How Did They Get Roscoe White To Lean Like That And Not Fall Over?

[Thomas Graves]

IMHO, the big difference between these two photos is that Oswald (left) has his entire body turned to his right, whereas Roscoe White (right) has his upper body "squared" to the camera. Therefore it's not fair to say that the overall "lean" of their bodies is the same.

Did the person (Oswald?) who faked the photo on the right intentionally do so in a way that screamed "fake"? (Along the lines of having Oswald hold two ideologically incompatible "Communist" newspapers?) Or was he / she just grossly incompetent?

[credit: DVP]

-- Tommy

Edited September 6, 2016 by Thomas Graves

[Robert Prudhomme]

The other interesting thing no one seems to notice, Thomas, is that the landscape in the photo on the right is not exactly on the level. In order to get the gate and the posts in this photo to be plumb (vertically) it is necessary to rotate the photo several degrees to the left; further exaggerating the lean.

I believe the person in this photo was originally photographed standing on the side of a hill, and his figure was cut out from that photo. When I worked as a logger, we often took photos of each other standing on the sides of hills, and I have seen this extended foot stance before.

[Thomas Graves]

The other interesting thing no one seems to notice, Thomas, is that the landscape in the photo on the right is not exactly on the level. In order to get the gate and the posts in this photo to be plumb (vertically) it is necessary to rotate the photo several degrees to the left; further exaggerating the lean.

I believe the person in this photo was originally photographed standing on the side of a hill, and his figure was cut out from that photo. When I worked as a logger, we often took photos of each other standing on the sides of hills, and I have seen this extended foot stance before.

Good point, Bob. Hadn't thought of that possibility.

Regarding the "fakeness" of the photo, I watched a video on youtube years ago in which a former FBI (I believe) photo analyst pointed out some shadows or marks on the ground near Oswald's left foot (his left foot) which indicate forgery. I wish I could find that video. Maybe someone here knows what I'm talking about.

-- Tommy

Edited September 6, 2016 by Thomas Graves

[Tom Hume]

The body shadow looks way too dark and way too crisp in comparison to the other shadows in the photo. It would be interesting to see what somebody like Andrej Stancak could do, demonstrating for us what "Oswald's" predictable shadow pattern would look like.

Edited September 5, 2016 by Tom Hume

[Thomas Graves]

The body shadow looks way too dark and way too crisp in comparison to the other shadows in the photo. It would be interesting to see what somebody like Andrej Stancak could do, demonstrating for us what "Oswald's" predictable shadow pattern would look like.

Tom,

In my above post, I'm talking about a "splice" of some kind and the anomalies it created on the ground next to or behind LHO's left foot, IIRC.

-- Tommy

Edited September 5, 2016 by Thomas Graves

[Tom Hume]

Thank you Tommy, I think I understand your point now.

A separate issue then, is “Oswald’s” very black and crisp shadow, which appears to be at odds with all of the other light gray and fuzzy shadows in the photo, vis-a-vis the posts in the picture, etc. “If” one were to convincingly insert a fake person into a backyard scene, one would need to create a convincing shadow, and “Oswald’s” shadow looks fake to me, that's all.

Tom

[Thomas Graves]

The other interesting thing no one seems to notice, Thomas, is that the landscape in the photo on the right is not exactly on the level. In order to get the gate and the posts in this photo to be plumb (vertically) it is necessary to rotate the photo several degrees to the left; further exaggerating the lean.

I believe the person in this photo was originally photographed standing on the side of a hill, and his figure was cut out from that photo. When I worked as a logger, we often took photos of each other standing on the sides of hills, and I have seen this extended foot stance before.

bumped by Robert's buddy, T. Graves

[Andrej Stancak]

The question of whether the man shown in this particular backyard photograph could have assumed this particular pose has been addressed by researchers at Dartmouth university: http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/farid/downloads/publications/tr10.pdf. The research of this group concludes that the pictures were plausible in terms of posture and lighting, however, the authors then falsely generalise in writing that the backyard pictures were not manipulated and are not composites.On this forum, the thread "Body pictures" is useful: http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=18109&page=2 .

Let us check Oswald's pose using an anatomically constraint human model in Poser 11. The picture below shows the backyard photograph in the left panel. The middle panel is a Poser 11 reconstruction of man's posture using Andy as the human model. The advantage of Andy is that one can visualise every joint of his body which otherwise would be covered by clothing if a full human model would be used. The posture has been modelled with Inverse Kinematics method enabled for both legs. Inverse Kinematics ensures that whenever a figure is bend, moved, or rotated, the rest of the body follows in an anatomically appropriate manner. The right panel shows the same pose from the side view.

To check whether the pose would fit Mr. Oswald's figure, the next picture shows an overlay of the original backyard picture and Andy with the transparency of Andy's model set to 34%. You can judge for yourself whether the match is good or not.

As a CT researcher, I would be inclined to believe that the backyard pictures were all faked to incriminate Mr. Oswald. However, let us stick with data. The backyard pictures may have been tampered with, however, the allegedly wrong or impossible pose in this particular picture would not be enough to believe this was the case.

