Backyard Photos, invitation for Jack White.

[Michael Clark]

In bumping this thread I was trying to get an idea of how many members regard the photos as fakes. After poking around a bit, it seems like most people think they are indeed fakes. 

This was in line with my post from earlier today where I was trying to gauge how much evidence there was that LHO did in fact own a rifle at all. The evidence is very surprisingly thin, in my estimation.

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?/topic/23480-witnesses-to-lho-posession-of-the-mc-rifle/

 

[Sandy Larsen]

On 2/13/2017 at 5:43 PM, Michael Clark said:

Bump, I know Jack White has passed. I am searching the forum for the Photo Analysis expert opinions on the backyard photos.

Cheers, Mike

Mike,

You don't need to be an expert to see that the BYPs are fake.

Here's my simple proof that the photos are fake:

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?/topic/23028-how-did-they-get-roscoe-white-to-lean-like-that-and-not-fall-over/&page=19#comment-335258

 

(P.S. I know... I use the word "proof" a little loosely.)

[John Butler]

Thanks Michael,

Thanks for your heads up but, for my own purposes I want to take Mr. Dankbaar literally.  I want to make at least 2 more posts on this topic of the BYP.  

Hopefully by doing so I can put out an idea that should end the discussion on the authenticity of the BYP.  Drive the last nails into the lid of that coffin.  I really don't know why people are still arguing about those frauds after 50+ years.

Somebody once said if you can prove The BYP are fraudulent then The LGT and Warren Commission conclusions are conspiracy frauds.

Edited February 15, 2017 by John Butler

[Michael Clark]

5 hours ago, John Butler said:

Thanks Michael,

Thanks for your heads up but, for my own purposes I want to take Mr. Dankaar literally.  I want to make at least 2 more posts on this topic of the BYP.  

Hopefully by doing so I can put out an idea that should end the discussion on the authenticity of the BYP.  Drive the last nails into the lid of that coffin.  I really don't know why people are still arguing about those frauds after 50+ years.

Somebody once said if you can prove The BYP are fraudulent then The LGT and Warren Commission conclusions are conspiracy frauds.

Excellent John, I am looking forward to your posts!

[John Butler]

The person who made the BYP is more than likely an amateur photo editor.  This person made the same kind of mistakes involving light and shadows an amateur artist makes when he first starts out.

To illustrate this point I will use an example from the art world.  Say that you are inspired by the TV artists and you want to make a painting as they do on television.  You assemble all the equipment you need, you’ve watched the videos, and now you are ready to make a landscape painting.  You want to put mountains and trees on canvas.

What is the first decision you need to make.  This first decision is the most important decision because everything else works off of it.  This first decision is where does the light come from?  You can bring light into to your painting from the right, from the left, from the top, from the bottom, from the rear, or from the front.  Once you have made that decision you must stick with it and not change it.

Let’s say you decide to bring the light in from the right.  You go ahead and paint your mountain and highlight it from the right.  Any shadows need to go off to the left.  During the course of making this painting you have made hundreds of decisions.  You decide to end the painting by putting a big tree in the front to show distance in the painting.  You paint the tree in and highlight the tree from the left and paint a shadow to the right.  Amateur artists do this kind of thing all the time.

This is a huge mistake.  You have introduced a second light source into the painting.  It’s an error the aspiring artist probably didn’t notice.  And, he won’t notice until later.

This is what happened in the BYP.  There are conflicting shadows and light sources.  This indicates that the photo editor was an amateur or was arrogant enough not to care knowing that his mistakes would not be noticed.

The amateur photo editor could be Roscoe White, who joined the Dallas Police Department in Sep. 1963.  He worked in their photo lab.

I will be more detailed in explaining this in the next post.

[John Butler]

Here is what I find false:

 

• I will use directions in the discussion of the photo that are standard for people.  Right and left are as follows.  Lee Harvey Oswald is holding a rifle in his left hand and a newspaper in his right.  This is called the proper right when viewing figures in a photograph.  From the viewer’s perspective or perspective left Oswald has a newspaper in his left hand and a rifle in his right.  If you want to use this perspective just reverse what is said.  

•  Notice that the shadows of the steps to the right of the picture move towards the left side of the picture.  This indicates the light source in this is a photo is to the right of the Oswald figure.  It is the sun.

