David Von Pein

Sandy,

I've been studying both "versions" of the film tonight, and I think I captured the best and clearest video frame of "Prayer Man" that there is in the YouTube version.

And, IMO, the reason that the "scoop neckline" isn't quite as defined and clear in that YouTube version is simply due to the fact that THIS JFK.ORG VERSION which was utilized by Mark Ulrik does, indeed, seem to exhibit slightly better picture quality.

Therefore, via the higher quality and the incredibly high bitrate used in the processing of the video (19,409 kbps, which I think is, by far, the highest bitrate I've ever seen for one of my downloaded videos), it stands to reason that some things in the video will be clearer and easier to see and define.....such as the "neck ring" on Prayer (Wo)Man.

Plus -- Via your theory, Sandy, of one of the versions being altered, can you explain why the Sixth Floor Museum would have wanted to upload an unaltered version to YouTube but also at about the same time put an altered version on their own website? Does that make any sense to you? Both videos were obviously uploaded by the 6FM people for use at online locations that they themselves controlled.

Doesn't my simple explanation from six days ago in this thread make a whole lot more sense than your "altered image" theory? I sure think it does....

On 9/13/2024 at 6:27 PM, David Von Pein said:

There's absolutely nothing that is "very different" in this Darnell film clip when compared to previously published versions of the same images.

It's just that the newer version posted by Mark Ulrik is a higher-quality and more stabilized version.

1 hour ago, Mark Ulrik said:

Oh, are they exactly the same? Even file sizes? You probably know your way around YT better than me My YT copy was smaller, so I went with the other one without thinking too much about it.

I just checked on that by downloading the one at jfk.org. And you're right. The video at jfk.org is a much bigger file (due to the processing methods, I would assume). It's 101 MB in size. The YouTube version is only 22 MB. And the jfk.org version shows that it's got a Total Bitrate of 19,409 kbps, vs. 4,000+ for the YouTube version.

A downloadable version of the Darnell file that's on the jfk.org website can be accessed HERE.

32 minutes ago, Mark Ulrik said:

Hi David. The difference isn't great, but I did use the version on the 6FM website:

https://www.jfk.org/nbc-5-archive/ (you need to scroll right a few times)

OK. Thanks.

I can see, though, that it appears to be the exact same video file that's been uploaded to the 6FM YouTube channel. Same exact running time and same exact captions at the bottom of the screen.

32 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

I said "on YouTube." Mark Ulrik said "on the 6FM website." Those two places are not the same.

I don't think the Darnell Film is even currently on the 6FM website (at jfk.org). I think Mark was probably referring to the 6FM YouTube website.

Anyway, you're still dead wrong when you said this --- "The sixth floor version that is posted on YouTube doesn't have the scoop style neckline".

See my last post above which proves you are wrong regarding that claim.

47 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

The sixth floor version that is posted on YouTube doesn't have the scoop style neckline.

You're wrong.

I just now (on 9/18/24) downloaded to my computer the highest quality version of the Sixth Floor Museum's YouTube video of the Darnell film (1920 x 1080 px, with a total bitrate of 4260 kbps), and then (without altering or changing a thing) I captured the still image below from that unaltered downloaded video.....

Compare it to Mark Ulrik's stabilized version of the Darnell clip (below). The neckline of "Prayer Man" looks just about the same to me:

39 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

the Darnell film posted by the SFM on YouTube doesn't have the scoop neckline.

Yes it does. And we know it does because Mark Ulrik just told everybody here (in THIS POST from six hours ago) that his stabilized GIF clip (below) "is based on the NBC5 version currently on the 6FM website", which is something that has been obvious to me since Mark Ulrik's very first post in this thread on September 11th.

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 

2 hours ago, Jonathan Cohen said:

In other words, it [the 6FM copy of the Darnell film] certainly has not been "altered" within the past few years for the purposes of embarrassing specific researchers, as has been claimed.

Exactly right. Just as I said three days ago:

On 9/13/2024 at 6:27 PM, David Von Pein said:

There's absolutely nothing that is "very different" in this Darnell film clip when compared to previously published versions of the same images.

It's just that the newer version posted by Mark Ulrik is a higher-quality and more stabilized version.

BTW / FWIW....

Duncan MacRae, in this discussion at his own forum, seems to think he has located "Prayer Woman" in one of Phil Willis' post-assassination photographs (the pic on the right):

Edit -- Thanks and kudos to Duncan MacRae and Denis Morissette.

Edit #2 to correct the spelling of Denis' last name.

2 hours ago, John Cotter said:

Yes, this too is very different from the version(s) I saw previously. Likewise, there was none of this business of the door opening and shutting and another head or reflection of a head behind Frazer [sic].

There's absolutely nothing that is "very different" in this Darnell film clip when compared to previously published versions of the same images.

