Unaltered Zapruder film

[Jamey Flanagan]

Just a thought. There have been many people who have claimed to have seen an unaltered complete filming of the assassination. Whether it was filmed by Zapruder or is a completely different film I'll still refer to it in this thread as an unaltered Zapruder film or UZ for short. So here is my question. Has anyone ever taken into account aspects of these similar reported viewings, combined them with witness accounts in Dealey Plaza (especially those closest to the limo at the time shots were fired) and tried making a computer simulation of this unaltered film (if it exists, which I believe it does) complete with the wide limo turn almost running over the curb and the limo stops that are missing in the current films of the assassination? You could also use information from other assassination films and photographs such as the Nix film and others which have also been altered but contain information not in the current Z film as the alterations can't match up perfectly in all films and photographs. Take those common elements that match up in those different mediums as kind of a basis or blueprint of what really happened but add in events such as the stops or near stops, the wide turn, the Stemmons sign as it should have appeared (at an angle, not the flat large sign blocking the limo for the throat shot) using pre-assassination pics, if the sign was hit by ammo show that, UM furiously pumping his umbrella, DCM or "the accomplice" and his more dramatic movements and actions, and everyone (viewers of the UZ as well as the closest witnesses) says the dramatic backward head snap never occurred so you'd have to use witness observations and find out what most likely really happened. We NEED a more accurate, the MOST accurate representation of what really happened during that ambush. It may not be perfect but has to be better than the false history we have from the current assassination visual records. To me this would be a gigantic step in the right direction. A visual representation based on actual data and corroborating accounts as to what most likely occurred during the ambush. Thoughts anyone? I welcome all opinions on this matter.

Edited February 13, 2018 by Jamey Flanagan

[Michael Walton]

No because there's  no  such thing. You can't  put a report together about something  that  doesn't  exist.

Otherwise, you're  literally  creating  something  from nothing.

[David Josephs]

2 hours ago, Jamey Flanagan said:

Just a thought. There have been many people who have claimed to have seen an unaltered complete filming of the assassination. Whether it was filmed by Zapruder or is a completely different film I'll still refer to it in this thread as an unaltered Zapruder film or UZ for short. So here is my question. Has anyone ever taken into account aspects of these similar reported viewings, combined them with witness accounts in Dealey Plaza (especially those closest to the limo at the time shots were fired) and tried making a computer simulation of this unaltered film (if it exists, which I believe it does) complete with the wide limo turn almost running over the curb and the limo stops that are missing in the current films of the assassination? You could also use information from other assassination films and photographs such as the Nix film and others which have also been altered but contain information not in the current Z film as the alterations can't match up perfectly in all films and photographs. Take those common elements that match up in those different mediums as kind of a basis or blueprint of what really happened but add in events such as the stops or near stops, the wide turn, the Stemmons sign as it should have appeared (at an angle, not the flat large sign blocking the limo for the throat shot) using pre-assassination pics, if the sign was hit by ammo show that, UM furiously pumping his umbrella, DCM or "the accomplice" and his more dramatic movements and actions, and everyone (viewers of the UZ as well as the closest witnesses) says the dramatic backward head snap never occurred so you'd have to use witness observations and find out what most likely really happened. We NEED a more accurate, the MOST accurate representation of what really happened during that ambush. It may not be perfect but has to be better than the false history we have from the current assassination visual records. To me this would be a gigantic step in the right direction. A visual representation based on actual data and corroborating accounts as to what most likely occurred during the ambush. Thoughts anyone? I welcome all opinions on this matter.

Jamey...  a small handful of researchers describe an account of seeing a "zapruder-type" film which was shown to them - each for different reasons.
I post a direct quote/post from one of those who did.... and I believe youtube has content from 1 or more of the others...

The descriptions here relate very well to an "unaltered" version of the Z-film given the specific items seen which are not on the extant version.

You'll have to excuse Mr. Walton and his penchant for posting pure opinion when asked for facts... and for arguing the opposite of something, anything, despite not fully grasping or even referring to the lengthy analysis done to date....   the late Rich Dellarosa was one...  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wRhcQI4tFTI

You'll find a batch of good videos to watch related to this other film and the general knowledge of what occurred.
Search this forum and you will find some amazing advances in our understanding of what the FBI did to FUBAR the survey and description of the situation...

The Evidence will only show you what occurred within the Conspiracy.... what actually happened - as you say - is a 1000 piece puzzle of which we only have 750 pieces, many of which are not even from this puzzle....  make seeing a picture very difficult.

