Chris Davidson

A visual representation from the graphic above. For your frame counting enjoyment!!!

btw, The start of Wiegman actually begins between where Myer's(z246) and I(z257) initially, placed it. The reason for this is the Wiegman/Z447 (limitation) sync. My apologies for not checking a full frame Altgens version against the Motorcade Animation. Below

Hit the brakes. Remove the apropos frame total increasing limo speed back to its pre-brake speed. Simple math using info from above/below will give you the answer. Enjoy!!! Added on Edit: Addition to graphic below in white boxes.

At least in trying to create the overall WC fantasy: The pylons were supposed to represent the limo front end(bumper edge) when JFK was hit by a bullet. The rear bumper edge was supposed to represent JFK's position in the limo(Station#) when hit by those same bullets.

Speaking of starting the extant zfilm with a frame designation of 133: z133 -z166 = 33 frames - z161-z313 = 152 frames 33 +152 = 185 frames (Remember that 190-185 = 5frames + 33 more frames missing for a total of 38.) The 5 in this case being the crossover from z161-z166, you understand, the BS area of z161-z166 @ .9ft Put z133 at its correct station# of 299.0 - z313 = station# 465.3 subtract these for a distance of 166.3 ft.(There's that 166 figure again, this time in a distance form) 166.3ft/185frames = .8989ft per sec = 11.19mph- Shaneyfelt hits his mark again It would have become quite obvious relative to the original zfilm what the rate/time/distance problems were. Instead, we were given a 24fps SS film(entirely helpful if you decipher it). I did this work long ago, and missed it by one frame 133-322 = 189 frames Enjoy

Look no further than z133-z161/z166 for the 30ft/33frame combo to appear. For sake of confusion(z161-z166 BS distance traveled), plot Cutler/Sprague z133 at Station 3+00.1 vs CE884 z166 at 3+30.1 . 330.1-300.1 = 30ft z133-z166 = 33 frames

After StationC, next up is "PositionA" or simply A in the data chart above. Once again, how/why do we have a plotted position if there was no available footage at this street location. If the first available film footage without "Towner in authorities hands" was extant z133, why didn't they just start the data chart at extant z133? Because at this point, it would have revealed the 33 frame jump count to the original film. You understand don't you, they had to accommodate for a 33 frame removal(with five additional) circa the extant 313 headshot.

167frames(Myers total for Towner) is awfully close to either 166 or 166.66... If the Z film didn't start until extant z133 and Towner's camera was not seen by investigators until 1967, what film piece was used by the WC back in 1963/1964 to plot the limo at StationC which resides in the middle of the turn from Houston St onto Elm? Gary Mack: “In reply to your questions, the camera original Towner film has one splice about 2/3 of the way through the limo turn onto Elm Street. Since the film was never examined by government investigators, the splice was first noticed by Robert Groden, who served as a consultant to the HSCA photo panel in 1978. From what Tina and Jim Towner told me over the years, they had no knowledge of how or when that splice was made. What is known is that the film was developed for them by The Dallas Morning News within a few days of the assassination; available records suggest the film was never seen by investigators until the HSCA. The only other time the film was out of the Towner’s possession was when LIFE magazine borrowed it from them in 1967 for publication in their November issue about Kennedy assassination photographers.” Dale Myers:

If nothing else, pay attention to the published numbers: They start off with 100ft arriving at z166. Convert it. 100ft/166frames = .6ft per frame = 7.47 mph- That is a speed match(before the frame excision) for the "at least" 12 extant zframes(see above) before the extant 313 headshot. They're setting up the front end of the altered equation to coincide with CE884 data charts. btw, I'm well aware that there weren't 166 frames from StationC to extant z166.

Final goal was to wind up with 30ft spent and half the 66.66 frames excised so it would keep sync with Shaneyfelt's ultimate goal of 11.2mph. 30ft/33.33frames = .9ft per frame x 18.3 = 16.47ft per sec / 1.47 = 11.2mph btw, notice the ft per frame rate for 11.2mph = the matching BS distance used for the span traveled for z161-z166 and z168-z171. Another remnant. Onto the 166frame/frame166 next.

Working from the parameters below, referencing the work above: 30ft / 166.66frames = .18ft per frame = 2.24mph 30ft / 100frames = .3ft per frame = 3.74 mph 166.66 - 100 frames = 66.66 frames in essence a match for total frames remaining in the original film span before frame excision, not including the car stop frames. 19.8ft + 10.2ft = 30ft 10.2ft / .3ft per frame = 34 frames 66 + 34 =100 frames Keep the 166frame/frame166 figure fresh for the next post.

