Robin Unger Posted April 14, 2017 Share Posted April 14, 2017 (edited) Edited April 14, 2017 by Robin Unger Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Walton Posted April 14, 2017 Share Posted April 14, 2017 Allistar I've always believed that if you really want something dive into it and learn. So why don't you buy the SW and download free 3D SW, teach yourself and make your own graphics? you'll be a better man for having done so Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alistair Briggs Posted April 14, 2017 Share Posted April 14, 2017 9 hours ago, Andrej Stancak said: Alistair: if you keep viewing your GIF or an individual still from this GIF for a while you may realise that Prayer Man stood at the very front part of the top landing. Please note how close his right elbow is to the brick column. It is possible to stand with one leg on a step and have the body aligned with the front of the top landing As far as your height estimates are concerned, Mr. Lovelady is leaning forwards while stepping down. He is also closer to the camera, and the doorway was shot from a slight bottom-up angle. The apparent height differences cannot be accounted for by comparing the ideal (maximum) body heights of these two persons. As per further 3D pictures of Darnell's, Wiegman's and Altgens's scene, this will have to wait until I have enough time to complete. We speak about weeks of contiguous time necessary to complete the work which I do not have at this moment due to my job and family commitments. I use different programs: Poser11, CorelDraw, CorelPaintshop, SketchuUp, and few extensions and toolboxes such as Artisan. At this moment, had I enough time, I would be finalising a high-resolution Poser11 model of Prayer Man, and importing it into Sketchup. Also, I am testing simultaneously two other scenarios besides the "one-foot-down" one: a man 5'9'' on the top landing and curled which was originally suggested by Greg Parker (I have reasons to think that the "curling" could be in Backyard Picture style), and of course the short 5'2'' person standing on the top landing. Unless all three possibilities are finished to perfection, I would not post any further screenshots from the new work. I find it quite intriguing as to why there is the necessity for PM to be standing one step down but with one foot up on the top landing... why not just be standing fully on the one step down... Also, I find it quite intriguing that an alternative 'scenario' under consideration is of a short 5'2" person standing on the top landing... considering the height of the step is 7 inches that carries the implication that PM then must be standing at maximum body height... *With regards to BL being closer to the camera... by what factor? The picture may be taken at an angle but it's also taken from a distance and let's be honest, the proximity of BL and PM is relatively close. Also that the picture was taken from a slight bottom up angle is somewhat moot as it applies to both PM and BL... You mention that apparent height differences cannot be accounted for by comparing the 'actual' body heights of these two people... I don't disagree - relatively. However, regarding your image of PM and Frazier, is it not a case that Frazier's actual body height of 6ft is factored and then to explain the 'apparent height difference' seen between Frazier and PM that the consideration given is between either a 5ft2 person standing on the top landing or a 5ft9 person standing one step down... but with the latter there is a need for one foot to still be on the top landing to explain the apparent standing further back than a person would be if they were fully on the one step down... fundamentally, are you not comparing the actual body heights of those two people to draw a conclusion also... ... it's not that I think you are wrong, per se... it's just I have to be honest with myself and say that I have looked at the extant photographs and can't see any real justification for having PM stand one step down but with one leg still on the top landing... although I do understand (I think) the 'need' for it to be that way... Anyroads, just wanted to throw something out there... what if BL wasn't as tall as 5ft8? Sure there is documentation putting him at that height (which Bill Miller posted earlier, and repeated below)... http://s366.photobucket.com/user/bmjfk63/media/Billy L height_zpsrlpguvfx.jpg.html The thing is though, they wouldn't have measured him they would have merely asked him and he said he was 5ft8 - it's not unusual for people to 'exaggerate' their height, so what if he was actually shorter... In an interview that Buell Frazier did he was asked about Lovelady and he claimed that Lovelady was quite short, and Frazier puts him as low as 5ft 4... personally I don't see him being that short, but it does, to me, perhaps, call in to question the 5ft8 claim... also maybe of impostance is to consider that Frazier said that Oswald and Lovelady were like 'Mutt and Jeff' - that Oswald was taller and thinner and Lovelady was shorter and wider... Just throwing that out there... Bill, if you are about you may be able to answer this question... did the door of the TSBD, at that time, only open outwards? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alistair Briggs Posted April 14, 2017 Share Posted April 14, 2017 4 hours ago, Michael Walton said: Allistar I've always believed that if you really want something dive into it and learn. So why don't you buy the SW and download free 3D SW, teach yourself and make your own graphics? you'll be a better man for having done so Sounds like far too much effort. lol Seriously though, if time was available it would be an option, but you know what it's like - real life gets in the way most times. lol Peace Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Miller Posted April 14, 2017 Share Posted April 14, 2017 15 hours ago, Gerry Simone said: Understood. So it is possible that PM is halfway down that step? Off the bat, PM looks like he's back in the corner. With respect to the argument that we see something shiny in his hand, that doesn't necessarily negate that he's entirely in the shadows because sunlight can be indirectly shining into that entrance vestibule but deflected back off of a reflective surface.* *(I recall those silly faked-moon landing arguments about artificial stage lights, which were debunked with simple table-top experiments, showing that an astronaut in a shiny suit can reflect sunlight even though he still might be in the shadows). You are correct - there is direct light and indirect light. There in no mistaking the direct sunlight in the Darnell film. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Miller Posted April 14, 2017 Share Posted April 14, 2017 13 hours ago, Andrej Stancak said: Alistair: if you keep viewing your GIF or an individual still from this GIF for a while you may realise that Prayer Man stood at the very front part of the top landing. Please note how close his right elbow is to the brick column. The right column hides a small section of the wall. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrej Stancak Posted April 14, 2017 Share Posted April 14, 2017 (edited) 3 hours ago, Alistair Briggs said: I find it quite intriguing as to why there is the necessity for PM to be standing one step down but with one foot up on the top landing... why not just be standing fully on the one step down... Also, I find it quite intriguing that an alternative 'scenario' under consideration is of a short 5'2" person standing on the top landing... considering the height of the step is 7 inches that carries the implication that PM then must be standing at maximum body height... *With regards to BL being closer to the camera... by what factor? The picture may be taken at an angle but it's also taken from a distance and let's be honest, the proximity of BL and PM is relatively close. Also that the picture was taken from a slight bottom up angle is somewhat moot as it applies to both PM and BL... You mention that apparent height differences cannot be accounted for by comparing the 'actual' body heights of these two people... I don't disagree - relatively. However, regarding your image of PM and Frazier, is it not a case that Frazier's actual body height of 6ft is factored and then to explain the 'apparent height difference' seen between Frazier and PM that the consideration given is between either a 5ft2 person standing on the top landing or a 5ft9 person standing one step down... but with the latter there is a need for one foot to still be on the top landing to explain the apparent standing further back than a person would be if they were fully on the one step down... fundamentally, are you not comparing the actual body heights of those two people to draw a conclusion also...... it's not that I think you are wrong, per se... it's just I have to be honest with myself and say that I have looked at the extant photographs and can't see any real justification for having PM stand one step down but with one leg still on the top landing... although I do understand (I think) the 'need' for it to be that way...Anyroads, just wanted to throw something out there... what if BL wasn't as tall as 5ft8? Sure there is documentation putting him at that height (which Bill Miller posted earlier, and repeated below)... http://s366.photobucket.com/user/bmjfk63/media/Billy L height_zpsrlpguvfx.jpg.html The thing is though, they wouldn't have measured him they would have merely asked him and he said he was 5ft8 - it's not unusual for