SOUTH KNOLL PHOTO

[John Butler]

Firing angles from the Triple Underpass with a train on the tracks.

The following films show a train on the tracks during the assassination of President Kennedy plus several witness statements say much the same. 

Mark Bell

Robert Hughes

Dave Weigman

Malcom Couch

John Martin

A passenger train with empty cars would make a perfect platform to assassinate the President.  This note doesn’t say an assassin could not shoot from the South Knoll.  It just says there are better firing angles.

The Zapruder film has 486 frames.  At roughly one foot for frame is 486 feet or roughly 160 yards.  That's not a difficult shot for a trained marksman with a scope or unscoped rifle.  That's about the same distance from the intersection of Main and Houston as the intersection of Elm and Houston.

Edited November 8, 2018 by John Butler

[Mathias Baumann]

1 hour ago, John Butler said:

Firing angles from the Triple Underpass with a train on the tracks.

The following films show a train on the tracks during the assassination of President Kennedy plus several witness statements say much the same. 

Mark Bell

Robert Hughes

Dave Weigman

Malcom Couch

John Martin

A passenger train with empty cars would make a perfect platform to assassinate the President.  This note doesn’t say an assassin could not shoot from the South Knoll.  It just says there are better firing angles.

The Zapruder film has 486 frames.  At roughly one foot for frame is 486 feet or roughly 160 yards.  That's not a difficult shot for a trained marksman with a scope or unscoped rifle.  That's about the same distance from the intersection of Main and Houston as the intersection of Elm and Houston.

John,

interesting idea. But I think a shot from a train would be hard to synchronize with the arrival of the motorcade in Dealey Plaza. Especially considering the fact that the motorcade did not arrive on schedule.

Edited November 8, 2018 by Mathias Baumann

[John Butler]

The Mark Bell film and the Robert Hughes film shows a train on the tracks during the assassination.

The other films, Dave Weigman, Malcom Couch, and John Martin show a train on the tracks after the assassination.

So, I guess their timing was right for the assassination.  It's the same train Chauncy Holt was told to get on and wait after the assassination.  He feared for his life by being made a patsy when he thought the boxcar he was in was going to be blown up.  It didn't and he lived because Oswald was caught with an hour.  I don't think Oswald was the lone designated patsy.  There were others.  Mainly those who were laying floor on the 6th floor, particularly Bill Shelley.  Most of them were arrested and taken in.

[Ron Bulman]

South Knoll.  Why waste my time.  We've been through this before on another thread.  What you claim is a train in one of the films is traffic in the background on Stemmons freeway.  The train Holt (!) claims he was on didn't leave the yard until around two o'clock per Bowers.  The train in the Hughes film you show is a passenger train, not a boxcar, setting stationary in the train yard beyond Bowers tower.  You see the edge of the tower in it. That part of the film is taken from behind the fence on the grassy knoll looking across the parking lot.

You do know you lost all credibility when you claimed shot's were fired on Main street? 

You really should read up on Chauncy Holt.

 

Edited November 9, 2018 by Ron Bulman

[John Butler]

I don’t know why Ron is wasting his time but, I can guess.  By the way, I am not writing this for Ron.  I am writing it for the readers.

As far as reading up on Chauncey Holt what I said is straight from a video made by Holt in which he says what I reported.  It is one of the things I thought was creditable about what Holt was saying.

I am not really going to rehash earlier posts showing the train frames of the 5 films mentioned.  That’s been done in earlier posts.  The four other films show what is seen in the Hughes frame.  A passenger train on the tracks, no one on the triple underpass (no Officer Foster and 10 railroad workers), and a very indistinct Foster standing on the Triple Underpass above the grassing area leading up to the Triple Underpass just to the left of the Triple Underpass.

Robert Hughes does show a passenger train in the railroad yards at the end of the film but, only a section of it.  That frame is not what was being discussed.  I am very familiar with trains of the 1950’s and 1960’s.  Our farm had a railroad (the L & N) at the end of the property line.  Saw many trains every day.  Trains are rare with only passenger cars.  Generally, they were of mixed variety with passenger cars and freight cars.  Officer J. C. White testified there was a “slow freight train passing by”.  There are I think 7 or maybe less tracks on the Triple Underpass.  There could have been more than one train on the tracks?

