Trying to Understand this Bronson Frame

[Tony Krome]

36 minutes ago, John Butler said:

Tony,

That is a neat observation.  Do you think they are the Hesters.  I noticed you place Hesters in quotation marks.

You have outlined yourself how their statements are inaccurate. I'd say those statements adopted the name Hester

[Chris Davidson]

6 hours ago, Chris Davidson said:

[John Butler]

Thanks Chris,

I have this photo but couldn't find it.  I really should spend time organizing files.

Is this a colorized version of a black and white?  Who was the photographer?

The following notions have always bothered me about this photo and others showing the Newmans.

 

Edited January 27, 2019 by John Butler

[David G. Healy]

19 hours ago, Chris Davidson said:

well now, that is certainly fascinating...

[John Butler]

Before the prior scene showing the Newmans laying in the grass that I posted we have this:

[Chris Davidson]

5 hours ago, John Butler said:

Thanks Chris,

I have this photo but couldn't find it.  I really should spend time organizing files.

Is this a colorized version of a black and white?  Who was the photographer?

The following notions have always bothered me about this photo and others showing the Newmans.

 

No, the camera cars have not left the area.

They are approaching Wiegman (red box) who films the inset(lower right corner).

I suggest watching the Couch film which includes Wiegman's partial run down the grassy knoll if you want to see the other camera cars(and cycle cop movement) as they start/move down Elm before Wiegman films the inset.

[John Butler]

I believe I did make a mistake on the name of this group of motorbike cops.  I meant to say the Mid Motorcycle Policemen.  This group followed the 3 Camera Cars.  Instead I wrote Mid Forward Motorcycles Policemen which is neither Forward Mid Motorcycle Policemen or Mid Motorcycle Policemen. 

The small insert showing a motorcycle policeman is from 38 seconds into the Wiegman film and is probably a Forward Mid Motorcycle cop that proceeded the 3 camera cars but, maybe not.  The Mid Motorcycle Policemen came after the Camera Cars.

This is from Couch and shows the Forward Mid Motorcycle Policemen.  Notice that there is no motorbike cops on the passenger side of the Camera Car #1 as shown in the insert.  They sped out of the area as the Camera Cars stopped on Elm street and unloaded photographers and took on board others.  Notice there are no Camera Car photographers on the slope of the Grassy Knoll.

And, this next frame is also from Couch showing the Camera Cars stopped on Elm Street loading and unloading photographers.

From these scenes we can conclude that the Motorcycle Policemen show earlier are the Mid Motorcycle Policemen if you will excuse my error of Mid Forward Motorcycle Policemen.

 

[Chris Davidson]

39 minutes ago, John Butler said:

This is from Couch and shows the Forward Mid Motorcycle Policemen.  Notice that there is no motorbike cops on the passenger side of the Camera Car #1 as shown in the insert.  They sped out of the area as the Camera Cars stopped on Elm street and unloaded photographers and took on board others.  Notice there are no Camera Car photographers on the slope of the Grassy Knoll.

 

 

That's because the previous inset shows the same cycle cop in Couch, after he somewhat traverses the camera cars in Couch.

This occurs while Wiegman (a camera car photographer shown in Couch) runs down the slope.

 

 

[John Butler]

The man running down the hill does not appear to be Wiegman but, someone else.  Wiegman is standing by the Newmans when he films the approaching Cameras Cars that more or less equals 38 seconds into the Wiegman film and corresponds to 9 seconds into the Couch film.

However, the man running down the hill is viewed at 12 seconds passing the Newmans on the ground and there is no sign of Wiegman.  The following gif is directly after the tiny blurred image of the man running down the hill is seen.  In this gif are camera men still in the Camera Car at 13 seconds into the film and still no sign of Wiegman.

This means you cannot use the man running down the hill to time the differences between the timing of the Couch film and the Wiegman film.