Something worth knowing and many forget, is that Jaggers-Chiles-Stovall, Inc, where Oswald worked a short time, was a highly competent photographic facility...  And you'd never believe how close it was to FBI HQ on ERVAY & MAIN.

Although most of its contracts were with commercial businesses and advertising agencies, it also had contracts with the military.  It handled super-secret projects for the Navy Bureau Materiel and the Army Mapping Service. [14] It set the type that would be used to label the landmarks of strategic maps of foreign countries, including coastlines, sea bottoms, and bds. According to George Carter, a reporter for the Dallas Times Herald, JCS was the one that did the maps of Cuba and Oswald was one of the employees that worked on them. This is confirmed by the timecards, which show that he had in fact participated in the work on these secret projects. On October 16, four days after he was hired, he did a camera job for the Army Mapping Service (AMS). This would have been at the very height of the Cuban Missile Crisis. If the timecards can be trusted on this point, Oswald did fifteen more camera jobs for A M S throughout his employment at the company.

In the film that I saw the limo came into view on Houston Street and the entire turn onto Elm was visible. There was no "splice" or point where the limo suddenly
appeared on Elm out of nowhere. The limo made an extremely wide turn onto Elm and was moving very slowly at the corner. The limo "drifted" to the left of center
(driver's POV) on Elm St. I don't recall if it actually made a complete lane change or if it was simply "pointed" more or less "left of center" -- My best recollection
is that it was partially in the left lane and partially in the center lane by the time it reached the steps leading up the Grassy Knoll next to the so-called Zapruder
pedestal. Similar to what is seen in the extant film, JFK had been hit at least once by the time the limo emerged from behind the Stemmon's sign, elbows raised
up, his torso apparently frozen, his "protection" inexplicably absent...a sitting duck.

There is absolutely no question as to whether or not the limo came to a complete and FULL stop. The car stopped. Completely. No motion whatsoever. The limo
remained motionless for approximately 2 seconds. I'm surprised the Queen Mary didn't rear-end it. The head shot most obviously came from the right front. A
detail that is missing from the motion of JFK in the extant film has to do with the difference between: "back and to the left" --and--"up, then fall to the left".
My recollection is that he was "lifted up" from his seat to a discernible degree before falling to his left. This "body motion" appeared to be much slower than the jerky,
abrupt, "snap" seen in the extant film.

Rich had a few items that I didn't recall and vice versa. For instance, unlike what Rich reported, I don't recall a shot from behind that caused JFK's head to move forward
initially just before the fatal head shot from the front. That doesn't mean it didn't happen. I just may not have registered that for whatever reason. I also recall that
several Secret Service Agents climbed out of the Queen Mary with (what appeared to be) automatic weapons drawn apparently looking to return fire. They appeared to
be very disoriented. Then they climbed back in and sped off. There was a considerable gap between the time the X-100 sped off and the Queen Mary sped off. Rich
did not recall the agents climbing out of the limo.

[Michael Walton]

And you'll  have to excuse Dave "everything and the kitchen sink is a conspiracy" Josephs for thinking everything  was faked.

The man knows no bounds. Just recently he actually  believed that a part of the street was actually  painted  in in the Z film.

And when others here disagree with his craziness   here he resorts to personal  attacks . So keep that  in  mind  when  you  read  his  long  rambling  posts here.

[David G. Healy]

1 hour ago, Michael Walton said:

 

And you'll  have to excuse Dave "everything and the kitchen sink is a conspiracy" Josephs for thinking everything  was faked.

The man knows no bounds. Just recently he actually  believed that a part of the street was actually  painted  in in the Z film.

And when others here disagree with his craziness   here he resorts to personal  attacks . So keep that  in  mind  when  you  read  his  long  rambling  posts here.

your inexperience regarding Z-film study is noted. Without loon nut, blind support of the extant Z-film (currently housed at NARA under the control of the 6th Floor Mausoleum), well, let's just say, the Z-film is the lynch-pin of the 1964 WCR LHO's did all by his lonesome. Without it, the WCR case collapses... of course, its suspect, of course, it's going to be scrutinized. You know NO bounds, lad! 20 years behind times... I sense a WCR support conversion, soon!