Paul, if nothing else, very important to concentrate on the bold type moving forward. I'll continue with the connection to it in a bit. Below could be more likely because the .3ft per frame limo speed is what was used regarding alteration calculations. z280-z313 = 23.73ft 21 x 2 = 42 frames 12 x 2 = 24 frames 66 frames / (23.73-3.93) = 19.8ft = .3ft per frame

What I purposely left out of this was the elapsed time of 8.3 seconds (152frames@18.3fps) A camera that shot the extra 38 frames (190 total) in that same 8.3 sec would actually be filming at 22.89fps. The frame rate (167 Towner frames) closely matches the fps adjustment by Myers in the form of Tina Towner's Sears Verizoom 8mm camera.

One last comment on this for now. What affect would this have over a 1 second time period. Look no further than the z168-186 frame span. 18frames converted to 18.3 frames = 1 second is 18.3/18 = 1.01666... multiplier 21.6ft distance (z168-186) x 1.01666 multiplier = 21.96ft per sec/1.47 = 14.94mph Now subtract the bogus 3.74mph span of z168-z171 from the overall speed of 14.94mph 14.94 - 3.74 = 11.2mph Who was responsible for the z168-z171 bogus entry? Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; because we were able to determine the speed of the camera, and thereby accurately determine the length of time it takes for a specific number of frames to run through the camera at this 18.3 frames per second, and having located these frame positions in the street, we took the farthest distance point we had in the Zapruder film which was frame 161 through frame 313. This was found to run elapsed time from the film standpoint which runs at 18.3 frames a second, runs for a total of 8.3 seconds. This distance is 136.1 feet, and this can be calculated then to 11.2 miles per hour. Mr. SPECTER. Is that a constant average speed or does that speed reflect any variations in the movement of the car? Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is the overall average from 161 to 313. It does not mean that it was traveling constantly at 11.2, because it was more than likely going faster in some areas and slightly slower in some areas. It is only an average speed over the entire run. Mr. DULLES. Over the entire run between what points? Mr. SHANEYFELT. Between frame 161 and 313. So, do you think he was rounding up 11.15mph to 11.2 or did he get mixed up with the BS he was calculating for the alterations. Enjoy the video of Shaneyfelt marking z168+171 on the street. That is Robert West(Surveyor) with the cowboy hat on. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1ZSXri67dj1Hef5RAdWMiZj1MK7vnrg2g/view?usp=sharing

As you mentioned, the other data CE884 document was a remnant of the instantaneous speed change. Those top two entries were then changed from z161-z166 to z168-z171, right away an obvious frame change at the same distance, which adversely affects the speed. The speed for z168-z171 = 18.3/3 = 6.1 x .9ft = 5.49ft per sec = 3.74 mph = .3ft per frame The limo wasn't traveling at 3.74mph at this point either Removing alternating frames from a film where a vehicle is traveling at 3.74mph = .3 ft per frame(near the headshots) will increase the vehicle speed to 7.47mph. This would be an example of an "instantaneous remnant" adjustment used in calculating the alteration of the original film.

Eddy, you are far from idiotic, don't even think that. Your synopsis was fine. I appreciate your input/incite and interest. This is not easy to comprehend all at once. That dealt with the average speed change when the 38 missing frames were included.

Add 38 frames to the overall span from z161-z313. That would make the new equation: 152 + 38 = 190frames/136.1ft 136.1ft/190frames = .716ft per frame x 18.3fps = 13.1ft per sec / 1.47 = 8.91mph average 8.91 + 2.24 = 11.15mph The limo did not travel 2.24 mph from extant z161-z166, it just represented the difference in average speed from z161-z313 when 38 frames were removed from that span. If you understand this, the remaining remnants will be much easier to grasp.

Keeping the above in mind. There was a true "rate x time=distance" equation before the film was altered. The alteration solution included the consideration of instantaneous .3ft per frame, 38 missing frames and the average speed affect this would have on the original unaltered film. I have pointed out remnants from the alteration solution in the past, just a little more re-enforcement moving forward. I will now start connecting this with the previous work I have provided. You can decide for yourself what is fact or fiction.

Eddy, The initial scenario I created for the missing time was based on Greer reacting to the hair flap shot. If Hickey saw it but Greer didn't hear it, I'm fine with that. This just delays the moment of braking to a different point in the original film. If as you say, the braking occurred slightly before or after the extant 313 shot, the excising of frames still exists. As to the exact sequence of that excision, don't have that yet. The frame extraction sequence will either support or disprove(I believe) the acoustical Don Thomas uses for his last three shot entries.

