Oswald Leaving TSBD?

[Linda Giovanna Zambanini]

The huge, brilliant white light from TLR camera #2 would be produced by something with a much larger diameter and more powerful lens than Oswald's toy-like IR 620. Also note that TLR #2 is black and has a definite white or chrome decorative strip or nameplate across the base of its faceplate.

In my research looking for a large TLR with just such a decorative strip, I came across the Mamiyaflex with 180mm lens. It looks like if anything could create such a huge, intense light - this baby could probably do the job! And all the Mamiyaflexes I've seen are black with this characteristic chrome decorative strip across the bottom of the faceplate - some also have "Professional" written on the strip. This is not to say it is definitely this particular camera - but it, or something similar, could fit the bill. And if it's Joe Molina with the camera, who i think from his location and hair, it is, having been an accountant for the TSBD for 16 years, he would probably have the resources to buy such an expensive toy - unlike LHO

Edited August 7, 2015 by Linda Giovanna Zambanini

[Linda Giovanna Zambanini]

Vanessa said:

Tommy, why do you think Oswald went inside to get his lunch after the shots? Sorry, I've probably missed a lot.

I find it incredibly coincidental that Oswald said he had his lunch out on the steps with Shelley and lo and behold, there is an Oswald-type lunch left on the steps right next to where PM was standing.

Who else on the TSBD steps actually said they ate their lunch on the steps that day? Maybe Molina? IIRC all the rest claimed they ate before or after being on the steps.

I think it's not unreasonable to assume that whoever left that lunch on the steps actually ate out there. Otherwise it's an odd spot for someone to leave their rubbish if they'd eaten their lunch elsewhere. Why not dump it in the building's rubbish bin if they were going back inside?

I know I've got a bee in my bonnet about the lunch but it's one of those dot-connecting things that I think forms part of the whole picture and tends to confirm that Oswald is PM.

I totally agree with you, Vanessa! It's just a little more than coincidental that we find that pop bottle and some sort of napkin or wrapper there on the steps where PM /LHO was standing! What appeared to me at first to be crinkled napkin around the bottle, i suddenly realized had the look, not of an opaque white napkin, but of the grayish semi-transparent look of crinkled waxed paper with it's charactestic white lines where the crinkles are! Low and behold one of the items confiscated from Beckley i think it was, was some brand of waxed paper - apparently this was pre-Saran wrap days and he usually wrapped his sandwhich in waxed paper. So I'm convinced that's his lunchtime garbage that he had to leave there when all hell broke loose.

Just a reminder from someone born in '56, of what crumpled waxed paper looks like - I've actually met some young people who don't know what waxed paper is or what it looks like!

Edited August 7, 2015 by Linda Giovanna Zambanini

[Thomas Graves]

Tommy said:

Since Prayer Man was pointing his twin lens reflex camera in the general direction of the sun, enough light was entering it through the upper "viewing" or "reflex" lens so that half (?) of it, after being bounced back in the direction of the lens by the 45-degree-angled mirror inside and then allowed to escape out through that lens, escaped with sufficient intensity as to make the lens appear to be glowing to an observer. It doesn't matter that he was standing in the shade because he wasn't pointing his TLR at a poorly-lit object, he was pointing it in the general direction of the sun. In fact, it's easier for the observer to see that glowing lens when the camera is in the shade due to the contrast between the "dark" shade and the "light" glow. That's my take on it, Ian. Please correct me if I've made any technical mistakes.

This forum won't allow us to post here any photos from certain websites (at least that's my understanding), so I'm unable to post some good photographs which demonstrate what I'm talking about.

In order to view this phenomenon, what it takes is for someone with a twin lens reflex camera to point it at a strong light source and at a mirror at the same time in order to create a kind of "selfie" photograph which shows the glowing "viewing" or "reflex" lens of the camera, or for another photographer with any kind of camera to take a head-on photograph of someone who is standing in the shade and pointing their TLR towards the sun.

That's why I suggest googling "Vivian Maier" in quotation marks and then clicking on "images" (instead of "web") to see two full pages of Vivian Meirer's photographs, a few of which were taken in the aforementioned "selfie" way and which, therefore, show her glowing "viewing" or "reflex" lens even though she's standing in shade.

Or you might want to check out Linda's excellent "photo album"

http://www.reopenken...lbumid=15889118

and blog

http://www.reopenken...s/show/13218499

on the ROKC website.

Regarding "PM's circle of light seeming larger that the diameter of his lens," Oswald's Imperial Reflex was a shiny silvery-grey in color, "like aluminum," so maybe that had something to do with it.

--Tommy

Thank you, Tommy!