[Jamey Flanagan]

So, let me ask you this Michael Walton, and not condescendingly but really wanting to know. Is it of your opinion that the current Zapruder film has not been doctored in any way other than the "Oops, we accidentally damaged the film in these spots"? And if that is your honest opinion then we must assume that you think Zapruder was either lying or "misremembering" when he said he started filming and never stopped and started back. And that you believe there are no limo stops whatsoever unless you count a very slight, almost imperceptible breaking. And Greer turns his head back twice in the span of an eighteenth of a second or possible twice that time. Am I correct so far? If you are questionable about any of that and the film has been doctored in any way and for any reason then why wouldn't it be a reasonable leap of logic to question anything and everything about the film? So much of what is seen in the film has NEVER been described by eyewitness accounts. I have yet to hear an eyewitness describe the violent backwards head snap seen on film. That would be kind of hard to miss. And the fact that the spray of blood and brains from the fatal headshot (or headshots if you ascribe to the two shot there from behind and then a frontal) dissipates in record time. What is it seen for? One frame? Two? Enough brain matter and blood to splatter Jackie and the rear motorcycle officer? Just curious as to your thoughts on those issues?

[Ron Bulman]

5 hours ago, David Josephs said:

Jamey...  a small handful of researchers describe an account of seeing a "zapruder-type" film which was shown to them - each for different reasons.
I post a direct quote/post from one of those who did.... and I believe youtube has content from 1 or more of the others...

The descriptions here relate very well to an "unaltered" version of the Z-film given the specific items seen which are not on the extant version.

You'll have to excuse Mr. Walton and his penchant for posting pure opinion when asked for facts... and for arguing the opposite of something, anything, despite not fully grasping or even referring to the lengthy analysis done to date....   the late Rich Dellarosa was one...  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wRhcQI4tFTI

You'll find a batch of good videos to watch related to this other film and the general knowledge of what occurred.
Search this forum and you will find some amazing advances in our understanding of what the FBI did to FUBAR the survey and description of the situation...

The Evidence will only show you what occurred within the Conspiracy.... what actually happened - as you say - is a 1000 piece puzzle of which we only have 750 pieces, many of which are not even from this puzzle....  make seeing a picture very difficult.

Something worth knowing and many forget, is that Jaggers-Chiles-Stovall, Inc, where Oswald worked a short time, was a highly competent photographic facility...  And you'd never believe how close it was to FBI HQ on ERVAY & MAIN.

Although most of its contracts were with commercial businesses and advertising agencies, it also had contracts with the military.  It handled super-secret projects for the Navy Bureau Materiel and the Army Mapping Service. [14] It set the type that would be used to label the landmarks of strategic maps of foreign countries, including coastlines, sea bottoms, and bds. According to George Carter, a reporter for the Dallas Times Herald, JCS was the one that did the maps of Cuba and Oswald was one of the employees that worked on them. This is confirmed by the timecards, which show that he had in fact participated in the work on these secret projects. On October 16, four days after he was hired, he did a camera job for the Army Mapping Service (AMS). This would have been at the very height of the Cuban Missile Crisis. If the timecards can be trusted on this point, Oswald did fifteen more camera jobs for A M S throughout his employment at the company.

In the film that I saw the limo came into view on Houston Street and the entire turn onto Elm was visible. There was no "splice" or point where the limo suddenly
appeared on Elm out of nowhere. The limo made an extremely wide turn onto Elm and was moving very slowly at the corner. The limo "drifted" to the left of center
(driver's POV) on Elm St. I don't recall if it actually made a complete lane change or if it was simply "pointed" more or less "left of center" -- My best recollection
is that it was partially in the left lane and partially in the center lane by the time it reached the steps leading up the Grassy Knoll next to the so-called Zapruder
pedestal. Similar to what is seen in the extant film, JFK had been hit at least once by the time the limo emerged from behind the Stemmon's sign, elbows raised
up, his torso apparently frozen, his "protection" inexplicably absent...a sitting duck.

There is absolutely no question as to whether or not the limo came to a complete and FULL stop. The car stopped. Completely. No motion whatsoever. The limo
remained motionless for approximately 2 seconds. I'm surprised the Queen Mary didn't rear-end it. The head shot most obviously came from the right front. A
detail that is missing from the motion of JFK in the extant film has to do with the difference between: "back and to the left" --and--"up, then fall to the left".
My recollection is that he was "lifted up" from his seat to a discernible degree before falling to his left. This "body motion" appeared to be much slower than the jerky,
abrupt, "snap" seen in the extant film.

