Operation on the Knoll - Theory

[Craig Lamson]

Let's continue here, starting with the Moorman 5.

I have over 30 different files with the name Moorman - all are very different creatures.  It's difficult to use this photo with any real confidence, as it has seen progressive alteration and changes - IMO.

However, at a minimum, we can see some of the operatives in this area, who have been wiped clean from the record - save for the testimony of Emmett Hudson, the Lifton interview with James Altgens, and the account of Charles Roberts.  It's my intention to gather additional information from those witnesses which are still living, and would have had a clear view of this area, but that's been a tough climb.  I would again ask that anyone with contact info for any known witnesses in this area use your own relationships, or feel free to contact me via email with contact info.

Again - I would like to focus on the area of the stairs and in front of the picket fence - behind the fence and behind the retaining wall can wait.  The 'shot' from behind the fence may well have been purely a diversionary tactic, coupled with the use of a silencer from the area of the stairs - theory only.

Let's start with a high quality Moorman which I snagged from a forum.  The insets are from the same area. 

The first is simply an enlargement and enhancement.

The second is the famous 'Moorman with Zippo.'

The third is the UPI version, which was published in the Dallas Times Herald.

I do not have a very good version of the one broadcast - NBC?  I have tried to get the Dallas Morning News version, but need a higher quality version to work with.

I will perform a similar enhancement using a variety of other Moorman 5s.

Worth noting - as IMO the films and photos have all undergone extensive alteration, 'the earlier the better' is my motto.  That same logic applies to the Zapruder film - IMO.

The insets at the left are enlarged and enhanced sections taken from the area of the tree.

Following a few more Moorman examples, we'll move on. 

- lee

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Mr. Forman, could you please explain the the processing you are using on these images?

[Robin Unger]

Hi Robin.

Interesting photo,recently i found this guy to the left of your figure.

kind regards jim.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Jim.

Does your image show a mans face and shoulders, with leaves hiding his face.

Do you have the original image from which this photo was cropped.

Hi Shanet.

Yes, i beleive that Moorman was re-touched, there are just too many area's that look like they have been done with a photoshop clone brush, re-placing one part of an image with a different backround of the same photo.

[Lee Forman]

Mr. Forman, could you please explain the the processing you are using on these images?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Craig,

Call me 'Lee.'

I use a variety of techniques, and many times a combination of programs, but I can give you an example. To penetrate the tint, for example, using ArcSoft PhotoImpression 2000 on a Muchmore frame:

a. I take an image, and first use an equilization feature.

b. Then I remove saturation.

c. Following this, I place the image into a negative mode.

d. Focusing on the target area, I adjust the tone in the photo, focusing primarily on the midtones.

e. Then I reverse the negative. Again, I adjust the tone - mainly the midtones, but I play around with the highlight and shadow if it buys me anything.

f. Then I apply blur, which is required when working with JPEGs, due to the 'blockiness' which comes as a result of the compression.

Here's a Muchmore frame as an example, using the steps above. The 'cameramen' were plainly set up on the stairs. They were removed from the official record. More on why at another time.

Adobe photoshop is much more powerful, however, and I go through a different routine. Usually I use Adobe for the first few steps, then hand it off to PhotoImpression. I've worked with an interpolator program also, but the files get too large to work with - one reason I just upgraded to a new machine.

If I could lay my hands on original film stock - I wouldn't bother with most of these steps, I'd spend more time on calibrating the scanner.

- lee

[Lee Forman]

Hi  Shanet.

Yes, i  beleive that  Moorman was re-touched, there are just too many area's that look like they have been done with a photoshop clone brush, re-placing one part of an image with a different backround of the same photo.

I'd agree with you Robin - 100%.

BTW - I did a bit on that individual you pointed out - have to find the files. What I saw was a man with a military type pointed hat and camera. I thought it may be Gordon Arnold at first - but I was corrected - wrong location.

I still wonder about whether or not his story was true - but that's for another time. He certainly would have bumbled right into the thick of things, if he is one of the cameramen I have seen.

I thought perhaps it was the same individual as seen in this animation - but I really don't know.

- lee

[Guest Eugene B. Connolly]

Hi EBC,point taken however my Erratic/Disjointed post my be influenced by my Dyslexia,apologies but it happends to the best of us.

For future reference i don't go on Benders or have Raw nerves in fact nothing you  say will touch/hurt or offend me.

If in the future you again have a problem with somebodys punctuation not being up to your own standard it may be kinder to personally mail them instead of using a thread to voice your thoughts.

Kindest regards

jim.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

No problem, Jim.

I was not trying to touch/hurt or offend you.

No offence intended, Jim.

With every best wish,

Gene

[Jim Hamilton]

Jim.

Does your image show a mans face and shoulders, with leaves hiding his face.

Do you have the original image from which this photo was cropped.

Hi Robin,it appears to me to be that of a mans face/shoulders however as discussed before my version my have been touched up.

Having said that(i cannot locate my Moorman source at this time)it was taken from another post which had in turn been scanned from a book.

kind regards jim.

