Chris Davidson

16 minutes ago, Eddy Bainbridge said:

In this part of the analysis I feel you are giving an overly coarse assessment of the limo speeds. To me the significance is that you suggest even frame removal to reach the speed results. Even frame removal wouldn't hide acceleration, and in the time period you analyse it still hides a stop (deceleration). 

A hugely powerful car, even in the sixties could probably accelerate from 0-60mph in six seconds. So very very roughly could be hitting 20mph in 2 seconds. A car with powerful brakes could stop from 10 mph in under a second. I think I am being unfair at this point in the analysis but I find the idea of even frame removal inconsistent with other evidence. 

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)

5 hours ago, Eddy Bainbridge said:

The chart above fairly accurately shows the point where the limo brakes. Alvarez does not consider braking as an option. Bearing in mind he is viewing the extant film, he sees a change in speed from 12mph to 8 mph. He states the car then continues at 8 mph until past frame extant Z334, and accepts this conflicts with Kellerman's testimony. My question from this is ; When did the limo accelerate? Can this be determined from Wiegman combined with Zapruder? (or anything else?). How long after Z334 did Kellerman trundle along at 8mph? I don't believe Kellerman did dawdle, I think the steady speed is an artifact.

My second point may only be of interest to a few, but the rate at which Zapruder's camera is purported to have run at is very important. Alvarez has proposed an elegant(ish) proof that it ran at 18.3 fps. Is anyone willing to consider and rebut the proof below?

 

 

 

 

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

On 5/9/2020 at 1:49 AM, Eddy Bainbridge said:

An article by a Mr Kelleher. His conclusions are based on the Z film and aren't robust, but his method of analysis (assessment of human reactions) Appears very good. Do his reaction points match your conclusions on synching? From your previous work I know you have looked at the possibility of a later shot than Z313. 

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.

22 hours ago, Chris Davidson said:

Were there subtle irregularities when comparing films in the span of z280-z313?

Did Myers not have the entire Nix film for his multi-film sync project as he started with the Nix equivalent of Z291, while Itek possessed the Nix equivalent of Z285.

Any speed jumps in that very small span of frames?

 

 

 

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. 

3 hours ago, Chris Davidson said:

Mark and others,

This is the first 11 seconds. These are progressive frames only.     I should have said the progressive only frames version was recorded, then converted to FLV format.

Hope that is clear.

I clocked the clocked.

Download is available to anyone interested.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1NMjNMhlhWp_PhwfiHsN2SEKDL9mwyxHz/view?usp=sharing

I created a gif which contains only progressive frames.

If so desired, you can download it, play it in your favorite movie player, count "frame x frame" and reach your own conclusion.

This is playing at 25fps as that is the closest rate I can get to 24fps using Photoshop and creating the gif. So it plays for 10.6 (instead of 11) sec but all 265 progressive frames are there.

1 hour ago, Chuck Schwartz said:

Chris, also, there were some witnesses that said the limo stopped:

1) Jean Hill (who stood to the immediate left of the limousine with her friend Mary Moorman during the assassination), in her Sheriff’s Dept. affidavit of 11/22/63, stated that the limousine stopped for an instant;
(2) Hugh Betzner (standing behind the limousine during the assassination), in his Sheriff’s Dept. affidavit of 11/22/63, said twice that the limousine stopped during the assassination;
(3) Roy Truly, Oswald’s boss at the TSBD, later stated that the limousine swerved to the left and stopped during the assassination;
(4) DPD officer Bobby W. Hargis—riding escort to the immediate left rear of the limousine—in an interview never published by a local newspaper, but whose text was later found and written about by Richard Trask in his book Pictures of the Pain, stated that the limousine stopped during the assassination; and
(5) In numerous interviews over many years, Bill Newman (standing to the immediate right of the limousine during the assassination with his wife and two children) has repeatedly and consistently recalled that there was a very brief, but definite car stop by the limousine during the assassination

 

Chuck,

I agree. To what extent, I believe I stated in my Part 2 initial rollout statements "Greer hit the brakes hard, probably stopped instantaneously then rolled on".

This is what the math is telling me so far.

I purposely have stayed away from as much witness testimony as possible (not that I don't believe in it) because I think a different approach is needed to get us to the witness statements.

This is why I used Hickey's hairflap(z275) description and time between these two particular shots(approx 4.5 sec) as it works quite well with the missing time/frames.

1 hour ago, Eddy Bainbridge said:

Hi Chris, this is not clear to me. Are you rebutting Mark Tyler's proposition that the Wiegman frame rate is unknowable? Your calculation shows it as 24fps, does 'I clocked the clock' mean you have verified the frame rate? Many thanks for your replies.

Yes, I disagree with Mark over the frame rate of Wiegman.

A film is comprised of single individual frames(otherwise known as "progressive").

The Wiegman version I am using contains only progressive frames. There are no interpolated/interlaced, etc. etc.

In other words, I've removed the post-processing conversion process to TV or whatever method might be used.