This series of posts began when Ron mentioned a “non-existent” train on the railroad tracks.  And, now to the main part of the post.  Ron says “You do know you lost all credibility when you claimed shot's were fired on Main street?”.

Lost credibility is not about me losing credibility but, about the credibility of the evidence presented.  The credibility of my statements on are based on the evidence for shooting on Main Street which comes from:

1.  The AMIPA film.  I posted several slowed gifs on that occurrence.

2. Jackie Kennedy’s statements about seeing a blue-grey building ahead and to the left when she heard shots.  You cannot find a blue-grey building on Houston or Elm.  You could at that time of the assassination on Main street but, not now since the Kennedy Monument sits where that building was.

3. There were one or two witnesses saying shooting occurred on Main.

If you go on from there you will see that things were happening in the intersection of Main and Houston.  Can you recall the posts on Robert Hughes and the cut-apart policeman?  Can you recall the posts on Altgens 5.

Altgens 5 is what started the suspicion that something was being covered up.  Altgens 5 can clearly be demonstrated that it is a photo altered photo.  Just look at the tires.  I had no evidence of what might be covered up in those days.  And, knowing that an altered photo, Altgens 5, was not telling the real story I couldn’t justify saying that shooting occurred there and was being covered up.  Even though that is what was suspected.  Bonnie Ray Williams early testimony helped but, Williams was not a reliable witness sense his testimony evolved over time.  Altgens 5 is just one of several peculiarities one can see in the assassination films taken on Houston Street.

1. Eight assassination films say something happened in front of Court Records building.  When the presidential limousine arrives in that area films become distorted and the films skip down to the intersection of Houston and Elm or beyond that to Elm Street.  Elsie Dorman said she heard shots coming from the Court Records building.  James “Junior” Jarmen changed his testimony at the Warren Commission hearing by saying he heard shots coming from low and to the left.  This changed his earlier testimony that agreed with Harold Norman and Bonnie Ray Williams.

2. What are the odds of that happening naturally in those 8 films.  I would say astronomical.

3. The John Martin film has scenes where the motorcycle policemen escorting the presidential limousine have see through helmets.  The walls of the buildings on Houston Street can be seen through their helmets.  I haven’t posted on this.

4. Parts of the Nix film could not have been filmed by Nix.  There are elevated scenes from someone else.  Nix, from where he was positioned could not have filmed portions of his film do to the crowd in the intersection blocking his view.

And, then we get to the intersection of Houston and Elm and what some the witnesses said about what happened there.  There are enough witness statements that say shooting occurred there to be believable.  I posted the witnesses, essentially what they said, and their references earlier.

Altgens 5, 6, and 7, the Zapruder film, Mary Moorman’s Polaroid are what people first saw about the assassination in the week following the assassination.  All are false.  But, they are part of the pictorial basis for the Warren Commission findings, The Lone Gunman Theory, and in the Zapruder film the Single Bullet Theory.

That is why some people find these posts reprehensible and outside their biases.  It can’t be true because of the theories mentioned above.  You must be like Robert Grodin and others with an absolute believe in the validity of the Zapruder film and other media in the film and photo record.

If you really analyze Z frames 157 and 163 you will find about 8 or so things that indicate alteration.  That is just two frames and there are others.  Using the standard of Falsum in Uno, Falsum in Omnibus you will understand that the Zapruder film is not valid.  Even under a loser standard of Falsum in Multis, Falsum in Omnibus the Zapruder film is still invalid.   

 

   

[Chris Davidson]

On 11/6/2018 at 2:36 PM, Chris Davidson said:

Hughes Stabilized.

Main&Houston:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BwrExtVD005OS3lWWUZad1VYakk/view?usp=sharing

Nix Stabilized.

Main&Houston:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/14gfHfZGtYMBgoxQ2_ZejFnEOtfHjRsj3/view?usp=sharing

 

[John Butler]

Since I mentioned it, here is the altered frame from the John Martin film showing the motorcycle helmet of the policemen that is see through.  You can capture other frames where this phenomenon is observed.  The question is why were these frames altered?