[Craig Lamson]

Mr. Forman, could you please explain the the processing you are using on these images?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Craig,

Call me 'Lee.'

I use a variety of techniques, and many times a combination of programs, but I can give you an example. To penetrate the tint, for example, using ArcSoft PhotoImpression 2000 on a Muchmore frame:

a. I take an image, and first use an equilization feature.

b. Then I remove saturation.

c. Following this, I place the image into a negative mode.

d. Focusing on the target area, I adjust the tone in the photo, focusing primarily on the midtones.

e. Then I reverse the negative. Again, I adjust the tone - mainly the midtones, but I play around with the highlight and shadow if it buys me anything.

f. Then I apply blur, which is required when working with JPEGs, due to the 'blockiness' which comes as a result of the compression.

Here's a Muchmore frame as an example, using the steps above. The 'cameramen' were plainly set up on the stairs. They were removed from the official record. More on why at another time.

Adobe photoshop is much more powerful, however, and I go through a different routine. Usually I use Adobe for the first few steps, then hand it off to PhotoImpression. I've worked with an interpolator program also, but the files get too large to work with - one reason I just upgraded to a new machine.

If I could lay my hands on original film stock - I wouldn't bother with most of these steps, I'd spend more time on calibrating the scanner.

- lee

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Thanks Lee for your explaination. But with all due respect, doing this kind of work with webs jpg's amd scans from books with a halftone screen, is IMO fruitless. The artifact left behind by jpg compression, let alone the original image processing by whom ever made the scan in the first place, destroy any chance of finding additional information in these images.

I have posted on my web photo gallery a crop of the Thompson Moorman. The image I have posted is from the drum scan we had made of the copy negative. It is posted exactly as it came off the drum scanner, with no levels or curves adjustment nor any sharpening. The negative was scanned to film grain level and its a 137mb 8 bit tiff file. The crop I am posting has been saved from the original tif as a png file, which is a lossless compression format. There are no artifacts in this file. To save this file to your system from my web gallery, do a copy on the full image, create a new document in photoshop and paste the copy into this new doc.

Give this a try and see what you come up with.

http://www.pbase.com/infocusinc/image/40804897

I'm only going to leave this image up for a few days, so if you want it, please get it soon.

[Robin Unger]

Mr. Forman, could you please explain the the processing you are using on these images?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Craig,

Call me 'Lee.'

I use a variety of techniques, and many times a combination of programs, but I can give you an example. To penetrate the tint, for example, using ArcSoft PhotoImpression 2000 on a Muchmore frame:

a. I take an image, and first use an equilization feature.

b. Then I remove saturation.

c. Following this, I place the image into a negative mode.

d. Focusing on the target area, I adjust the tone in the photo, focusing primarily on the midtones.

e. Then I reverse the negative. Again, I adjust the tone - mainly the midtones, but I play around with the highlight and shadow if it buys me anything.

f. Then I apply blur, which is required when working with JPEGs, due to the 'blockiness' which comes as a result of the compression.

Here's a Muchmore frame as an example, using the steps above. The 'cameramen' were plainly set up on the stairs. They were removed from the official record. More on why at another time.

Adobe photoshop is much more powerful, however, and I go through a different routine. Usually I use Adobe for the first few steps, then hand it off to PhotoImpression. I've worked with an interpolator program also, but the files get too large to work with - one reason I just upgraded to a new machine.

If I could lay my hands on original film stock - I wouldn't bother with most of these steps, I'd spend more time on calibrating the scanner.

- lee

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Thanks Lee for your explaination. But with all due respect, doing this kind of work with webs jpg's amd scans from books with a halftone screen, is IMO fruitless. The artifact left behind by jpg compression, let alone the original image processing by whom ever made the scan in the first place, destroy any chance of finding additional information in these images.

I have posted on my web photo gallery a crop of the Thompson Moorman. The image I have posted is from the drum scan we had made of the copy negative. It is posted exactly as it came off the drum scanner, with no levels or curves adjustment nor any sharpening. The negative was scanned to film grain level and its a 137mb 8 bit tiff file. The crop I am posting has been saved from the original tif as a png file, which is a lossless compression format. There are no artifacts in this file. To save this file to your system from my web gallery, do a copy on the full image, create a new document in photoshop and paste the copy into this new doc.

Give this a try and see what you come up with.

http://www.pbase.com/infocusinc/image/40804897

I'm only going to leave this image up for a few days, so if you want it, please get it soon.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Thanks Craig.

Exellent enlargement of Moorman 5 now i will have a good look at it.

I left a message in your guestbook.

[Lee Forman]

Thanks Lee for your explaination. But with all due respect, doing this kind of work with webs jpg's amd scans from books with a halftone screen, is IMO fruitless. The artifact left behind by jpg compression, let alone the original image processing by whom ever made the scan in the first place, destroy any chance of finding additional information in these images.