Exactly right - thank you for pointing out that it doesn't' matter that PM is standing in the shade! Indeed, it matters not that PM is standing in the shade - what matters is his camera - and the 45 degree mirror behind the top "reflex lens" - is pointing TOWARD a light source. He has no light source behind him or above him but he has light in front of him! The southern noon-day sun light! If he didn't he wouldn't be able to take photos.

This is well-demonstrated in the numerous photos of Vivian Maier and her Rolleiflex, which I have uploaded at ROKC - demonstrating this very effect. When she is taking a selfie in a dark room and only has background light behind her, but is shooting toward a mirror in an otherwise dark room - we see the top "reflex lens" is almost black - one has to pay particular attention to see that the top reflex lens has a very, very, VERY faint grayish tinge to the lens - whereas the bottom "taking lens" remains completely black (as it always does). But if she is shooting toward any light source one will see the white light from the top reflex lens. On cloudy days - or as the camera is angled from the viewer's view - the light will look dimmer. But if it's very sunny day or she's in a room brightly lit with artificial light (and if she has the camera angled toward us) - the effect is a brilliant round white light being emitted from the reflex lens!

Here's Vivian's selfie I referred to which she took in a dark room with only background light:

Example of the phenomenon with the Imperial Reflex 620:

Buell Frazier won't even admit to ONE camera on the steps - let alone 2!! So, it's no wonder all this repeated questioning of him about cameras and that mysterious guy to the right of him in the dark corner, by both Gary Mack and Gayle Nix Jackson, have made him break out in nervous ticks and grammar melt-downs! Buell has a lotta 'splainin to do' - as does Molina and anyone else around the steps who is still alive! But, indeed, there were at least 2 TLR cameras on the steps that day! We can see PM's small TLR reflex light and also a HUGE brilliant white reflex light from another larger, much more sophisticated TLR. We can see BOTH of them in the Towner and Martin Films (in Towner PM's smaller reflex light is intermittent.) Here's Martin:

Here's a great animated gif from Robin Unger's gallery of that Martin clip that especially captures the big reflex light http://www.jfkassassinationgallery.com/displayimage.php?pid=6312&fullsize=1

And here's the 2 of them seen in the Towner Film:

Here's the link for the album of PM photos i created at Imgur - but there are many more in my album at ROKC that goes with my essay/thread there. I just created this Imjur album because it was the only way i could get my photos to "appear" here when i posted links to them. http://imgur.com/a/TjftX#0

ADDENDUM / EDIT: I just noticed that though it appears in the Martin still, as if the smaller white light above which you can see the dark top of someone's head, which appears to be someone with a small TLR (like PM) is NOT! If you look at the animated gif - which I just did again - one can see that what appears to be a stationary bright white light is a waving, moving hand. So in Martin we only see the one large TLR camera. Now in Towner you see the big TLR all the time, and PM's much smaller TLR, only rarely and intermittently.

And one other thing, Tommy, speaking of Vivian Maier's selfies - she is known as "The Queen of the Selfies". Thank you Vivian! Without your inspiration we would not be discussing this right now!

Linda,

Is that "Joe Molina," with glowing camera lens in front of his face (before the first shot) at the far right edge of this GIF? Note that Prayer Man and "Molina" lower their cameras at the same time to see what's going on down on Elm Street.

EDIT: Or is "Molina" a glasses-wearing woman in black with her bare forearm at her side, instead?

Credit: Robin Unger

--Tommy

Edited August 7, 2015 by Thomas Graves

[Thomas Graves]

Darn. The person just below and to the right of Lodelady looks like a woman. What in the world is that black thing she's wearing on her head?

I guess I mistook her glasses for a camera lens in the previous GIF.

Wiegman crop of a frame taken just after the first shot or actually during the shooting.

Edited August 8, 2015 by Thomas Graves

[Robert Prudhomme]

If the person holding the TLR camera is standing in the shadows, and the only light source is that which enters the lens on the front of the camera, this light will not be visible to someone looking at the front of the camera. This light will be focused on the mirror, sitting behind the lens at a 45° angle. The entirety of the light entering this lens will be reflected off this mirror and directed upward toward the viewfinder. That is the entire purpose of this mirror.

The only time light will be visible on the front of the lens will be if there is a light source above the open viewfinder. Was there a light bulb above the top of the steps, and was it turned on?

[Thomas Graves]

If the person holding the TLR camera is standing in the shadows, and the only light source is that which enters the lens on the front of the camera, this light will not be visible to someone looking at the front of the camera. This light will be focused on the mirror, sitting behind the lens at a 45° angle. The entirety of the light entering this lens will be reflected off this mirror and directed upward toward the viewfinder. That is the entire purpose of this mirror.