people to 'exaggerate' their height, so what if he was actually shorter... In an interview that Buell Frazier did he was asked about Lovelady and he claimed that Lovelady was quite short, and Frazier puts him as low as 5ft 4... personally I don't see him being that short, but it does, to me, perhaps, call in to question the 5ft8 claim... also maybe of impostance is to consider that Frazier said that Oswald and Lovelady were like 'Mutt and Jeff' - that Oswald was taller and thinner and Lovelady was shorter and wider... Just throwing that out there... Bill, if you are about you may be able to answer this question... did the door of the TSBD, at that time, only open outwards? Alistair: there are quite a few points in your post to answer. I'll try my best. Query: "I find it quite intriguing as to why there is the necessity for PM to be standing one step down but with one foot up on the top landing... why not just be standing fully on the one step down... Answer: Prayer Man could not stand with both his feet on the first step below the top landing because his body would be aligned in parallel with the plane crossing the glass door. However, he is orientated almost in parallel (not completely though) with the western wall (in Darnell). This could not be achieved should he stand with both his feet on the step below the top landing. Further, the left part of his body (shoulder and left arm) would be lit by the sunlight which they it is not. Query: "Also, I find it quite intriguing that an alternative 'scenario' under consideration is of a short 5'2" person standing on the top landing... considering the height of the step is 7 inches that carries the implication that PM then must be standing at maximum body height..." Answer: Yes, there may be some small height reduction due to Prayer Man very slightly bending his head and having (in my opinion) his leg apart. However, his body is stretched along the axis of his right leg. The about one inch reduction from 5'9'' is very small given how blurry the images (Wiegman and Darnell) are - one inch inaccuracy is within the uncertainty limits of contours drawn around the heads of the important figures in the doorway. As far as the scenario of a person 5'2'' and standing on the top landing is concerned, I guess that every alternative, including the one with a fat and stocky woman dressed as a worker and drinking from a bottle (?), should be given equal weight and opportunity. Query: *With regards to BL being closer to the camera... by what factor? The picture may be taken at an angle but it's also taken from a distance and let's be honest, the proximity of BL and PM is relatively close. Also that the picture was taken from a slight bottom up angle is somewhat moot as it applies to both PM and BL... Answer: I do not know the "factor" as a number for Mr. Lovelady and Prayer Man. However, the small exercise presented in my previous post illustrates the principle: the bottom-up angle to a certain extent smears the height differences. Query: "You mention that apparent height differences cannot be accounted for by comparing the 'actual' body heights of these two people... I don't disagree - relatively. However, regarding your image of PM and Frazier, is it not a case that Frazier's actual body height of 6ft is factored and then to explain the 'apparent height difference' seen between Frazier and PM that the consideration given is between either a 5ft2 person standing on the top landing or a 5ft9 person standing one step down... but with the latter there is a need for one foot to still be on the top landing to explain the apparent standing further back than a person would be if they were fully on the one step down... fundamentally, are you not comparing the actual body heights of those two people to draw a conclusion also..." Answer: That example was meant to demonstrate that the relative body heights in a 2D image may not correctly inform about the real height differences. I am testing the hypothesis that Prayer Man is Oswald and therefore place a manikin 5'9'' into the doorway. There is enough circumstantial evidence to take this possibility as a plausible explanation and for this reason I work with a man 5'9''. A person 5'9'' and standing upright and on the top landing would be too tall relative to e.g. Mr. Frazier and other doorway landmarks. To answer your query, I really use the realistic and known body heights but rotate the model in such a way that it matches a particular scene. There, the body heights would be already relative, as in pictures. Query: "it's just I have to be honest with myself and say that I have looked at the extant photographs and can't see any real justification for having PM stand one step down but with one leg still on the top landing... although I do understand (I think) the 'need' for it to be that way.." Answer: The "need" in my thinking is a plausible hypothesis that needs to be tested. If Prayer Man was Oswald then a man 5'9'' should match all ad-hoc criteria derived from Darnell's and Wiegman's scenes. To say "need" implies a sort of wishful thinking on my part which would eventually always yield only one outcome. This intention I can exclude. Query: "just wanted to throw something out there... what if BL wasn't as tall as 5ft8? Sure there is documentation putting him at that height (which Bill Miller posted earlier, and repeated below)..." Answer: Mr. Lovelady's body height has been documented early on in this thread. In my analysis, it is possible to fit Mr. Lovelady's figure in Hughes by a man 5'8'' well. Lovelady's body height appeared in an FBI record, it is not a hearsay. The door opened both outwards and inwards. You can see an inward opening of the glass door right in some Darnell's stills. Edited April 14, 2017 by Andrej Stancak Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alistair Briggs Posted April 14, 2017 Share Posted April 14, 2017 1 hour ago, Andrej Stancak said: The door opened both outwards and inwards. You can see an inward opening of the glass door right in some Darnell's stills. Genuinely I would like to see any Darnell still that shows the door (conclusively) opening inward... a while ago I went searching for any contemporary photo that showed the door opening inwards and couldn't find any... 1 hour ago, Andrej Stancak said: Answer: Mr. Lovelady's body height has been documented early on in this thread. In my analysis, it is possible to fit Mr. Lovelady's figure in Hughes by a man 5'8'' well. Lovelady's body height appeared in an FBI record, it is not a hearsay. My point was merely that in that record that lists his height as 5ft8 the likliehood is that they merely asked him his height - it wasn't an actual measurement... people do sometimes have a tendency to exaggerate, or 'over-state' their height, or indeed think they are taller than they actually are... don't get me wrong I'm not suggesting that BL is shorter than that... but I did find it interesting to hear Frazier say that BL was (noticeably) shorter that Oswald (and indeed Frazier claims that BL was 'wider' than Oswald)... no biggy, just something I found interesting. 1 hour ago, Andrej Stancak said: Answer: The "need" in my thinking is a plausible hypothesis that needs to be tested. If Prayer Man was Oswald then a man 5'9'' should match all ad-hoc criteria derived from Darnell's and Wiegman's scenes. To say "need" implies a sort of wishful thinking on my part which would eventually always yield only one outcome. This intention I can exclude. I appreciate that you say it is a plausible hypothesis that needs to be tested. 1 hour ago, Andrej Stancak said: Answer: That example was meant to demonstrate that the relative body heights in a 2D image may not correctly inform about the real height differences. I am testing the hypothesis that Prayer Man is Oswald and therefore place a manikin 5'9'' into the doorway. There is enough circumstantial evidence to take this possibility as a plausible explanation and for this reason I work with a man 5'9''. A person 5'9'' and standing upright and on the top landing would be too tall relative to e.g. Mr. Frazier and other doorway landmarks. To answer your query, I really use the realistic and known body heights but rotate the model in such a way that it matches a particular scene. There, the body heights would be already relative, as in pictures. I agree that the relative body heights in a 2D image may not correctly inform about the real height difference... and I would also say, and I'm sure you will agree, that the 'quality' of the images (alas) are not the most conducive for as accurate readings as we may want... so, sure, there has to be some form of 'guestimation' required and that's ok. 2 hours ago, Andrej Stancak said: Answer: I do not know the "factor" as a number for Mr. Lovelady and Prayer Man. However, the small exercise presented in my previous post illustrates the principle: the bottom-up angle to a certain extent smears the height differences. The width of the step is, if memory serves, is 12 inches... thus if BL is standing at the edge of the top landing whilst PM is standing one step down then the relative distance between them is 12 inches (although considering PM, it is claimed, has one foot down and one foot up, then the relative distance would only really be 6 inches)... that relative distance between them doesn't change... the further away the camera is though the less of a 'factor' that distance becomes Anyway, you earlier mentioned, and I quote; Quote The doorway is a 3D object, and factors such as perspective or