Chris Davidson

Duncan, Hard to tell. Not a lot of movement. It's approx 16 frames. I stabilized your figure and this is what I get. Also, perhaps you/others can see the movement of the shadow within the shelter a little better. By the way, Abe was bald the last time I checked. Need a hat on his head or a bald head for Z. chris

Chris, An interesting figure. He seems to be crouching down & looking over toward the fence. Younger man, no hat. Possible object in right hand. Wonder what time elapse is since Z-313? Thanks Miles, I agree. It's pretty clear this gentleman has a full set of hair. No hat, young man does not equal Zapruder. Maybe it's SA Lem Johns. I know how camera shy he was. chris

The animation is from the Marc Bell movie. Please watch the light opening within the pergola shelter. Somebody obscurs that opening as they walk by. The last frame stops to show you his placement. The photo is that last frame enlarged. This gentleman appears a little taller than Mr.Hester, using the height of the light opening within the shelter as a measuring tool. It's not Abe. chris

Jack, Thanks for sending that to John. Since John ran a vector analysis on those previous frames, I guess we could treat the CURB as a vector. Watch the shadow angle of Altgen's feet, change on the curb. With the camera movement involved between these two frames, why doesn't the CURB move in accordance? As John stated, I too believe the background and foreground are on different layers. chris

Next post if you may.

Chris you don't have anywhere near the camera movement during exposure as the z film. What was your shutter speed in your test? Now go back and look at the zframes again and compare the highlight in front of Jackies face in the two frames. It makes the same angle change as the curb stripe. Everything blurs to the same extent and changes angles just like the curb. Its motion blur. Craig, A composite of the Zframes. Red lines indicating the angle formed by curb joint. Also shows angle Jackie's white gloves form near her face, and camera movement between the two frames. A composite of the camera movement in my film. (7 frames) I shot my curb sequence with a digital Sony DSC-W1. In movie mode at 30FPS. Shutter speed set at NR30. Which is noise reduction at 30 seconds. Any shutter speed slower than 1/6 second has the NR setting for automatic slow shutter function. chris

7 consecutive frames from a movie. Motion blur among them. Far more movement than the 2 consecutive Z frames. No angle change in this expansion joint. chris

Thanks Jack, Background and foreground separated. chris

Can the joint of a curb change angles in one frame, if at all? Or, is this a result of multiple layers? Do the legs in the background sync with the angle movement of the joint? Was the exclusion of frame 341 by MPI, intentional or an honest mistake? thanks chris P.S. A Reposted response from a Tom Purvis topic.

Chris; This too has always given me problems. Especially since it is virtually in the exact vicinity of where the third shot was. http://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z341.jpg Tom, I think the problem first arises from MPI mislabeling frame 342 as 341, and then forgets to include 341? Just another coincidence. But wait, there is something about the curb that doesn't seem right. When we put in a somewhat discernable frame 341, and take a look at the crack in the curb, it appears to change angles. How can that be? I've got it, he changed camera angles in 1/18 of a second. Is the "jig" up???? thanks chris crack in the curb CONSTRUCTION JOINTS! Generally at regular intervals/distances and represent the beginning and/or ending point of the form which holds a monolithic/single pouring of concrete forming the concrete curb and concrete gutter portion of the street prior to any asphalt or concrete pavement being poured for the street itself. Poured in these often 8' to 10' lengths for ease of construction as well as to prevent shrinkage cracking of the concrete. And although most succeeding joints are normally poured with concrete abutting concrete, at given intervals, what is referred to as an "expansion joint" is included into the pouring. Expansion Joint!!! I guess a little better description in the construction trade than "crack in the curb". Possibly a crack in my brain, also. Thanks Tom. I took the liberty of filming an expansion joint on a normal street. I chose two frames that were about 5 frames apart, to show a little camera movement. chris

Chris; This too has always given me problems. Especially since it is virtually in the exact vicinity of where the third shot was. http://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z341.jpg Tom, I think the problem first arises from MPI mislabeling frame 342 as 341, and then forgets to include 341? Just another coincidence. But wait, there is something about the curb that doesn't seem right. When we put in a somewhat discernable frame 341, and take a look at the crack in the curb, it appears to change angles. How can that be? I've got it, he changed camera angles in 1/18 of a second. Is the "jig" up???? thanks chris

Thanks Tom, I think your first few sentences are pretty clear. chris

Tom, In previous posts, you pointed out the shot near Altgen's, but never made reference to a specific frame if I remember corrrectly. At some point I responded with a 3 picture series from the Zfilm near Altgens, pointing out a specific frame with a red circle/halo and what appears to be some type of scratch/residue within the halo. Could this be some type of designation on the film representing/showing the flesh particles? Or just a film anomaly? Coincidence/No Coincidence thanks chris

This composite is a frame from the Malcolm Couch movie layed over Moorman. If the pergola and wall line up between the two photos (red arrows), not the pergola openings per say, shouldn't the limo be at the same angle as the curb line? thanks chris

Tom, CE875 excerpt: "no picture was taken at 5+00 mark as this was about 4 feet from impact of the third shot" If they didn't take any pictures or make any stops at 4+96, they sure did come close. imo Notice the amount of car stops between approx 313 and Altgen's. chris Chris; For the SS work, Mr. West initially established the stationing/footage numbers for Elm St. as well as the elevation control. Then, during the re-enactment, the SS stopped the vehicle at each of the 25 foot marks which Mr. West had established. (these are the small "+" marks on the survey plat, located in the center of the street). Photo's were taken at each of the 25 foot marks, as well as the impact points for each of the three shots fired. However, since the last shot was so close (within 4 to 5 feet) of the 5+00 stationing, there was no photo taken at this position. If you will look, the portion of the larger WC survey plat which is posted and demonstrates Z255 also has these "+" marks as well, each of which represents 25 feet of separation from one to the next. This goes back to exactly how Mr. West "tied" in the Position "A". It was not in the center lane (in right hand lane), but it was directly in alignment with one of the "+" marks and was actually at stationing 2+75 or 2+77 (can not recall exactly). Then, when Mr. West got back to the center of the street for the WC, he had his established stationing from the SS re-enactment to go by. Hope that is not too much info in that it confuses. Tom Not at all. Keep spoonfeeding. thanks chris