• Notice that the Oswald figures’ shadow moves to the right.  This is a direct impossibility. This is the first glaring mistake made by the photo composer.  There cannot be two suns shining and casting shadows in different directions at the same time. 

• This body shadow of the Lee Oswald figure indicates the light source or sun is to the left of the Oswald figure.  Are you beginning to get the idea that something might be wrong here; two light sources or two suns in one photo casting shadows in different directions?

• Notice the shadow under the Oswald figure’s nose.  This shadow is moving downward indicating the light source or sun is overhead and to the front.  This gives us a third shadow direction or pattern.  Three suns casting 3 shadows in 3 different directions.  This is a violation of the laws of nature.  This cannot be refuted or denied!  The evidence is in the picture and can’t be erased. 

• What can we conclude from all this?  Well, Dallas, Texas where these photos are supposed to have been taken is not on the Predator’s hunting preserve planet.  Adrien Brody is not about to walk out of the jungle into a clearing with many suns and planets in sky.  Dallas, Texas is on the earth.  There is only one sun in our solar system.

• So, the BYP has three light sources or suns for the types of shadows displayed.  That violates the laws of nature, but makes a framing and cover-up possible. Violating the laws of nature is not an uncommon occurrence when dealing with the visual record of the assassination in Dealey Plaza.  Most of the visual evidence in Dealey Plaza is fantastical or magical and is clearly fraudulent. 

• The BYP shown by Life Magazine is a fake! Jack White who studied these photos for many years lists for you 15 things that falsify these photos.  But, you only need one to expose the backyard photos for the hoax that they are.  Only one is necessary.  Sorry, the one I have chosen cannot be argued against by a sane person.  It is undeniable and irrefutable. The facts concerning the shadows and light sources are beyond a reasonable doubt.  I don’t know why Jack White didn’t recognize this or use it if he did. He used this argument in other places to invalidate photos with more than one light source.

 

[Tom Hume]

I too suspect the BYP were faked, but not for the reason most CTs believe. Be that as it may, Oswald’s shadow and the stair shadows look consistent and believable to me.

 

Several months ago, Andrej was putting together a 3-D model of the Neely Street back yard. Using Oswald’s shadow as a base line, say, someone like Andrej should be able to predict what the stair shadows should look like, and also reveal whether the Oswald body-shadows from all three photos are believably consistent. 

 

For me, the most obvious clue to fakery is that all three photos were shot from almost exactly the same spot (a matter of inches), yet to the casual observer, it looks like C-133A and C-133B, for example, were taken from very different distances from the subject. So, the camera original images had been resized, yet, according the authorities, the film from the Imperial Reflex was batch processed at a commercial establishment, a place where custom cropping of individual photos would be quite unusual.

 

 

 

Another obvious clue to fakery, for me, is the severe keystone that’s apparent in C-133A and 133C, and yet C-133B shows no keystone at all.

 

Tom

 

Edited February 15, 2017 by Tom Hume

[Michael Clark]

Thanks guys. I always thought the pics looked fake, but I was never one to repeat that claim based on my, more or less, casual assessment; or just because a book made that claim, or I heard somebody say it. I still am only interested in saying that they are fake based on the consensus of a set of people's opinions which I respect. I would need to spend a lot of time measuring, thinking and reading before I would be willing to make the claim and argue for that claim. I am just not interested in studying the pictures in the absence of another live person or persons to debate with and analyze with, face to face.

So, I am satisfied. I can say that I believe they are faked, without feeling that I am just parroting sceptics.

What's more is I am confident that the only  evidence for LHO owning the rifle are:

-Marina's testimony

-Jeanne De M's testimony (that Marina showed her the rifle) that is uncorroborated by Marina.

Irionically, it is the dubious nature of Jeanne's testimony that makes me doubt Marina's. If they simply made Marina recount Jeanne's testimony I wouldn't reject the entire claim that Oswald owned a rifle. But, alas, that's where I am at.... LHO did not own or possess a rifle.

Thanks again!

Michael

[Paul Trejo]

BUMP

Edited February 16, 2017 by Paul Trejo

[Michael Clark]

3 minutes ago, Paul Trejo said:

We have too many witnesses who saw the Oswald's at the Neeley Street address.  Besides the DM's, there were others in the Dallas Russian community.   Gary Taylor is another.   Michael Paine.  Ruth Paine.  Why would they lie?  What would they possible have to hide or gain?  