Rich had a few items that I didn't recall and vice versa. For instance, unlike what Rich reported, I don't recall a shot from behind that caused JFK's head to move forward
initially just before the fatal head shot from the front. That doesn't mean it didn't happen. I just may not have registered that for whatever reason. I also recall that
several Secret Service Agents climbed out of the Queen Mary with (what appeared to be) automatic weapons drawn apparently looking to return fire. They appeared to
be very disoriented. Then they climbed back in and sped off. There was a considerable gap between the time the X-100 sped off and the Queen Mary sped off. Rich
did not recall the agents climbing out of the limo.

So how did the High School dropout to join the Marines returned Russian defector get such a technical job with a firm producing secret blow ups of photographs taken by the government for the government?  Seems it would have been a Red Flag to prevent him from doing such if the intelligence community was doing it's job.  Unless they got him the job.

[Joe Bauer]

2 hours ago, Jamey Flanagan said:

So, let me ask you this Michael Walton, and not condescendingly but really wanting to know. Is it of your opinion that the current Zapruder film has not been doctored in any way other than the "Oops, we accidentally damaged the film in these spots"? And if that is your honest opinion then we must assume that you think Zapruder was either lying or "misremembering" when he said he started filming and never stopped and started back. And that you believe there are no limo stops whatsoever unless you count a very slight, almost imperceptible breaking. And Greer turns his head back twice in the span of an eighteenth of a second or possible twice that time. Am I correct so far? If you are questionable about any of that and the film has been doctored in any way and for any reason then why wouldn't it be a reasonable leap of logic to question anything and everything about the film? So much of what is seen in the film has NEVER been described by eyewitness accounts. I have yet to hear an eyewitness describe the violent backwards head snap seen on film. That would be kind of hard to miss. And the fact that the spray of blood and brains from the fatal headshot (or headshots if you ascribe to the two shot there from behind and then a frontal) dissipates in record time. What is it seen for? One frame? Two? Enough brain matter and blood to splatter Jackie and the rear motorcycle officer? Just curious as to your thoughts on those issues?

There is absolutely no argument against JFK's limo driver Greer turning his head "180 degrees" behind him  ( twice! ) just after the second shot that supposedly hit JFK in the back and John Connally as well. And there is even a brief holding it there by Greer visible.

You can see this so clearly in the Z film it's a mute point.

Try doing this yourself..and count the seconds it takes to turn your head all the way around and then back like that. At least one second.

And if I was ever driving a moving car and turned my shoulders and head a full 180 degrees around like Greer did ( not a quick 90 degree turn to maybe see merging traffic )  I am instinctively going to either ease my foot off the accelerator or totally pull it back and maybe even move my gas pedal foot to the break one as a precautionary move.

The limo was supposedly going only 11 MPH before Greer turns so fully back.

Just "easing off the accelerator" would slow down the car to less than 11 MPH. I believe Greer even touched his breaks when he turned around. There is photo evidence of the limo's break lights going on at that precise moment of Greer's action.

Edited February 14, 2018 by Joe Bauer

[Chris Bristow]

What bugs me is how the motor cops all surged forward towards the limo when it only slowed by 3 or 4 mph. They were tasked with keeping pace with the limo and had previous experience. How does an experienced rider get caught so off guard?. In fact all four of them move forward in the nix film. The follow up 'Beast' kept correct distance and the motor cops were right next to it. I can't see how they all missed the limo slowing down. I believe it could be because they were actually reacting to the limo slamming on the brakes. That part was removed and so now their move forward makes no sense.
Finally i will repeat again that John Costella's pincushion  theory about the Stemmons sign is the strongest proof that the film has fakery in it. The only counter theory floated in the 10 years since it was proposed is that a leaning pole will appear to swing as you pan and change your perspective. The problem with the theory is a pole that leans away swings in the wrong direction to account for Costella's observations. Only a pole leaning towards Zapruder would have produced the swing needed to explain what Costella observed. Secondly I put up a pole with the correct lean and from the correct angle and at 50 feet from the pole. I had to walk 11 feet to make the pole swing 2 degrees!. Zapruder only panned his camera 6 inches or so!!! 
Look at frames that have not been corrected for pincushion distortion, like the version available at Lightbox, and you find  the poles in frames 193 and 228 (Same frames as Costella's pincushion corrected comparison)  are parallel! The distortion should bend each pole inward almost one full degree. You should see about a 2 degree difference in the same pole from 193 to 228. No one has been able to explain this easily measurable anomaly. It is not some wild theory that requires faith in the person proposing it. It is not some cryptic accusation based on a questionable understanding of perspective or optics. This is a simple, measurable and straightforward observation with no good explanation.
Pincushion distortion is something many have a vague understanding of and maybe that is why this theory falls by the wayside.
 It really only has a couple of rules to it and knowing them should allow anyone to figure out why a rectangle frame changes to a pincushion shape. First rule is that the distortion displaces images or pixels directly outward from the optical center.(This means if you draw a line from the center of the frame, through the pixel in question and beyond, you find the direction of displacement.) Second rule is the farther from the center the pixel lies, the more displacement it undergoes). 
The bottom of the Stemmons pole is farther from the center and so is displaced outwards more than the top. That is what causes the leaning effect. The entire pole is displaced outwards but the bottom is  displaced more. 
The pincushion problem does not deal with obscure hard to comprehend concepts. I think anyone who takes a little time to see how pincushion works will find Dr Costella's theory highly credible. 

