Chris Davidson

1 hour ago, Ian Lloyd said:

Wouldn't the limo braking sharply cause JFK's head to move forward, not backwards?

Ian,

That's a valid point.

At 7.47mph I don't know how a human head would respond(already shot from behind) to the initial braking.

For now, I'll stick with the initial limo distance traveled at approx 2.4ft(braking calculator) = 4 zframes @ .6ft per frame stopping at z318 1/2.

If the head is supposed to move forward, I think you'll have an even more precise time for frame removal.

8 hours ago, Chris Davidson said:

 

The WC didn't lie about the angle(15deg21min = 15.35°) from which the z313 headshot hit JFK's head.

They lied about where it originated from.

I'll explain the rest of the graphic in awhile.

Sheldon Hershorn had it pegged.

1 hour ago, Paul Bacon said:

A shot from the Dal-Tex 7th floor ledge @ z310.  Yes

We see Kennedy's head move forward slightly from z312 to z313. Yes

Then, at virtually the same moment in time, the head is driven back by a shot from the front: Close -The limo braking at z314/315 begins JFKs backward head motion, the limo stops instantaneously from braking @z318 Kennedy's head continues driving "back and to the left" by the frontal shot which also causes the back of head blowout. 

So, the frame removal was done to hide the fact that there were two shots, at virtually the same moment in time, which would have been impossible for a lone gunman. Yes, besides hiding the limo stop.  And the "blob" is real and not painted in, as has been suggested. Shot from behind - Enhanced blob or not. The "blob" was created by the first of those two shots which came from 7th floor Dal-Tex. First headshot from the Dal-Tex 7th floor ledge.

Do I sort of have this right? Yes

Paul, my interjection above in red.

It's also impossible to initially see JFK's head start the "back and to the left" process at z315 in real time.

More coming.

9 hours ago, Chris Davidson said:

A visual representation from the graphic above.

For your frame counting enjoyment!!!

Z310 Shot From Behind - Z313Hit- Z314+ Shaneyfelt Brakes - Z318 Limo Instantaneous stop - Z318.41Headshot from the front / Remove 8+ Frames

Essentially two shots in one with the braking reaction giving the false impression of the initial "back and to the left".

Audibly possible, visually impossible to distinguish between the two shots in real time. imo

The Z313 headshot came from the DalTex 7th floor ledge:

On 5/20/2020 at 11:06 PM, Chris Davidson said:

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: Additional info graphic above from a previous post.

 

 

 

 

 

A visual representation from the graphic above.

For your frame counting enjoyment!!!

On 5/7/2020 at 9:59 PM, Chris Davidson said:

Mark's plotting of Cabell and the National Presspool car at Z295. Notice the CameraCar1 LOS in yellow for both vehicles.

I've included Wiegman2 since Wiegman1 is even more quality challenged.

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

On 5/10/2020 at 2:03 PM, Chris Davidson said:

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)

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

16 hours ago, Chris Davidson said:

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.

 

 

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

23 hours ago, Chris Davidson said:

A

 

 

 

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.

37 minutes ago, Chris Davidson said:

If nothing else, pay attention to the published numbers

 

 

 

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:

On 5/10/2020 at 2:03 PM, Chris Davidson said:

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)

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.

2 hours ago, Chris Davidson said:

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.

           

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.

46 minutes ago, Chris Davidson said:

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

 

 

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.

35 minutes ago, Paul Bacon said:

Eddy, thanks for this.  It helps.  I hope you continue.

I am transfixed by Chris's analyses.  Like the Math Rules thread, it's dense.  It takes time and concentration to follow the numbers, and I'm doing very poorly.  But, at this point, I have a decent picture of what the analysis is revealing.  Unbelievable work from Chris!

 

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

4 hours ago, Chris Davidson said:

Add 38 frames to the overall span from z161-z313.

That would make the new equation: 152 + 38 = 190frames/136.1ft

 

 

 

 

 

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

21 hours ago, Chris Davidson said:

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)

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.

34 minutes ago, Eddy Bainbridge said:

I want to try and explain this post more fully. If Chris Davidson says 'No you idiot' after this post I will have failed.

The chart above is part of a survey carried out to tabulate the Zapruder film with distances in Dealey Plaza. 

If you look at the column 'Station No.' You see a number' which is a surveyed point on Elm Street , the '+' number after it indicates the distance in feet past the surveyed point.

So, At Frame Z161 the survey says the limo was 29.2 ft from station 3. At Frame 166 the limo was 0.9 ft farther on. (At 3+30.1 ft)

We know how fast Zapruder's camera was running at (18.3 frames per second) so Chris has calculated how fast the limo must have been going to travel  0.9 feet in the five frames of film that have passed during the distance travelled. The result of the calculation is that it travelled at 2.24mph.

THIS IS GARBAGE!!!!!! - Of all the estimates of limo speed during this time NOONE suggests it was going that slow.

In Chris's earlier thread (Maths rules) the small bit I understood was that he demonstrated the reason for the FALSIFICATION of the survey results. AND the reason is:

"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." - C Davidson

or in other words - The survey was done with a film that no longer matched the measurements taken. There isn't enough Elm Street between the Surveyed points to model a car moving at reasonably constant speed (Between Z161 and Z313), so the measurements have been fiddled. (There is another copy of the table showing the fiddling, obtained from the surveyor)

I hope that explanation is good enough to catch anybody up whose interested.

If it isn't Chris will help.

 

 

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.

19 hours ago, Chris Davidson said:

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)

 

 

 

 

 

 

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.

2 hours ago, Eddy Bainbridge said:

To find out what happened in the missing time is not easy, but I can see some possible avenues where you might find some reference information. Do you find credible the view that the Zapruder film shows a skull fragment shooting almost vertically? That make no sense in the extant film, but is it indicative of the head angle at that point in time? Also we know that Kennedy's head moved at Z312 in reaction to braking, can that head movement be extrapolated into missing frames. It is a suspicion of mine the momentum imparted by any shots is small in comparison with the momentum imparted from the braking, is that right?

Does the missing time give more credibility to the acoustic evidence? If it does, then it can be used the locate shots and thus estimate reactions to momentum.

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)