Marina Oswald said she took one (and only one) of the BYP photographs.  Why in the world would she lie about it?   No reason.

One would have to coordinate a dozen people to tell the same like under oath -- why would they cooperate?   No reason.

Isn't it simply paranoid to claim that all these people were lying in concert?   I can't think of another word for it.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

That should follow a quote from a member who disputes the Neely street residency.

Cheers,

Michael

 

[Paul Trejo]

On 2/14/2017 at 4:43 PM, David Josephs said:

 Joe, She did not take the BYPs.  Not a single one of them.  There is, in fact, quite a bit of skepticism that the Oswald's ever lived at Neely to begin with...   

 

David,

We have too many witnesses who saw the Oswald's at the Neeley Street address.  Besides the DM's, there were others in the Dallas Russian community.   Gary Taylor is another.   Michael Paine.  Ruth Paine.  Why would they lie? What would they possible have to hide or gain?  

Marina Oswald said she took one (and only one) of the BYP photographs.  Why in the world would she lie about it?   No reason.

One would have to coordinate a dozen people to tell the same like under oath -- why would they cooperate?   No reason.

It simply makes no sense to claim that all these people were lying in concert.  

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Edited February 16, 2017 by Paul Trejo

[Chris Bristow]

I took these images from the Dartmouth study assuming they were already sized. The ear tips match well, the mug shot is about  3% larger than the backyard photo. But the face front is an additional 12% larger than the backyard photo.
Even though the horizontal measurements of the faces are only off by 3%, the horizontal measurements of the pupillary distances are over 10% larger in the mug shot.
 The height vs width dimensions are way off, but even the width of the ears vs the eyes are way off. And they are on the same horizontal plane!
Makes difficult to compare the Pupillary distance when nothing else matches. I can't find any good reason for these large differences 

Note: the pupillary measurement on the backyard photo.is taken from a high contrast image of his left eye. The slight rotation of the backyard face was taken into account for the PD measurement.

[Chris Bristow]

On ‎2‎/‎15‎/‎2017 at 0:01 AM, Sandy Larsen said:

Mike,

You don't need to be an expert to see that the BYPs are fake.

Here's my simple proof that the photos are fake:

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?/topic/23028-how-did-they-get-roscoe-white-to-lean-like-that-and-not-fall-over/&page=19#comment-335258

 

(P.S. I know... I use the word "proof" a little loosely.)

Sandy, I was looking over the shadows of the rifle and newspaper and noticed something. While the newspaper looks to be pointing straight up, the rifle is leaning towards the camera and slightly to the right. To the degree it is leaning at the camera the shadow will move toward a horizontal position. Holding a pen upright on a table under a close light source and rocking it from straight up to 30 degrees forward changed the direction of the shadow by almost 90 degrees. Just how far forward the rifle leans is hard to confirm but it may be a plausible answer for the direction of the shadow.

 

[Guest]

http://www.prayer-man.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/rokc forum/www.reopenkennedycase.org/apps/forums/topics/show/13097955-backyard-photos.html

 

http://www.prayer-man.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/rokc forum/www.reopenkennedycase.org/apps/forums/topics/show/13242989-back-yard-photography.html

 

https://kennedysandking.com/john-f-kennedy-articles/a-new-look-at-the-enigma-of-the-backyard-photographs-parts-1-3

https://kennedysandking.com/john-f-kennedy-articles/a-new-look-at-the-enigma-of-the-backyard-photographs-part-4

https://kennedysandking.com/john-f-kennedy-articles/a-new-look-at-the-enigma-of-the-backyard-photographs-part-5

 

That'll ought to keep you busy for a while.....

Edited February 16, 2017 by Bart Kamp

[Paul Trejo]

Chris,

Jack White, a late member of this Forum, brilliantly showed how the chin in the BYP belongs to Roscoe White.  So, yes, the BYP are indeed Fakes.  Not only the chin, but the neck, the shoulders, the lumpy right wrist and the back-leaning stance, all belong to Roscoe White.

Jack White failed to show, however, that it was Lee Harvey Oswald who created the Fake BYP's at Jaggars-Chiles-Stovall, where he also created the Fake ID for Alek J. Hidell.   (Oswald and Roscoe White were buddies in Dallas, having been Marines in Japan during the same tour.)

Regards,
--Paul Trejo