The only time light will be visible on the front of the lens will be if there is a light source above the open viewfinder. Was there a light bulb above the top of the steps, and was it turned on?

OK, Robert. Then I guess Prayer Man was using both hands to drink a bottle of Dr. Pepper, and enough light was somehow hitting it's bottom for it to glow in the shade..

--Tommy

Edited August 8, 2015 by Thomas Graves

[Thomas Graves]

http://www76.zippyshare.com/v/O9VT35mr/file.html

The Weigman gif is a 2frame/4second differential,time lapse.

PM appears to be filming/photographing and then stops.

Lovelady appears to take at least one step down.

chris

http://www78.zippyshare.com/v/U9bVGjkH/file.html

The complete segment.

Lightened,stabilized and rotated somewhat.

chris

Chris:

Very nice GIF. Over at Reopen Kennedy Case, Stan Dane posted these images. While not as optimized as yours, they do show what sure seems to be Prayer Man taking pictures.

Here's a two image Wiegman gif from R. Unger's website that shows what I believe to be PM with camera in the "ready-aim-snap" position (while cars are going by) and in the "stand-by" position (with nothing passing by):

I am 95% convinced that PM has a camera and is taking pictures. If so, what does this mean?

He's raising it just as the car is going past... further indication of a photo being snapped.

Actually, Greg, Prayer Man lowers the camera from his face after he's heard at least one of the shots.

Note the man on the left in khaki looking back towards the entrance at the same time that PM's camera is in the lowered position.

This same guy is hard to see in the fuzzy photograph, but he's in it, looking straight ahead at the motorcade. Due to the change in Wiegman's car's position, this Khaki Man and his Khaki Buddy appear to be standing farther to the right than in the clear image, but they haven't changed their positions between the two frames. In the fuzzy first image, their faces are visible above the car's driver side front window.

Note also that Lovelady leans forward to get a better view after the first shot.

If you study the Wiegman film, you'll see that the car in front of Wiegman passes these spectators and Wiegman continues filming normally to the left until he hears a shot or (shots) and starts panning back to the right again towards the TSBD, so the TSBD is filmed twice. The fuzzy image is from the first time he films it; the shots haven't been fired yet. The clear image with Khaki Man looking back towards the entrance is from the second time he films it, having panned back to it after the first (or second, or third) shot.

--Tommy

Edited August 8, 2015 by Thomas Graves

[Robert Prudhomme]

If the person holding the TLR camera is standing in the shadows, and the only light source is that which enters the lens on the front of the camera, this light will not be visible to someone looking at the front of the camera. This light will be focused on the mirror, sitting behind the lens at a 45° angle. The entirety of the light entering this lens will be reflected off this mirror and directed upward toward the viewfinder. That is the entire purpose of this mirror.

The only time light will be visible on the front of the lens will be if there is a light source above the open viewfinder. Was there a light bulb above the top of the steps, and was it turned on?

OK, Robert. Then I guess Prayer Man was using both hands to drink a bottle of Dr. Pepper, and enough light was somehow hitting it's bottom for it to glow in the shade..

--Tommy

I don't have a clue what PM was doing. I do know there is a tendency on this forum to want something to be true so badly, some are willing to ignore the basic laws of science to make it so. Unfortunately, light entering the top lens could only reflect back out of that lens if the mirror were situated vertically inside that camera. As it is not, and is instead at a 45°, light entering the lens horizontally is reflected 90° and travels vertically to the viewfinder.

[Ray Mitcham]

Why would he be holding an Imperial Reflex camera up to his eyes?

I agree with Bob. There is no light above the camera to relict light to the viewer.

Edited August 8, 2015 by Ray Mitcham

[James DiEugenio]

Ditto with Bob and Ray. On both issues, the angle of refraction and the technique of the camera use.

As anyone familiar with the whole Imperial Reflex Camera controversy-as so well investigated by Jeff Carter in his series--one of the many problems with Marina's story is that when she was asked how she took the photos, she was given two options as to how she proceeded. She picked the wrong one. Namely that she raised the camera to her eye and clicked the shutter. That is not how you use that camera.

I also agree with this by Bob: I do know there is a tendency on this forum to want something to be true so badly, some are willing to ignore the basic laws of science to make it so.

BTW, is this the longest thread ever here now? I think its surpassed Fetzer and his defense of Baker. I sure wish Sean would come back. He started the landslide and then got out of the way.