After that, it's a rate x time = total frames equation.

264 progressive frames @ 11 seconds = 24fps

Wiegman's camera averaged 24fps over the first 11 seconds.

Did it vary within that span, yes that is possible, but keep in mind over the next 16.2 seconds, the total progressive frame count also equaled the camera averaging 24fps.

So, did the camera run at 20 and 28 fps(24fps average) for the first 11 seconds and then repeat that same pattern for the last 16.2 seconds or combination of speeds thereof?

That's too much of a stretch for me, instead of a 24fps camera running at an actual rate of 24fps.

8 hours ago, Eddy Bainbridge said:

Hi Chris, every competent researcher from this forum must be on vacation at the moment so until they read what you have posted and provide decent feedback can you flesh out the provenance of the Weigman film? Can you cite that it was shown so early? 

I have just read this : https://www-accesswire-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/www.accesswire.com/users/amp/viewarticle.aspx?amp_js_v=a3&amp_gsa=1&id=424229&usqp=mq331AQFKAGwASA%3D#aoh=15890124196550&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&amp_tf=From %1%24s&ampshare=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.accesswire.com%2F424229%2FMajor-Breakthrough-in-the-JFK-Assassination-Dramatic-New-Evidence-Proves-Unequivocally-that-All-Three-Shots-Hit-the-President-Establishes-Track-and-Likely-Location-of-Lost-Bullet

An article by a Mr Kelleher. His conclusions are based on the Z film and aren't robust, but his method of analysis (assessment of human reactions) Appears very good. Do his reaction points match your conclusions on synching? From your previous work I know you have looked at the possibility of a later shot than Z313. 

Eddy,

Mark reposted the link to the NBC telecast that day which includes the playback of the Wiegman film.

Thanks for the article link, I will look at it more in depth, just need some time among the other items I'm presenting.

4 hours ago, Mark Tyler said:

Hi Chris.  24 FPS is indeed the rate that the Wiegman film was replayed on TV in 1963, as for each 4 frames in the original film, an extra one was added to get to the ~30 FPS rate for TV.  However, the rate that the Wiegman film was recorded at is unknown and can only be estimated relative to other films and human judgement.

 

Mark and others,

This is the first 11 seconds. These are progressive frames only.     I should have said the progressive only frames version was recorded, then converted to FLV format.

Hope that is clear.

I clocked the clocked.

Download is available to anyone interested.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1NMjNMhlhWp_PhwfiHsN2SEKDL9mwyxHz/view?usp=sharing

Were there subtle irregularities when comparing films in the span of z280-z313?

Did Myers not have the entire Nix film for his multi-film sync project as he started with the Nix equivalent of Z291, while Itek possessed the Nix equivalent of Z285.

Any speed jumps in that very small span of frames?

Decipher the documentation:

Shot3 = Frame 89 = Z313
Shot2 = Frame 56 = Z280 - 6ft = Z273

Z273 occurs just before the hair flap occurrence.

btw, the hair flap is much more noticeable in this document.

3 hours ago, Chris Davidson said:

The excising started at approx extant Z280 = five frames after Kennedy’s right forehead hair flap.

Just look for production errors that arose around Z280 supporting some sequence of frame removal.

There were 38 frames excised + the remaining 38 frames = 76 frames.

The hairflap on Z appears at z275 = 5 frames before Z280.

76 + 5 = 81 Z frames between the hairflap and extant z313 shot.

81/18.3 = 4.42 seconds

Just substitute Hickey's second of the two with the word "last".

10 hours ago, Chris Davidson said:

The excising started at approx extant Z280 = five frames after Kennedy’s right forehead hair flap. (Use MPI Sprocket hole version)

 

 

9 hours ago, Chris Davidson said:

Extant film time with missing frames included:

The extant film from z133-z318@18.3 fps =10.1seconds

Z318-Z447 = 129Z frames / 16.82fps = 7.666seconds

Z447-Z486 = 39Z frames/16.82fps = 2.318seconds

10.1 + 7.666 + 2.318 + (2.076 missing seconds)= 22.16 seconds

 

 

Erwin Schwartz, Zapruder's business partner:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/13sXD5XG5mRXN9IczhmaxqvJFbpVtiXBA/view?usp=sharing

6 hours ago, Eddy Bainbridge said:

Hi Chris, I am fascinated by your research but don't understand it well.

Thanks Eddy

I have believed for some time that :The extant film does not accurately record the result of the braking limo,

I agree.

JFK's head-snap is an artifact from a long drop forward of his head due to braking and thus explains the conflicting evidence for the direction on rear blowout of the head wound. (It was more upwards and is missing from the extant film).

I'm not trying to (directly) prove or disprove the head snap or rear blow out with this topic.

You have stated that your work agrees with Mark Tyler's excellent research

Mostly.

but you are saying your conclusions diverge at Z280. Is that correct? 

That's where I believe the excising starts and I'll be expanding on that.

 

Eddy,

I just posted Part 2.

I'll be supplying more supporting graphics for this part.

