The Zapruder Film Provenance

[Michael Schweitzer]

Thanks, Jack. I appreciate this. I thought there was something funny about the "Tink & Jerry" show--and I was right!

Thanks, Jack. But I am puzzled that Tink is suggesting what the National Archives provides as

"the Forensic copy" of the Zapruder film is not suitable for forensic purposes. I want to know

why the National Archives would offer a forensic copy that is not suitable for forensic purposes.

Regardless of the generational count, what "Tink & Jerry" are saying doesn't make any sense.

See my posting in another thread explaining common misconceptions about GENERATIONS of

transparency film.

If you do not find it, I will copy it and repost it in this thread.

Jack

Jim...I agree with you that any copy labeled by National Archives as FORENSIC COPY is the best possible

copy, regardless of GENERATION.

While on that subject again, I should add one more important consideration:

SECOND GENERATION (or third, etc.) does NOT MEAN INFERIOR.

It is possible, IN FACT USUAL among photographers, that following generations may be SUPERIOR

to the first generation! For instance, I can shoot a negative (first generation) that is imperfect...BUT I CAN

PRODUCE FROM THAT IMPERFECT NEGATIVE a PERFECT PRINT (second generation).

Among means of doing this on the second generation print are:

1. exposure control

2. contrast control

3. dodging

4. burning in

5. selective focus

6. perspective correction

7. filters

etc,etc,etc. ALL RESULTING IN A SUPERIOR SECOND GENERATION!

If you ever read books about the great photographer Ansel Adams, you often will find pages of

explanation about how his negatives were exposed, and even greater illustrations of precise

instructions for dodging, burning in, etc. to achieve a perfect print FAR SUPERIOR TO HIS NEGATIVE.

Jack

Jack, you're absolutely right. A print made from a photographic negative can look considerably better than the negative. But Zapruder used reversal film. It can be "timed" to create a copy with better exposure and color balance than the original. But reversal stock is contaminated in its first generation: grainy and low resolution. So even with timing, a copy suffers a generation loss (more grain and less resolution). If you add matte work to replace elements of the image with other elements, the image degradation should become pronounced enough to give itself away (absent digital enhancement not available then). Moreover, the grain and resolution in the matted-in image should differ from that in the "background plate." Please note I DO believe the Zapruder film was altered. But I don't see how the alteration could how gone beyond simple skip printing (removing frames in an optical printer) without becoming obvious. So Jack, you're right, enhancement technology existed. But I think Jim is right in stating the National Archives copy can't be suitable for forensic purposes – unless Jack can explain how it survived the matte process without self-disclosing that fact.

[David Lifton]

I always thought, Greer brought the limo to a halt to give the SS-men of the follow-up car the opportunity to get onto the Lincoln-Limo, and protect JFK with their body's...but the SS-men didn't move...following an order by Emory Roberts..."Don't move!"

To me Greer did the right thing, while Roberts order, and behavior is more than questionable...

KK

Where did you get the idea that Greer slowed the limo for that reason?

Did Greer say anything like that in his testimony or anywhere else?

Is there anything in Secret Service protocols that would require him to do such a thing?

Let me be brief, because this is not a very important point, and I'm doing this from memory, but. . .:

A veteran JFK researcher recently pointed out to me that in the book The Kennedy Detail, the author actually advances the view that the President's limo slowed down sharply for the following reason: that Greer, upon hearing loud noises, thought he his vehicle might have suffered a blowout. Consequently, he then tapped on the brake pedal, slowing the car down, just to test to see if the car was "stable" (i.e., to determine whether he had had a blowout); then, and only after determining there had been no blowout, he then stepped on the gas, and sped away.

FWIW: I find this explanation to be absurd and ridiculous, but that's what the book says. If time permits, or if someone wants to email me the exact quotes, I'll edit this post accordingly.

But I find it amazing that, so many years after the fact, anyone would have the audacity to come up with such an "explanation".