Craig, How does one acquire the correct aspect ratio for DVD/digital photos? The process I use is to Export the frame using Quicktime, saving with no compression. If the originally filmed frame ratio is incorrect, then I would imagine my exported frame is also. I normally don't change aspect ratio's on anything I do, but since the change on the original post was less than 1 percent, I figured I try and get it as close as possible, and tell others accordingly. As a follow-up, here is a different version of the recreation, quality wasn't as good as previous one, reduced to 93 percent with no change in aspect ratio. The Moormon version this time is from the same program and introduced by Gary Mack as fairly original. I believe this is as close or closer, than my original post. thanks chris Chris, Much like the frame captures of the MPI Zapruder DVD, your frame captures also suffer from having the aspect ratio changed along the horizontal. If you resize the horizontal size to about 90% your captured frames will match the Moorman. The reason your latest version matches better is that they are both from the dvd source. I'm sorry to all who have contributed to this thread. I did not check the aspect ratio on the original Moorman photo I used. Then I compounded the problem by changing it again to get a more exact registration. Sloppy work!!!! The recreation photo had a 4:3 aspect ratio directly off the DVD. Thanks to Craig and Gary for pointing this out to me. This animation would be the original photos with 4:3 aspect ratios and the Moormon photo reduced to 26.4 %. I believe this is correct. If not, let me hear it. Will try to proceed with more caution in the future. thanks chris

Tom, CE875 excerpt: "no picture was taken at 5+00 mark as this was about 4 feet from impact of the third shot" If they didn't take any pictures or make any stops at 4+96, they sure did come close. imo Notice the amount of car stops between approx 313 and Altgen's. chris

Craig, How does one acquire the correct aspect ratio for DVD/digital photos? The process I use is to Export the frame using Quicktime, saving with no compression. If the originally filmed frame ratio is incorrect, then I would imagine my exported frame is also. I normally don't change aspect ratio's on anything I do, but since the change on the original post was less than 1 percent, I figured I try and get it as close as possible, and tell others accordingly. As a follow-up, here is a different version of the recreation, quality wasn't as good as previous one, reduced to 93 percent with no change in aspect ratio. The Moormon version this time is from the same program and introduced by Gary Mack as fairly original. I believe this is as close or closer, than my original post. thanks chris

Best footage I have. It appears he took it right behind/over the tripod which is just upon the grass. chris

Jack, Here they are. The Moorman photo as stated earlier was reduced to 29.2% x30% for more precise registration. Thanks to Marcel for the Moorman Polaroid photo and Robin for the earlier photo from the program. chris

Jack, Quote's from the documentary: "We then took pictures with an exact duplicate of the Moorman camera." (photo supplied) "That could be enlarged, but that's the original off the camera". (Photo supplied of gentleman holding the recreation original). I don't think it was cropped, but it looks like there's a pin-cushioning affect at the top.( Photo supplied) They zoomed in on the pin-cushioning until it was gone and that's when I extracted my comparison frame. They did show the recreation photo without the pin-cushioning, but the quality/detail on that one was not as good for comparison purposes. Gary Mack was there consulting, perhaps he can give us more insight on the positioning of the limo. chris

The two photos may look the same, but there are noticeable differences. The camera heights were not the same for openers. I would also like to say that the more distant objects may look to line up because they are far away and harder to detect any slight differences, but they are there and can be checked none-the-less. For instance, I can take two photos taken at different angles of around 15 degrees and still find certain reference points in both photos that will appear to be the same distance apart. But at the same time the angle change will also show other reference points to be way off, thus the photo was not accurate enough to be an exact replication. Place your mouse arrow on the Badge Man tree or the southwest outside shelter wall in the animation and watch them move back and forth off your mouse arrow. Bill Bill/Others I see the Moorman limo at an upward angle going downhill. Then I see the recreation at the same spot or very close to, at a downward angle going downhill. I took a couple of photos, tilted the camera a few degrees and this is what I get. I put lines on the side of the truck and it appears to stay at the same angle in relation to itself/street. Is there a way to duplicate what's in Moorman with regards to the limo appearing to be at an upward angle? thanks chris

Tom, I think I have the same virus Why would the West and W/C surveys list the same measurements for different frames? chris

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Chris, The attached picture describes what I have concluded in regard to where everyone in the limousine was located as depicted in Z. frame #456. It would take several attachments to treat each of the extremely blurry images of the occupants individually. Improving one image simply resulted in making the remainder less distinct. In the overall , the only item of significance is the configuration of the blurs, and I submit that what we see is completely consistent with what Sam Holland reported concerning JFK being thrown forward onto the floor of the limousine. I am sure that anyone using high quality graphics software, would be able to produce far better results. Thanks for your original observation re Sam Holland's evidence being 'shaped' preferentially , and also for your response to my posts Ed O'Hagan [/b] Ed, I haven't drawn any conclusions, yet. Just trying to show movement leading up to 456. Listening to eyewitness accounts of those close to the head-shot/s is very reliable. imo Don't know if this helps but I worked a little on 456. chris

Ed, Here is 452-456. It looks as if Jackie is headbutting that taller person sitting next to her. chris