Edited August 8, 2015 by James DiEugenio

[Vanessa Loney]

Thanks Stan and Chris - this gif is very clear. It seems there is a consensus that when the flashlight effect is lowered that is when PM would be taking a photo with the IR (if he is holding one) and when the flashlight effect is raised that is when PM could be drinking out of a bottle.

When the flashlight circle is raised we see PM's right elbow gets illuminated by the sun but whatever he is holding doesn't get any further illuminated. If it was the IR camera which seems to be a bulky sort of camera wouldn't we expect to see a bit more of it illuminated? But we still just have the flashlight and I can't see any further substance around it.

Which would tend to support the bottle theory.

I couldn't agree more that if theories are discredited we need to be able to ditch them and move on.

[Greg Parker]

Robert, I've bounced all over the place on what - if anything he is holding. I have always had some doubt he ever owned the IR. Camera doesn't have to be an IR - if it is a camera at all.

The various theories and supporting evidence as to what (if anything) he has, all have pluses and minuses attached to them. Unfortunately, it is (as has been pointed out by some already) becoming a distraction from the main game. The actual ID of PM. That seems to be a far simpler question to answer at this point as well, thanks to the painstaking efforts of Sean and others.

[Ray Mitcham]

Robert, I've bounced all over the place on what - if anything he is holding. I have always had some doubt he ever owned the IR. Camera doesn't have to be an IR - if it is a camera at all.

Agreed, Greg. Nowhere has it been shown that Oswald possessed an Imperial reflex.

For somebody like Oswald, allegedly interested in photography, he wouldn't have chosen such a cheap camera, anyway.

[Robert Prudhomme]

Robert, I've bounced all over the place on what - if anything he is holding. I have always had some doubt he ever owned the IR. Camera doesn't have to be an IR - if it is a camera at all.

Agreed, Greg. Nowhere has it been shown that Oswald possessed an Imperial reflex.

For somebody like Oswald, allegedly interested in photography, he wouldn't have chosen such a cheap camera, anyway.

Agreed, Ray. One has only to look at one of the other cameras he owned, or at least were found in his possessions at the Paine residence, to grasp the full meaning of your statement.

Pictured above is a Stereo Realist camera, manufactured by the David White Company from 1947 to 1971.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stereo_Realist

This camera exposed two images on 35 mm film, from slightly different angles, and allowed a person to view his photos in three dimensions through a stereoscopic viewer. Wouldn't Oswald have much preferred to view himself in the BYP's in 3D?

Of course, then there is the expensive Minolta "spy" camera found at the Paine's by the DPD, with the serial number that made it only available in Europe at the time of the assassination. It magically morphed into a Minolta light meter when it got into the hands of the FBI.

Dumb question but, why would someone with a cheap Imperial Reflex camera be in need of a Minolta light meter?

Edited August 10, 2015 by Robert Prudhomme

[Tom Hume]

Hi Ray,

I agree that if Lee Oswald had been photographing his TSBD surroundings (and perhaps himself) during the assassination as part of his alibi, he would most likely have been using a dependable camera of some quality.

Turning to the "backyard photos", however, "IF" Oswald had taken those because he had been assigned to do so by, say, Banister/Ferrie as part of his patsy bona fides, and "IF" Oswald, and his cohorts, were also embedding decodable puzzles in their activities, Oswald's camera of choice might well have been one bearing a brand name containing a decodable puzzle or two. For example, "IMPERIAL REFLEX" anagrams to:

"LEE FIREARM PIX. L"

And "IMPERIAL REFLEX" anagrams to:

"LAME FERRIE PIX. L"

And "IMPERIAL REFLEX" anagrams to:

"LEE FILM RARE PIX"

And "IMERIAL REFLEX" anagrams to:

"PIX FRAME LEE. R/L/I"

("R/L/I" = "Richard/Lee/Igor")

And "IMPERIAL REFLEX" anagrams to"

"PRIME ALEX RIFLE"

The above anagram of "IMPERIAL REFLEX" may be implying that Alex's (Lee's) camera is figuratively his rifle. If so, the next anagram of "IMPERIAL REFLEX" appears to bolster that notion:

"RIFLE EXAMPLE: 'I.R.'"

One might also suspect that the "I.R." in the above anagram is a double entendre: "I.R." = "Imperial Reflex", "I.R." = "Igor, Richard".

"IF" Lee Oswald, the designated patsy, was assigned to buy the firearms, and "IF" he was assigned to have his picture taken with the guns, and "IF" Richard Nagell, Igor Vaganov, and, Lee Oswald were embedding decodable puzzles in all of their activities, I'd say they picked the appropriate name-brand camera to use and be entered into evidence.

No real decoding was done in this post, just anagrams.

Tom

Edited August 10, 2015 by Tom Hume