DSL

4/2/12; 4:50 AM PDT

Los Angeles, CA

Edited April 2, 2012 by David Lifton

[David Josephs]

Maybe I missed the discussion about this... but Max Phillips' own report talks about a 4th print.. even though the official record shows something else...

P 1199

"The official record shows that Zapruder went home late Friday night with his original film and with one of the three 'first day copies'—the other two 'first day copies' had been loaned to the Secret Service. Zapruder would never see them again."

....since the Secret Service had two copies and LIFE reportedly had the original—was the third of the three 'first day copies' made by Zapruder, thus proving that it did not go to New York on

Saturday as Stolley incorrectly recalled in 1973.

Doesn't this report suggest that there was no copy to view in Dallas other than the original, and why refer to it as a "master" as opposed to "the original"?

The quality of the National Archives' photographic copy of this hand written report is so poor that many of its words cannot be made out in a scanned copy. Consequently, we have provided below a typed copy ]

CD - 87 Folder 1

CO2 34030 11/22

9:55

To: Chief Rowley

From: Max D. Phillips

Subject: 8mm movie film showing President

Kennedy being shot

Enclosed is an 8mm movie film

taken by Mr. A. Zapruder, 501 Elm St., Dallas

Texas (RI8-6071)

Mr.. Zapruder was photographing

the President at the instant he was shot.

According to Mr. Zapruder, the position of

the assassin was behind Mr. Zapruder.

Note: Disregard personel scenes

shown on Mr. Zapruder’s film.. Mr. Zapruder

is in custody of the "master" film. Two prints

were given to SAIC Sorrels, this date.

The third print is forwarded.

Max D. Phillips

Special Agent - PRS

10 Z-Film Questions that can and should be answered that have nothing to do with its content.

1) Who suggested to Abe Zapruder that he should do something he’s never done before and buy an 8mm home movie projector and film the president? Why did he do it?

2) After the film was developed at Kodak and three copies made at Jameson, where did they go? The A-1 Original stayed with Zapruder; B-1 Copy went to Life; B-2 Copy and B-3 Copy went to Secret Service. Who at Life and Who at SS physically took possession of the copies and where did they go with them? The SS agent should have filed a report on this. Is there such a report?

3) If the Provenance – Chain of Custody was not broken, then we should be able to connect the dots and follow the film to where we know it was – Life Chicago; NPIC DC. Which copies went where, and who took them there?

4) If one set of still photos from the Z-film frames were used to make briefing boards with Dino Brugioni, and that set used to brief CIA director McCone, who was briefed with the other boards and who did the briefing?

5) After Life purchased all the rights (on Saturday?) and obtained the A-1 Original, what did they do with it?

6) How did the original get the two splices in it, who did it and how or why did that happen, twice?

7) If there are frames missing from the original because of the splices, are the missing frames in the B-1,2,3 copies?

8) If the frames missing from the A-1 Original are in the copies, then the intersprocket images in the original frames are still missing? Or were they picked up from the editing room floor and are still in existence?

9) Was there ever a point after Life took possession of the A-1 Original when all four of the films came together again at the same place?

10) If the Original A-1 Z-film was put through an optical printer and tampered with then the film in optical printer would now be at the NARA A-2, and since it wasn’t filmed with Zapruder’s camera, but the optical printer’s camera, it should be compared with the two other films known to have been filmed in Zapruder’s camera and differences should be apparent, just as each gun barrel makes different marks on a bullet and each manual typewriter exhibits unique traits. Has this comparison been made? If not, why not?

Bill...those are good questions FOR STARTERS. There are many others. For instance, you refer to B-1, B-2, and B-3...but there is ONE MISSING

IN THAT SEQUENCE, according to the Kodak numbering sequence.

Jack

[David Josephs]

Agree 100% David... If anything... once the turn onto Elm was completed that limo should have done nothing but accelerate its way to the freeway..