elevation angle do count. Further, none of the two people in question stood perfectly straight precluding the comparisons of their body heights based on simple math calculations. I don't feel that we know that 'none of the two people in question stood perfectly straight', and as true as it may be that they are not standing at their 'maximum' height I also don't feel that we know, or can determine from the extant photographs how much of their height is 'missing' or indeed for what reason... as such, for ease of simplicity I feel that the starting point should always be their 'maximum' height and see how that works out... just a different way to look at it. 2 hours ago, Andrej Stancak said: As far as the scenario of a person 5'2'' and standing on the top landing is concerned, I guess that every alternative, including the one with a fat and stocky woman dressed as a worker and drinking from a bottle (?), should be given equal weight and opportunity. Not sure about every alternative or it would take more time than any of us mere mortals probably have. lol Seriously though, the 5ft2 and standing on the top landing seems to be an alternative only because the steps are 7 inches tall... Again, I know I'm over simplifying things here, and I understand the limitations, but if it was a 5ft2 person standing on the top landing, then relatively the 5ft 8 BL would look 6 inches taller whilst on the top landing and 1 inch shorter after stepping down... and that doesn't match the apparent view on the gif... I knocked up a couple of 'drawings' yesterday just for relative illustration purposes only and from that deduced that the best 'match' for the gif would have PM standing on the top landing and being the height of either 5ft4 or 5ft5. Anyroads, always glad to discuss this with you. Regards Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robin Unger Posted April 14, 2017 Share Posted April 14, 2017 IMO Prayer man is standing on the top step, in the corner close to the glass window. I don't see any indication that he is standing on the edge of the top step. I don't see any indication that he has one foot on the next step down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robin Unger Posted April 14, 2017 Share Posted April 14, 2017 (edited) If Prayer man were standing close to the front of the top step, he would be lit by direct sunlight, and we would see him more clearly in this wiegman frame Edited April 14, 2017 by Robin Unger Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrej Stancak Posted April 15, 2017 Share Posted April 15, 2017 (edited) 20 hours ago, Robin Unger said: If Prayer man were standing close to the front of the top step, he would be lit by direct sunlight, and we would see him more clearly in this wiegman frame Robin: I appreciate your posts. It is possible to stand close to the front edge of the top platform and yet to have only the object held in the right hand exposed to the sun light. Your recent doorway images with a shaded western wall actually illustrate well that Prayer Man's right elbow was about at the level of the front edge of the top platform. It is all just-just about Prayer Man's location, and this is the reason for people arguing a lot about his exact location. We speak about an inch of two deciding about the plausibility of each alternative. As far as the missing proof for one-foot-down-one-foot-up hypothesis is concerned, a reasonable way forwards is to ask about Prayer Man' left leg. The hypothesis of one-foot-down-one-foot-up assumes that Prayer Man's left leg was bent in the knee joint and covering objects in the background. The object in the background is the heater. I see a smaller portion of the heater than expected in early Darnell's frames before the ladies ascended the steps far enough to cover what could be Prayer Man's left leg. I made a full analysis including overlays of the model and an early Darnell's still during Christmas break but need to check if I have the files on this or my other laptop. I was able to conclude that the grey blob where Prayer Man's left leg could be actually was his left leg. This the Darnell's still I have in mind: And this is a 3D reconstruction of a possible Prayer Man's stance: Am I mistaken in my recall of you saying in some of your past posts that Prayer Man stood in the front part of the top platform? Naturally, researchers are fully entitled to change their minds. Edited April 15, 2017 by Andrej Stancak Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alistair Briggs Posted April 15, 2017 Share Posted April 15, 2017 22 hours ago, Robin Unger said: Robin, I was wondering about the width of the landing there... is the width known for sure? It doesn't appear to be very big from that image... Regards Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Graves