Hair flap shot has already occurred. Limo speed confirmation on the z313 headshot. (.3ft per frame = 3.74mph) Another shot to follow.

My plotting of z301-z313 = 7.2ft 7.2ft /12 frames = .6ft per frame x 18.3fps = 10.98ft per sec / 1.47 = 7.47mph .6ft per frame at twice the frames = .3ft per frame (see previous posting for appropriate explanation)

I agree. I was putting that in a continuous moving limo scenario with it not necessarily completely stopping. Below could be more likely because the .3ft per frame limo speed is what was used regarding alteration calculations. z280-z313 = 23.73ft 21 x 2 = 42 frames 12 x 2 = 24 frames 66 frames / (23.73-3.93) = 19.8ft = .3ft per frame Stopping distance @ 9.7mph = 3.93ft Z280 (441.57)-z301(458.1) = 16.53ft After instantaneous stop 16.53 - 3.93 = 12.6ft left 4.85mph = .39ft per frame 12.6ft/.39ft per frame = 32.3 frames 42 total - 32.3 + (10 frames car stop or something to this effect)

Too many official studies on a film which is faulty(missing frames) to begin with. Compare the Alvarez study with the previous Itek study I provided and note the differences in frame# related to limo speed and the speed bump up/down from z289-z293 I previously provided a frame rate scenario which includes18.3fps and the missing frames taking the Z/Wiegman syncs into consideration. The extant film from z133-z318@18.3 fps =10.1seconds Missing frames 38 = 2.076 seconds Z318-Z447 = 129Z frames / 7.666seconds = 16.82fps Z447-Z486 = 39Z frames/16.82fps = 2.318seconds Total time 22.16seconds

Eddy, here are a few of my comments in red: “8. Who did it? – Kelleher concludes that Lee Harvey Oswald did all the shooting and scored a very lucky hit with his final shot: I disagree. But my topic is not about the shooter, so I’ll reserve more comments. Applying this simple scientific principle in carefully examining frames 133 through 350 of the Zapruder film, it is plainly obvious to an objective observer with a sharp eye for detail that three bullets traveling at supersonic speed entered the presidential limo accompanied by their shock-wave noise at Zapruder frames Z222, Z313 and Z331 (plus or minus a Z frame) and that there were no other shots. In March 1979, using a rifle identical to Oswald's, a government investigator who had no formal training using any type of firearm, was able to operate the bolt, aim and fire in 1.2 seconds.” If he wants to delay where the excising of frames occurred to approx z301 and start from there that’s fine with me. In fact, that would give a shooter enough time between these (313-331) shots. But, one reason the hair flap shot had to be ignored was the total shots dilemma. “I found the visual-shot-identifier evidence lying dormant in the three key motion-picture sequences taken of the presidential limo under fire: the famous Abraham Zapruder, Orville Nix and Marie Muchmore films. I found confirming visual-shot-identifier evidence in two lesser-known motion pictures after syncing them with the Zapruder film: the Elsie Dorman and Dave Wiegman assassination sequences. These last two films captured the spectators lining either side of Elm Street in front of the TSBD as the three shots rang out. The visual shot-identifiers in the Dorman and Wiegman films additionally provide compelling scientific proof that all three shots came from the TSBD.” Since I’m not privy to the actual material(quality thereof) he used to justify his conclusions, I’ll stick with the Z/Wiegman frame syncs using Wiegman as the master time clock.

Following up on the connection to where I believe the excising started is the article by Paul Mandel. It’s published in the Dec 6, 1963 edition of Life Magazine. This article has always left me somewhat puzzled because of his specific reference to frame count pertaining to the movie he was viewing. Yet, put into the customary views of when some shots occurred, it didn’t fully work. Now I believe it does. The strike he describes at 170ft away (derived from Breneman), which is later corrected in terms of distance by surveyor Robert West using proper surveying techniques is at extant z207. Shot at z200, camera reaction at z207. 74 frames later, shot at z274, camera reaction at z281. 48 frames later the extant z313 headshot. Including the extra 38 missing frames now, what happens if I remove what amounts to every other frame starting at approx 281. 281+ 32 = 313 1/2 of 32 frames = 16 frames 32 + 16 = 48 frames = Mandel’s description of 48 frames between shots. Mandel sees a version that was in the process of being converted. Btw, I’m not discounting that he started at z281 + 48 = z329 which could be a different shot than extant 313, I just believe his viewing was of a version not quite in its final state.