There were no more crowds and nothing but danger in the bowl of DP... and for these trained men not to have realized this weeks in advance is absurd to even consider.

When we look at Nix/Muchmoore Hill does not come close to the limo until well after z313...

Try jumping off a moving vehicle at 5-7 mph and hit the ground running and catch another moving vehicle in less than 1 second...

Greer is simply not doing his job here... and his testimony (ala analysis from Palmara) is wrought with CYA and plain out lying.

I always thought, Greer brought the limo to a halt to give the SS-men of the follow-up car the opportunity to get onto the Lincoln-Limo, and protect JFK with their body's...but the SS-men didn't move...following an order by Emory Roberts..."Don't move!"

To me Greer did the right thing, while Roberts order, and behavior is more than questionable...

KK

Where did you get the idea that Greer slowed the limo for that reason?

Did Greer say anything like that in his testimony or anywhere else?

Is there anything in Secret Service protocols that would require him to do such a thing?

Let me be brief, because this is not a very important point, and I'm doing this from memory, but. . .:

A veteran JFK researcher recently pointed out to me that in the book The Kennedy Detail, the author actually advances the view that the President's limo slowed down sharply for the following reason: that Greer, upon hearing loud noises, thought he his vehicle might have suffered a blowout. Consequently, he then tapped on the brake pedal, slowing the car down, just to test to see if the car was "stable" (i.e., to determine whether he had had a blowout); then, and only after determining there had been no blowout, he then stepped on the gas, and sped away.

FWIW: I find this explanation to be absurd and ridiculous, but that's what the book says. If time permits, or if someone wants to email me the exact quotes, I'll edit this post accordingly.

But I find it amazing that, so many years after the fact, anyone would have the audacity to come up with such an "explanation".

DSL

4/2/12; 4:50 AM PDT

Los Angeles, CA

[Bernice Moore]

hi David's ; it would appear , they whomever are trying to insert words into Greers mouth that never came out imo.....watch for changes in the testimonies, recall....Bill has suggested and i agree that the information held by the museum, re the witness statements could be and should be very important, but Bill just now upon visiting the site, i opened and read the bit of Marilyn Sitzmans quoted that is available, now in my studying of her and their statements and info hers and Zaps, there are differences within this small quote, that she has told the museum, if doubtful just read what they have posted then do some searches here on the forum,and begin comparing her information, there are many threads showing how down through time, just about every time she did so,details within her story changed, and i might add neither did Zapruder stick to his original either....a shot from behind him to his right.....I would not be surprised if and when the Museums witness information is if ever made available, on the web,thee will be many , many differences found...imo..thanks for the information...take care best b

[Bernice Moore]

veteran JFK researcher recently pointed out to me that in the book The Kennedy Detail, the author actually advances the view that the President's limo slowed down sharply for the following reason: that Greer, upon hearing loud noises, thought he his vehicle might have suffered a blowout. Consequently, he then tapped on the brake pedal, slowing the car down, just to test to see if the car was "stable" (i.e., to determine whether he had had a blowout); then, and only after determining there had been no blowout, he then stepped on the gas, and sped away.

FWIW: I find this explanation to be absurd and ridiculous, but that's what the book says. If time permits, or if someone wants to email me the exact quotes, I'll edit this post accordingly.

But I find it amazing that, so many years after the fact, anyone would have the audacity to come up with such an "explanation".

DSL

4/2/12; 4:50 AM PDT

Los Angeles, CA

page 212..''.Suddenly, above the noise of the motorcycles and beyond the screams of the adoring crowd, a sharp crack blistered through Dealey Plaza..The triangular canyon of buildings created an echo chamber that masqueraded the sound such that even many of the SS agents, all of whom were expert marksmen with high powered rifles , didn't recognize it as gunfire. Bill Greer, driving the president's limousine , thought one of the motorcyles had backfired or that he had a blowout .He quickly tapped on the brake to see how the car would respond, but the car remained stable , so he continued.'' b.