Posted April 15, 2017 Share Posted April 15, 2017 (edited) On 4/13/2017 at 10:30 PM, Andrej Stancak said: Alistair: if you keep viewing your GIF or an individual still from this GIF for a while you may realise that Prayer Man stood at the very front part of the top landing. Please note how close his right elbow is to the brick column. It is possible to stand with one leg on a step and have the body aligned with the front of the top landing As far as your height estimates are concerned, Mr. Lovelady is leaning forwards while stepping down. He is also closer to the camera, and the doorway was shot from a slight bottom-up angle. The apparent height differences cannot be accounted for by comparing the ideal (maximum) body heights of these two persons. As per further 3D pictures of Darnell's, Wiegman's and Altgens's scene, this will have to wait until I have enough time to complete. We speak about weeks of contiguous time necessary to complete the work which I do not have at this moment due to my job and family commitments. I use different programs: Poser11, CorelDraw, CorelPaintshop, SketchuUp, and few extensions and toolboxes such as Artisan. At this moment, had I enough time, I would be finalising a high-resolution Poser11 model of Prayer Man, and importing it into Sketchup. Also, I am testing simultaneously two other scenarios besides the "one-foot-down" one: a man 5'9'' on the top landing and curled which was originally suggested by Greg Parker (I have reasons to think that the "curling" could be in Backyard Picture style), and of course the short 5'2'' person standing on the top landing. Unless all three possibilities are finished to perfection, I would not post any further screenshots from the new work. Guys, I don't know if what I have to say is germane to your conversation, but you do realize don't you that the Weigman frame (above, in an earlier post) in which Lovelady is leaning forward equates time-wise to Altgens 6? Yes, Altgens 6, in which Cinque's / Fetzer's "Doorman / Oswald" is actually Billy Nolan Lovelady, who, having heard the first shot ring out and / or some shouting down the street, is leaning forward near the center handrail (having moved to that position from the left wall just a few seconds earlier), leaning forward, I say (not going down one step), in order to "get a better view" of and / or "hear more clearly" what the heck was going on down there on Elm Street? -- Tommy Edited April 15, 2017 by Thomas Graves Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrej Stancak Posted April 15, 2017 Share Posted April 15, 2017 (edited) 1 hour ago, Thomas Graves said: Guys, I don't know if what I have to say is germane to your conversation, but you do realize don't you that the Weigman frame (above, in an earlier post) in which Lovelady is leaning forward equates time-wise to Altgens 6? Yes, Altgens 6, in which Cinque's / Fetzer's "Doorman / Oswald" is actually Billy Nolan Lovelady, who, having heard the first shot ring out and / or some shouting down the street, is leaning forward near the center handrail (having moved to that position from the left wall just a few seconds earlier), leaning forward, I say (not going down one step), in order to "get a better view" of and / or "hear more clearly" what the heck was going on down there on Elm Street? -- Tommy Tommy: This is one one of the most important points in the reconstruction of the events occurring in the doorway during the time of assassination. Would you not mind posting the Wiegman's frame which you think would be the one corresponding to Altgens6? Mr. Dale Myers reconstructed the time axes of different films, and assumed it was Wiegman's frame 14/15 which matched with Altgens6. However, I doubt Myers's time reconstruction at this particular point for a very simple reason: we see Carl Jones viewing east in Altgens6 but to the west in Wiegman's frame 14 or 15. Of course, the image quality of Groden's version of Wiegman's film available to me is very poor to determine the Mr. Jones's gaze axis. Anyway, I wonder what are the opinions of forum members about Carl Jones viewing towards the Tripple Underpass in frame 14/15 and eastwards in Altgens6. Mr. Dale K. Myers's reconstruction of Wiegman/Zapruder time alignement can be found in his document "Secret of Homicide...", page 114, downloadable at: http://www.jfkfiles.com/jfk/html/report_download.html Edited April 15, 2017 by Andrej Stancak Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robin Unger Posted April 15, 2017 Share Posted April 15, 2017 (edited) To my eyes Carl Jones does not appear to be looking East or West in Altgens 6 but looking straight ahead, as is Otis Williams. Edited April 15, 2017 by Robin Unger Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts