ25MQC0DHD/sasquatch-legend-meets-science)cited 4 times here**SRC** 0CZ25MQC0DHD 1. 5.[Daegling, D., Schmitt, D. 1999. Bigfoot's Screen Test. Skeptical Inquirer 23(3), May/June 1999.](https://mysteriesdept.com/sources/SRC0CZ25M7R0G68/bigfoots-screen-test)cited 4 times here**SRC** 0CZ25M7R0G68 1. 6.[Daegling, D. 2004. Bigfoot Exposed: An Anthropologist Examines America's Enduring Legend (chapter 5, The Patterson Film, pp. 105–156). AltaMira Press.](https://mysteriesdept.com/sources/SRC0CZ25MFJ2T2T/bigfoot-exposed-an-anthropologist-examines-americas-enduring)[doi](https://doi.org/10.5040/9798216417958)cited 3 times here**SRC** 0CZ25MFJ2T2T 1. 7.[Long, G. 2004. The Making of Bigfoot: The Inside Story. Prometheus Books, Amherst, New York.](https://mysteriesdept.com/sources/SRC0CZ25MZ62QX0/the-making-of-bigfoot-the-inside-story)cited 7 times here**SRC** 0CZ25MZ62QX0 1. 8.[Munns, W. 2026. Capturing Bigfoot: A Documentary Film Review and Analysis (Director Marq Evans). Journal of Scientific Exploration 40(3): 437–442.](https://mysteriesdept.com/sources/SRC0CZ25KZY6S2Q/capturing-bigfoot-a-documentary-film-review-and-analysis)[doi](https://doi.org/10.31275/20264058)cited 13 times here**SRC** 0CZ25KZY6S2Q 1. 9.[Krantz, G. 1999. Bigfoot Sasquatch Evidence. Hancock House, Surrey, British Columbia.](https://mysteriesdept.com/sources/SRC0CZ25N707JGX/bigfoot-sasquatch-evidence)cited 1 time here**SRC** 0CZ25N707JGX 1. 10.[Napier, J. 1973. Bigfoot: The Yeti and Sasquatch in Myth and Reality. E. P. Dutton, New York.](https://mysteriesdept.com/sources/SRC0CZ25PE209HS/bigfoot-the-yeti-and-sasquatch-in-myth-and-reality)cited 1 time here**SRC** 0CZ25PE209HS 1. 11.[Evans, M. 2026. Capturing Bigfoot. Documentary film; premiered at South by Southwest, Austin, 12 March 2026; distributed by XYZ Films.](https://mysteriesdept.com/sources/SRC0CZ25PNW52ZX/capturing-bigfoot)cited 1 time here**SRC** 0CZ25PNW52ZX Last edited 27 Oct 2026