Edited February 14, 2018 by Chris Bristow

[Chris Scally]

Jamey:

I have neither the time nor the inclination to get involved in the age-old dispute over the authenticity of the Zapruder film, but I am very interested in your comment about how one "could also use information from other assassination films and photographs such as the Nix film and others which have also been altered" when studying the Zapruder film. Any information - supported by authentic documentation and/or photo evidence, if possible  - that you can provide to establish either the current whereabouts of the camera-original Nix film or that it has been altered, would be most helpful to current on-going research.

Any assistance will be very much appreciated, please.

Chris.

 

 

[David Josephs]

10 hours ago, Joe Bauer said:

There is absolutely no argument against JFK's limo driver Greer turning his head "180 degrees" behind him  ( twice! ) just after the second shot that supposedly hit JFK in the back and John Connally as well. And there is even a brief holding it there by Greer visible.

You can see this so clearly in the Z film it's a mute point.

Try doing this yourself..and count the seconds it takes to turn your head all the way around and then back like that. At least one second.

And if I was ever driving a moving car and turned my shoulders and head a full 180 degrees around like Greer did ( not a quick 90 degree turn to maybe see merging traffic )  I am instinctively going to either ease my foot off the accelerator or totally pull it back and maybe even move my gas pedal foot to the break one as a precautionary move.

The limo was supposedly going only 11 MPH before Greer turns so fully back.

Just "easing off the accelerator" would slow down the car to less than 11 MPH. I believe Greer even touched his breaks when he turned around. There is photo evidence of the limo's break lights going on at that precise moment of Greer's action.

Two things to follow your quality post and observations...

The experiments were done with college athletes with notice, to turn their heads... And they couldn't do it in the 2 FRAMES allowed by Greer's 2 examples.

2nd, and I've mentioned this before as it gets overlooked a lot....  The speed Hill would need to run and the time needed to catch a 10mph limo from his position, and the reality of the 3 to 4 steps we see him take bridging the gap....

He'd need to hit the ground running at 15 or more mph.... Yet if the limo was only going 2 to 3mph... It makes sense.

I have imagery to support this but not accessible right this sec.

[Steve Thomas]

11 hours ago, Ron Bulman said:

So how did the High School dropout to join the Marines returned Russian defector get such a technical job with a firm producing secret blow ups of photographs taken by the government for the government?  Seems it would have been a Red Flag to prevent him from doing such if the intelligence community was doing it's job.  Unless they got him the job.

Ron,

 

This is just going by memory here, but some of those photos were taken by U-2 spy planes.

Guess who had a background as a radar operator working with U-2's in Japan?

 

Steve Thomas

[Steve Thomas]

I forgot to mention that some of those maps were also Russian language maps.

Guess who had a working knowledge of Russian, having recently returning from Russia?

 

 

Steve Thomas

[Jamey Flanagan]

Excellent observations David Josephs! In both of your posts! And some of the anomalies in the film and photographic "evidence" make it all too apparent that they were tampered with. If you look at Clint Hill's right wrist and hand I think it was as he's climbing on the limo, or reaching for it to climb on, his wrist and hand are abnormally long. Not even getting into the "prayer man" or "Oswald in the doorway" debate there are SO many oddities and abnormalities in Altgens 6. People with oversized features or inhumanly big heads, the strange looking baby, and various misplaced looking people and objects that were possibly put in place to hide something or someone they didn't want to be seen. You have people in Zapruder looking ahead after the limo has passed them as if they are there to see the follow up car 😂😂😂 Moorman not in the street taking her famous pic. I could go on all day.

[Steve Thomas]

William Reymond talks about seeing a different version of the Zapruder film.

He says he talked to the owner of the film, H.L. Hunt. Hunt supposedly bought it from Zapruder.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hSdyqDBTpeo

 

Steve Thomas