I hadn't noticed before that there is a babushka lady in the frame.  What does that make?  14 in various films?

Chris has posted some interesting films supposedly stabilized for better use.  The problem is that they are much shorter than the originals therefore a lot of information is lost.

Edited November 10, 2018 by John Butler

[Chris Davidson]

4 hours ago, John Butler said:

Since I mentioned it, here is the altered frame from the John Martin film showing the motorcycle helmet of the policemen that is see through.  You can capture other frames where this phenomenon is observed.  The question is why were these frames altered?

I hadn't noticed before that there is a babushka women in the frame.  What does that make?  14?

Chris has posted some interesting films supposedly stabilized for better use.  The problem is that they are much shorter than the originals therefore a lot of information is lost.

You are dealing with Interlaced and Progressive frames.

The frame you posted started out as an Interlaced frame. (Left side of graphic.)

It was then De-interlaced and saved. (Right side of graphic.) Which matches what you posted.

The frame you posted is from Groden's version.

Anybody interested in seeing the PROGRESSIVE frame where the cop helmet is not translucent, can view it there.

 

 

[John Butler]

Chris,

I might understand what you are saying if you would explain what you are talking about to someone who doesn't know that much about video or film techniques

Dealing with interlaced and progressive frames is beyond my pay grade.  I just assumed this was a transparent or opaque image formed by one image overlaying the other.

This is from Groden's DVD.  I can't see Robert Groden faking an image or using a technique that fakes an image.  I can see photo editors of the time doing it.  In my mind this is just another of the many mistakes the photo editors made in editing the assassination films and photos.

Why interlacing is used in television?

"Designed for the analog NTSC television system, interlaced scanning uses two fields to create a frame. One field contains all the odd lines in the image, the other contains all the even lines of the image"

 

This is a note I found on the internet.  This notes makes some sense.

 

Are you saying these interlaced images are analog TV images?  Particularly, the type used in the 1960's.  And, when deinterlaced form opaque images?

 

Can you explain why this frame and others are interlaced analog TV video. 

 

Here is another odd photo frame involving Phil Willis.  Because of this photo I call Willis the flat-headed see-through man.

 

 

Can you explain what went wrong here.  Particularly, the flat head?  It looks like it has been cut off.

 

 

Edited November 10, 2018 by John Butler

[John Butler]

Is this an example of a interlaced analog TV frame?  Groden's DVD films have many images similar to this in different films.

[Ron Bulman]

https://www.bing.com/search?q=areosmith+dream+on&form=PRUSEN&mkt=en-us&httpsmsn=1&refig=2b64eb40025d4d4ea8ab9e414fb73c4e&sp=-1&pq=areosmith+dream+on&sc=8-18&qs=n&sk=&cvid=2b64eb40025d4d4ea8ab9e414fb73c4e

Full screen recommended, so you can see the non existent train in the background.

Edited November 10, 2018 by Ron Bulman

[Chris Davidson]

2 hours ago, John Butler said:

Chris,

I might understand what you are saying if you would explain what you are talking about to someone who doesn't know that much about video or film techniques

Dealing with interlaced and progressive frames is beyond my pay grade.  I just assumed this was a transparent or opaque image formed by one image overlaying the other.

This is from Groden's DVD.  I can't see Robert Groden faking an image or using a technique that fakes an image.  I can see photo editors of the time doing it.  In my mind this is just another of the many mistakes the photo editors made in editing the assassination films and photos.

Why interlacing is used in television?

"Designed for the analog NTSC television system, interlaced scanning uses two fields to create a frame. One field contains all the odd lines in the image, the other contains all the even lines of the image"

 

This is a note I found on the internet.  This notes makes some sense.

 

Are you saying these interlaced images are analog TV images?  Particularly, the type used in the 1960's.  And, when deinterlaced form opaque images?

 

Can you explain why this frame and others are interlaced analog TV video. 

 

Here is another odd photo frame involving Phil Willis.  Because of this photo I call Willis the flat-headed see-through man.

 

 

Can you explain what went wrong here.  Particularly, the flat head?  It looks like it has been cut off.

 

 

Frame rate conversion

Here is the point where the native frame rate of the film, be it 16 fps, 18 fps, or something else, gets converted to 30 fps. Playing a 16 fps source at 30 fps would make everything happen too quickly. One approach is to duplicate frames until the right speed is achieved. For instance, say one second of film is represented by this sequence of 16 frames, named "A" to "P":

A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P

can be turned into these thirty frames via duplication such that playback at 30fps takes one second, and the speed of the movie is unchanged:

A A B B C C D D E E F F G G H I I J J K K L L M M N N O O P

Each frame was duplicated, except for frame "H" and "P", otherwise we would have ended up with 32 frames. Because some frames are duplicated and others aren't, the result will be somewhat uneven speed, a slight stuttering effect. Even if every frame is is duplicated the same number of times, the resulting video is more choppy than what video normally looks like, and is especially noticeable during panning.

Another approach is to go ahead and duplicate all 16 frames, resulting in 32, and then playing it at 30 fps. The motion will be about 6% too slow, but will be more smooth.

Somewhat more sophisticated, it is possible to blend adjacent frames, weighting the contribution of each based on how close it is in time to the frame which is being synthesized. For instance, if we were simply trying to double the frame rate, we could average together frames A and B producing frame A', and then play them back in A,A',B order.

Avisynth offers another option still, the most sophisticated of them all. Often it gives stunning results, but it can also produce noticeable artifacts and occasionally comically bad results. Avisynth can actually analyze each frame and discern objects from other objects based on how they move in relation to the background and each other, and how they occlude other objects. The tool can create a synthetic image part way between two frames in a physically plausible manner. Imagine someone standing still but raising their arm. The blending approach would produce an intermediate frame showing a ghost of the arm in both the before and after positions. Frame interpolation would try to create an image with the arm in a half way between position. Keep in mind that the tool is just shifting around pixels and has no a priori understanding of objects, nor any understanding that the objects are originate from 3D objects projected onto a 2D image. Sometimes the heuristics can't figure out what to do, and it falls back on just doing a blending operation. Objects sometimes have a "halo" of blurred image around moving objects where it has synthesized some background image around a moving object.

[Ron Bulman]

Chris, I'm certainly no physicist but you make more sense than John.

He can...

https://www.bing.com/search?q=areosmith+dream+on&form=PRUSEN&mkt=en-us&httpsmsn=1&refig=2b64eb40025d4d4ea8ab9e414fb73c4e&sp=-1&pq=areosmith+dream+on&sc=8-18&qs=n&sk=&cvid=2b64eb40025d4d4ea8ab9e414fb73c4e

[John Butler]

Chris,

Can you explain for me how interlaced frames from analog TV got into a 60's era film?  Is this a product of Groden's work?  Or, someone else?  How does that occur?  Doesn't this require after the fact manipulation of the taken film?

Stock in those days was celluloid or plastic?  Does interlacing occur while the film is being made or added afterwards?   How's that mix with interlaced analog TV signals in a amateur film?  Someone has manipulated this film when?

This is a problem for me since I started looking at Groden's films.  I have speculated military photographers film blended into the assassination films.  Any advice or help on this would be appreciated.

I'm sure Ron would agree that anyone makes more sense than me since I have no credibility.

Edited November 10, 2018 by John Butler

[John Butler]

The time difference between the Cancellare photo and the Zapruder film.

In the Zapruder film is that a vehicle moving east or a three wheeler motorbike cop moving west?  If not where is that vehicle in Cancellare.  Cancellare took his photo several minutes after the assassination so there is time to move people or vehicles and account for this discrepancy.

Again the time difference suggests an assassin would not hang around after the assassination.  If so, who was he hanging around to shoot?  The image of an assassin under the tree is a dwarf image undersized in relation to the giant pickup truck in the parking lot.

Another point to research is whether one would see anything past the Triple Underpass and the railroad bank.  At street level on Elm Street you can't see the Stemmons Freeway.