I have posted on my web photo gallery a crop of the Thompson Moorman. The image I have posted is from the drum scan we had made of the copy negative. It is posted exactly as it came off the drum scanner, with no levels or curves adjustment nor any sharpening. The negative was scanned to film grain level and its a 137mb 8 bit tiff file. The crop I am posting has been saved from the original tif as a png file, which is a lossless compression format. There are no artifacts in this file. To save this file to your system from my web gallery, do a copy on the full image, create a new document in photoshop and paste the copy into this new doc.

Give this a try and see what you come up with.

http://www.pbase.com/infocusinc/image/40804897

I'm only going to leave this image up for a few days, so if you want it, please get it soon.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Thanks Craig,

I will give it a whirl. Your observations are correct - however I work very hard to get my hands on the highest quality material available. I don't do many book scans. As to the internet images - agreed 100%. Part of the trouble is in locating original negatives so that I could do my own scans - they appear to be lost, under wraps, or unavailable. The majority of my files are from other Researchers, DVD splits, Forums, and internet last.

In terms of being fruitless - in a court of law, agreed. Princeton University informed me that my work would not hold water unless it was from original film stock [and with a 3rd party independent auditing firm confirming the process and witnessing the transfer?]. However, it is actually quite useful. If I find an object that appears to be a man wearing a tight-fitting, light colored sea cap holding a camera in Muchmore, and I can find him in almost the exact location in Nix, Moorman and Bell, for example - it's enough for me to deduce that the individual was in fact present on 11/22/63, but was concealed. It's also proved very useful in tracking movements, locations and roles, and creating 'best guesstimates' as to numbers of individuals involved.

Another point worth mentioning - the timeframe in which a scan was performed is very significant. Your Moorman, IMO, would be a later generation - as it is markedly different than the scan I use [which also came from the 'original'], and from the UPI Dallas Herald Newspaper version. I have remarked before that 'Red Shirt' man in the earlier versions of the Moorman is focusing on the object in his hands, as opposed the Motorcade. Later generations have him looking less suspicious.

However IMO the Moorman is about as useful as the Zapruder film - it has data, and it has spurious nonsense. Figuring out the difference isn't easy, which is why I try to shoot for multiple mediums, whenever possible, for some level of consistency and validation.

- lee

[Lee Forman]

Robin.

Did you ever work on this puzzle? From the righthand side of Moorman 5, which originally was cropped out of the UPI release. What I came up with was that someone was removed from this area [due to the man's face in the background being obscured], or that the motorcycle cop's head has been 'repaired.' Perhaps they didn't want 2 cops looking in the direction of the Knoll? No clue really - I'd like to know what you think?

If that's supposed to be Bill Newman, what happened to his left arm, and to his face? In the thumbprint Moorman it seems as if it's been smoothed out/repaired.

- lee

[Shanet Clark]

Robin, once again NIX versus MOORMAN.

Edited March 14, 2005 by Shanet Clark

[Lee Forman]

Enhanced version, saturation removed, contrast and tone adjusted, noise added at 10%, gaussian blur at 1 pixel. Comparison is crop from 'Moorman with Thumprint' -- no enhancement. Sorry if it comes out really small.

I believe I was told before that this is Bill Newman. Bill Newman appears to have on a patterned shirt, and his sleeves aren't rolled up - as per Cancellare, for example.

- lee

[Robin Unger]

Enhanced version, saturation removed, contrast and tone adjusted, noise added at 10%, gaussian blur at 1 pixel.  Comparison is crop from 'Moorman with Thumprint' -- no enhancement.  Sorry if it comes out really small.

I believe I was told before that this is Bill Newman.  Bill Newman appears to have on a patterned shirt, and his sleeves aren't rolled up - as per Cancellare, for example.

- lee

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Edited March 18, 2005 by Robin Unger

[Guest Eugene B. Connolly]

Lee,

I was very impressed by your piece on the Graphics processes

and software you use on the photographs which are certainly yielding results.

May I recommend a few Graphics programmes you could try?

Have you heard of a programme called 'The Gimp'?

The Gimp or simply Gimp is an open source piece of

software and is totally free.

Some say it's even better than PhotoShop.

You can download The Gimp Version 1.2.5 and

the file gtk+-1.3.0-20030717-setup-1

at:

http://www.gimp.org

Gimp has its own set of filters - some not found in PhotoShop.

Also you can download a little Gimp addon pspi.exe this allows you

to use PhotoShop plugin filters in The Gimp. although I have been unable

to get this to work.

If you install Gimp make sure your screen resolution is set correctly.

True Color (24 bit) at Screen 800 x 600 pixels works for me.

Another one you could try is Bworks under Digital Camera Tools at:

http://www.mediachance.com.

There are a few other tools at this site too which are very good.

This too is free and gives amazing results.I have used both programmes on

the Willis BDM and Moorman Badgeman photos and have got great results.

Both programmes run on windows.

EBC

Edited March 15, 2005 by Eugene B. Connolly

[Robin Unger]

Robin, once again NIX versus MOORMAN.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Hi Shanet.

This is a " tight crop " of the Large Moorman image prvided by Craig Lamson.