It's just that the newer version posted by Mark Ulrik is a higher-quality and more stabilized version. But the reflections in the glass door and the "dark gap" I talked about previously can still be seen (although not quite as clearly) in the lower-quality version of James Darnell's film below:

7 hours ago, Tom Gram said:

the dark gap at the top of the door gets wider as the film progresses, so I think the door is opening, not closing,

But it could be that it's being opened by someone on the other side of the door, because according to the TSBD floor plans, that door will swing both ways---both inward and outward (at least per this diagram it does):

1 hour ago, Greg Doudna said:

Weren’t there two sets of glass doors, as in making a vestibule between them?

I see only one, not two sets of glass doors:

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/tsbd-photographs-and-floor-plans.html

42 minutes ago, Tom Gram said:

but what do you make of the moving white vertical line thing that looks a lot like a door opening?

Probably reflections.

I see a horizontal dark gap at the top of the metal door frame, which might very well indicate that the door is in the process of closing. And the changing position of the door is probably causing the "moving" reflections seen in the glass door.

22 minutes ago, Tom Gram said:

It looks like the door is opening and there’s a figure there with maybe the back of their head visible?

Could it be a reflection of a person standing on the top step? ~shrug~

It kind of looks like reflections in the glass door to me.

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2015/09/ Prayer Man (And Other Assorted Topics)

12 hours ago, Benjamin Cole said:

DVP--

Do you really believe that Gov. Connally, after being shot through the chest---a slug that took out five inches of rib, collapsed a lung, and then when exiting, due to the exiting bone matter, left a 2"x2" hole in his chest skin, and then fractured his wrist---and then after all that, Connally turned to look over his own right shoulder to check on JFK? Making a 180-degree turn in his seat?

IN A SEPTEMBER 2022 DISCUSSION, BENJAMIN COLE SAID THIS.

DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

I have no idea why you're labeling it "the DVP version", because the version of the SBT that you're talking about in your [2022] post [linked] above (as it relates specifically to Governor Connally having the ability to turn completely around in his seat AFTER being hit in the back, wrist, and leg by a bullet) is exactly the same as the Warren Commission's version and even the HSCA's version.....because both the WC and the HSCA also concluded that Gov. Connally definitely DID turn around in his seat and stare right at JFK at a point in time after Connally had been hit by the one and only bullet that pierced his body.

But it's still okay with me if you want to call it the "DVP Version". I like being associated with something filled with so much common sense and logic (plus the number of whole bullets that are in evidence---one).

David Von Pein
September 25-30, 2022

Below are a couple of additional 11/22/63 photos showing the "bunched up" nature of JFK's jacket during the motorcade through Dallas.

These pictures, which were taken on Lemmon Avenue by a high school student named Richard Clark, also clearly confirm the fact that Governor Connally was sitting a few inches lower in the limousine than the President.

Click to enlarge:

Photo Source: The Sixth Floor Museum (via this video).
 

Here's a very good 2020 Sixth Floor Museum/Oral History interview with researcher and author Fred Litwin:



And HERE'S A LINK to Litwin's 1994-1995 article "A Conspiracy Too Big?", which Fred mentions in the above interview.

7 hours ago, Pat Speer said:

In the photo above, Hill's left foot is unseen, but is presumably hooked over the side of the limo by the passenger compartment. His right foot, which is seen, is over the side by the trunk.

FWIW, Clint Hill said this in his WC testimony [emphasis by DVP]:

Mr. HILL -- "I had my body above the rear seat, and my legs hooked down into the rear seat, one foot outside the car."

2 hours ago, Pat Speer said:

If you look at the unretouched Miller photo published in the Sat Post you will see what appears to be a left foot, not a right foot dangling over the edge of the back seat compartment.  I believe it was Bill Miller who tried to replicate Hill's position in the photo, moreover, and found it could not be done with the right foot dangling over the right side of the compartment. 

But don't you think it's odd that Clint Hill would have switched from having his right foot over the side at one point during the frantic drive to Parkland (which is certainly what we see in the picture below) to having his left foot outside the car at another point during that journey?

Quite obviously, this "Which Foot Was It?" question is totally unimportant. But it does provide us with yet another topic of meaningless JFKA fodder to chew on.

At least we agree on the conclusion that it is a foot belonging to Mr. Hill.

38 minutes ago, Pat Speer said:

it was almost certainly Hill's left foot. 

No. It's almost certainly Hill's right foot. Not his left.

You surely don't think Hill has his LEFT foot dangling over the side of the car in this photo below, do you Pat?

1 hour ago, Kevin Balch said:

What is the object protruding above the rear seat behind Clint Hill? Is it Clint Hill’s foot or JFK’s or something else?

It's Clint Hill's foot hooked over the right side of the Presidential limousine. And I can't really understand why this matter has been such a disputed one over the years, since at least one other photograph exists (the top picture below) that provably depicts that very thing occurring (i.e., Secret Service Agent Hill's right foot hanging over the side of the car).

Click to enlarge:

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Related Audio....

JFK'S REMARKS REGARDING THE DISMANTLING OF MISSILES IN CUBA (NOVEMBER 2, 1962)