Edited April 3, 2012 by Bernice Moore

[Karl Kinaski]

veteran JFK researcher recently pointed out to me that in the book The Kennedy Detail, the author actually advances the view that the President's limo slowed down sharply for the following reason: that Greer, upon hearing loud noises, thought he his vehicle might have suffered a blowout. Consequently, he then tapped on the brake pedal, slowing the car down, just to test to see if the car was "stable" (i.e., to determine whether he had had a blowout); then, and only after determining there had been no blowout, he then stepped on the gas, and sped away.

FWIW: I find this explanation to be absurd and ridiculous, but that's what the book says. If time permits, or if someone wants to email me the exact quotes, I'll edit this post accordingly.

But I find it amazing that, so many years after the fact, anyone would have the audacity to come up with such an "explanation".

DSL

4/2/12; 4:50 AM PDT

Los Angeles, CA

page 212..''.Suddenly, above the noise of the motorcycles and beyond the screams of the adoring crowd, a sharp crack blistered through Dealey Plaza..The triangular canyon of buildings created an echo chamber that masqueraded the sound such that even many of the SS agents, all of whom were expert marksmen with high powered rifles , didn't recognize it as gunfire. Bill Greer, driving the president's limousine , thought one of the motorcyles had backfired or that he had a blowout .He quickly tapped on the brake to see how the car would respond, but the car remained stable , so he continued.'' b.

Another natural explanation, nothing sinsiter...I believe there was some SS-cooperation in the assassination, but I believe too the slowdown of the Lincoln has nothing to do with it...it was an innocent reaction of the driver...

[David Josephs]

veteran JFK researcher recently pointed out to me that in the book The Kennedy Detail, the author actually advances the view that the President's limo slowed down sharply for the following reason: that Greer, upon hearing loud noises, thought he his vehicle might have suffered a blowout. Consequently, he then tapped on the brake pedal, slowing the car down, just to test to see if the car was "stable" (i.e., to determine whether he had had a blowout); then, and only after determining there had been no blowout, he then stepped on the gas, and sped away.

FWIW: I find this explanation to be absurd and ridiculous, but that's what the book says. If time permits, or if someone wants to email me the exact quotes, I'll edit this post accordingly.

But I find it amazing that, so many years after the fact, anyone would have the audacity to come up with such an "explanation".

DSL

4/2/12; 4:50 AM PDT

Los Angeles, CA

page 212..''.Suddenly, above the noise of the motorcycles and beyond the screams of the adoring crowd, a sharp crack blistered through Dealey Plaza..The triangular canyon of buildings created an echo chamber that masqueraded the sound such that even many of the SS agents, all of whom were expert marksmen with high powered rifles , didn't recognize it as gunfire. Bill Greer, driving the president's limousine , thought one of the motorcyles had backfired or that he had a blowout .He quickly tapped on the brake to see how the car would respond, but the car remained stable , so he continued.'' b.

Another natural explanation, nothing sinsiter...I believe there was some SS-cooperation in the assassination, but I believe too the slowdown of the Lincoln has nothing to do with it...it was an innocent reaction of the driver...

Karl... how is driving the POTUS thru DP at less than 10mph "nothing sinister"... once he completes the TRULY TURN (wide and almost on the curb that is not filmed anywhere) he has clear sailing..

there can be no explanation for that speed at that time given what we see the limo do after the shots... it is up to speed and roaring away by the time it gets to the overpass...

a real SS escort would have had him accellerating all the way down Elm and onto Stemmons...

Instead, we have him staring at JFK a SECOND time, up to the point of the headshot.... this is an "innocent" reaction to sounds like gunshot and the man in obvious distress fro 6-10 seconds ago?

While I would like to offer the benefit of the doubt... this sequence literally SCREAMS at you... WTF is he doing?