 

[Chris Davidson]

4 hours ago, John Butler said:

The man running down the hill does not appear to be Wiegman but, someone else.  Wiegman is standing by the Newmans when he films the approaching Cameras Cars that more or less equals 38 seconds into the Wiegman film and corresponds to 9 seconds into the Couch film.

Who do you think has to run down the knoll in Couch before he can film the Newmans and the approaching camera cars at the bottom?

However, the man running down the hill is viewed at 12 seconds passing the Newmans on the ground and there is no sign of Wiegman.

Wiegman in Couch doesn't quite reach the Newmans before the Couch film ends.

The following gif is directly after the tiny blurred image of the man running down the hill is seen.  In this gif are camera men still in the Camera Car at 13 seconds into the film and still no sign of Wiegman.

Does Wiegman have to run to his car before he can enter his car?

Who do you think that is with the car door open?

Your answer to the above questions might help you identify Wiegman's timeline in previous media.     i.e. Couch

This means you cannot use the man running down the hill to time the differences between the timing of the Couch film and the Wiegman film.

I pointed out the sync between Bell and Wiegman using the common Hester footage.

I've also located Wiegman repeatedly for you.

Why you don't understand that Wiegman is running down the knoll in Couch is beyond me.

Ask someone else, maybe they can help you.

 

 

 

 

Answers in red.

[David Josephs]

19 hours ago, David G. Healy said:

well now, that is certainly fascinating...

Two parents, two kids both dressed in red....

Chris is not saying the are the same people....  so what’s the fascination Dave?

btw, nice to see you on here again...

[John Butler]

Thanks Chris,

You have put me back on the trail with your analysis of Weigman several times.  I think I get it.  Wiegman leaves the area of the Newmans for the Camera cars at about 10 or 11 seconds in Couch.  And is seen in your photos by the Camera Cars.  Then the man running down the hill passes the Newmans at about 13-14 seconds.  That explains why Weigman is capturing the Camera Cars at 38 seconds and in Couch at 9 seconds the scenes correlates with Weigman.  And, this is why the running man passes the Newman's at 13 seconds of the Couch film.  Wiegman has a hat on the running man does not have a hat.  The two are not the same.  This timeline is awful tight.

A key element of the scene is that Altgens is in the grass close to and almost behind the Newmans.  In the Running Man frames Altgens is on the sidewalk.  To travel from one spot to the other is a matter of seconds.  Still, this timeline I am proposing is very tight. 

As far as Weigman running down the hill the Couch film doesn't really give a good indication of that.  The images are too small and blurry.  You can see some person running down the hill.  I will take another look at Bell.  It's Wiegman if he has a hat on or that should be what is checked with these small blurry images. 

BTW, the scene of Weigman and the Camera Car seems to be a cropped photo.  I almost recognize it.  Can you say whose photo that is?  

[Michael Cross]

2 hours ago, David Josephs said:

Two parents, two kids both dressed in red....

Chris is not saying the are the same people....  so what’s the fascination Dave?

btw, nice to see you on here again...

Not to speak for Dave, but they seem to move with the car albeit not perfectly - I wondered if it's an alteration error.

[Lewis Reynolds]

18 minutes ago, Michael Cross said:

Not to speak for Dave, but they seem to move with the car albeit not perfectly - I wondered if it's an alteration error.

From what i can see its two parents with two children (both in red). In the first frame the right hand side child is visible with mum. The other is hidden by the car.

In he second frame the left hand side child is visible with dad, and the right hand side child is hidden by people.

[John Butler]

Chris' gif has just two jpegs so there is no error in its operation.  There may be alteration in the film but, I can't detect that.  The only thing I question is both children wearing red.  The color in these old films are simplistic and any colorized version of a frame may have it wrong.  It seems in other place the children have different color clothes but, I will have to check on that.  I am not a techo geek so I wouldn't know.  I mostly work with content not technical matters. 

Chris has covered several areas where I have gone wrong.