Lee Harvey Oswald incriminated himself actively as a pro-Castro activist and leftist on a number of occasions. Who would willingly distribute pro-Castro leaflets in New Orleans in 1963? A father of a young family? Well, only someone who wished that his pro-Cuba credentials were well spotted, and the one who saw a very good, maybe a noble reason in doing so. A similar reason may apply to the rifle and the backyards pictures. "You will get a rifle from us, and you will show it as your rifle on few occasions. However, you can always deny owning the rifle if anything happens because we will arrange a faked postal order, and it will be possible to prove that you have not purchased any rifle.The postal officers will testify that they never handed over any rifle to you because they never did. However, you need to send a postal money order because if you would just buy a rifle at a gunsmith shop, we would not be able to plant this deniability trick. With the pictures, we need you to play a militant leftist, a communist capable of killing someone with this rifle for the ideals of communism. Again, do not worry, we make some small tricks with the pictures so that you will always be able to prove that the pictures have been manipulated, for instance that part of your head has been mounted on someone else's body."

Edited September 6, 2016 by Andrej Stancak

[Robert Prudhomme]

Andrej

How many degrees would you say the gate and gate posts are leaning to the right in this photo? Why not try rotating the photo to the left until all the posts are plumb, and then we'll see how much of a list to starboard Mr. Oswald really has? Or does gravity in Dallas work at an angle?

[Robert Prudhomme]

I don't know what is more amazing, the cheap tricks used in the coverup or the public's unceasing ability to keep swallowing them.

[Andrej Stancak]

Robert:

My analysis only refers to the plausibility of the man's posture, and here I find the posture stable and anatomically appropriate - this is evidenced by the panel showing the model from the side view. It is very likely that this and/or other backyard pictures have been tampered with. My post addresses the doubt about the inclination of man's body contained in the title of this thread.

As far as slopes of the gate and gate posts are concerned, I find it hard to decide whether the picture as a whole is plausible. For instance if the camera lens was a junk, the vertical lines may show just such disparities in vertical lines as seen in this backyard picture, especially at the periphery of the lens. Objects in the centre of the lens would be affected less than those projecting at the periphery. Besides the optical quality of the lens, there is also a problem of perspective which is related to the focal length of the lens.

What would be your interpretation?

[Robert Prudhomme]

The gate is in the centre of the photo, and leans severely to the right; just like every other vertical surface in this photo. It has nothing to do with the Imperial Reflex being a "cheap" camera, and everything to do with the people faking this photo turning it to the right so Oswald doesn't look like he's going to fall on his butt.

As I said, cheap tricks.

Your analysis of Oswald's posture might work for you but, what happens to your work if Oswald is rotated to the left a few degrees?

[Thomas Graves]

The question of whether the man shown in this particular backyard photograph could have assumed this particular pose has been addressed by researchers at Dartmouth university: http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/farid/downloads/publications/tr10.pdf. The research of this group concludes that the pictures were plausible in terms of posture and lighting, however, the authors then falsely generalise in writing that the backyard pictures were not manipulated and are not composites.On this forum, the thread "Body pictures" is useful: http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=18109&page=2 .

Let us check Oswald's pose using an anatomically constraint human model in Poser 11. The picture below shows the backyard photograph in the left panel. The middle panel is a Poser 11 reconstruction of man's posture using Andy as the human model. The advantage of Andy is that one can visualise every joint of his body which otherwise would be covered by clothing if a full human model would be used. The posture has been modelled with Inverse Kinematics method enabled for both legs. Inverse Kinematics ensures that whenever a figure is bend, moved, or rotated, the rest of the body follows in an anatomically appropriate manner. The right panel shows the same pose from the side view.

To check whether the pose would fit Mr. Oswald's figure, the next picture shows an overlay of the original backyard picture and Andy with the transparency of Andy's model set to 34%. You can judge for yourself whether the match is good or not.

As a CT researcher, I would be inclined to believe that the backyard pictures were all faked to incriminate Mr. Oswald. However, let us stick with data. The backyard pictures may have been tampered with, however, the allegedly wrong or impossible pose in this particular picture would not be enough to believe this was the case.

Lee Harvey Oswald incriminated himself actively as a pro-Castro activist and leftist on a number of occasions. Who would willingly distribute pro-Castro leaflets in New Orleans in 1963? A father of a young family? Well, only someone who wished that his pro-Cuba credentials were well spotted, and the one who saw a very good, maybe a noble reason in doing so. A similar reason may apply to the rifle and the backyards pictures. "You will get a rifle from us, and you will show it as your rifle on few occasions. However, you can always deny owning the rifle if anything happens because we will arrange a faked postal order, and it will be possible to prove that you have not purchased any rifle.The postal officers will testify that they never handed over any rifle to you because they never did. However, you need to send a postal money order because if you would just buy a rifle at a gunsmith shop, we would not be able to plant this deniability trick. With the pictures, we need you to play a militant leftist, a communist capable of killing someone with this rifle for the ideals of communism. Again, do not worry, we make some small tricks with the pictures so that you will always be able to prove that the pictures have been manipulated, for instance that part of your head has been mounted on someone else's body."

Andrej,

Thanks for the modeling and the juxtaposing of the two images.

I would like to point out that "Oswald's" right knee and the knee of the model seem to be pointed and bent in different directions, so it's not a very good match after all, IMHO. And look at how close together "Oswald's" legs are (in his tight-fitting, leg-hugging pants) compared to the model's farther-apart legs. Which would have made "Oswald" even more likely to tip over, IMHO.

(When I say his right knee, I do mean his right knee.)

-- Tommy

Edited September 7, 2016 by Thomas Graves

[Robert Prudhomme]

Cheap tricks.

[Roger DeLaria]

To me, the pasted on Oswald head looks way too big for the body, and out of proportion.