Be patient.

The main point being Wiegman is a true clock, Zapruder is not.

There are 38Z frames = (2.076 seconds) missing between 2 distinct sync points among these two films.

They are not missing from Dave Wiegman's film.

Part 2 continuation:

Z318-Z447 = 129Z frames / 7.666seconds = 16.82fps

Z447-Z486 = 39Z frames/16.82fps = 2.318seconds

So, from Z318-Z486 = 7.666 + 2.318 = 9.984seconds

The extant film from z133-z318@18.3 fps =10.1seconds

10.1 + 9.984 + 38Z missing frames(2.076 sec) = 22.16 seconds (See Schwartz video clip)

The excising started at approx extant Z280 = five frames after Kennedy’s right forehead hair flap. (Use MPI Sprocket hole version)

Greer hit the brakes hard, probably stopped instantaneously then rolled on.

Z280 + 38 = z318 + 38 missing frames = remove every other frame to double speed of limo on film.

From Z280-Z301(21 x 2 frames = 42 real frames) the limo speed would have actually been 9.71mph/2 = 4.85mph

4.85mph@18.3fps = .39ft per frame x 42 frames = 16.38ft

From Z301-Z318(17 x 2 = 34 real frames) the limo speed would have actually been 7.47mph/2 = 3.74mph

34frames @ .3ft per frame = 10.2ft (Brehm Statement)

Z313-Z318 @ .3ft per frame = 1.5ft + (Station#465.3-442.3) = 24.5ft (See West Plat-Distance between shot 2 and 3)

Mandel z207-z281 = 74 frames (see description)

Mandel 48 frames later = Mandel 281 + 32 + 16(half of 32) = 313

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.

Thanks Pamela, I'll keep that in mind.

BTW, my Quicktime frame counter begins with 0 not 1, so in total frames it will be 1 more than what the counter displays. I have denoted that in red within the graphic below.

Z317 no camera shake, Z318 first camera shake after extant z313 headshot.

Wiegman79 no camera shake, Wiegman80 first camera shake frame.

Both Z/Wiegman reacted in the same amount of time to the extant 313 headshot.

Both Mark Tyler and Dale Myers plotted the sync of Z447 to Wiegman265 (1-265) = 264 frames. I agree.

I added Bell as an extra check.

Establish Wiegman Frame Rate:

The same frames on the left are from the same original film version shown live on TV 11-22-1963. They are portrayed using two different movie players One that shows total frames and the other shows time elapsed.

The frame on the right is from my progressive version of the Wiegman film. It includes the first 27.2 seconds of uninterrupted running time.

The bottom graphic is the end of the 27.2 second span.

The conversion back to the original frame rate is 4/5 = .8 multiplier.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=7859&v=M4mUvR3WToU&feature=emb_logo

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-two_pull_down

START ON PAGE 5 -SKIP THE REST

Enjoy!!!!

The (Gold Standard) is the Dave Wiegman film.

Convert Wiegman frames into seconds dividing by 24fps.

The following three sync points between Wiegman and Z are the solution:

1. Z313/Wiegman Frame73.45 = (80 - (24/18.3) x 5) = 6.55 frames).                  2.Wiegman80/Z318                3. Wiegman264/Z447

Convert Wiegman frames into seconds dividing by 24fps.

This means that the extant Z313 headshot = Wiegman frame 73.45/24 = 3.06seconds x 18.3fps = 56Z frames.

The extant z313 head shot occurred 3.06 sec after Wiegman started filming.

If the extant Z film was genuine, then 56 frames previous to Z313 would equal the start of Wiegman’s film = Z257.

This is impossible because at Z257, we would see Mayor Cabell’s car in the background of the Altgen’s 6 photo.(Dale Myers Multi Sync Project Disqualified)

Mark Tyler (using his Motorcade Animation) resolves the Cabell dilemma by moving the Wiegman starting point to the equivalent of extant Z295.

The frame difference between where the Wiegman film should and shouldn’t start (Z257-Z295) is 38 Zframes. Remember this.

The equivalent of five Zframes (the reaction time of both Wiegman/Z) after the extant Z313 headshot is the sync of Wiegman80/Z318 = 3.33seconds after the Wiegman film starts.

Couple this with the Wiegman264/Z447 sync.

Wiegman264 - Wiegman80 = Wiegman184 / 24fps = 7.666 seconds

So, from the start of Wiegman’s film to where it sync’s with Z447 = 3.333 + 7.666 = 11seconds. (See original Wiegman TV broadcast version)

Mark Tyler has the Wiegman start correct, but this will not work with the Wiegman264/Z447 sync.

Z295 + (11seconds (Wiegman264 sync) x 18.3fps) = 201.3 + 295 = Z496.3 = a difference of 496.3 - 447 = 49.3 Frames

Dale Myers has Wiegman start at z246 + 49.3 = z295.3 = Mark Tyler’s Wiegman start

Difference of 16.82/18.3 fps over 129Z frames(z318-z447) = 129/16.82 = 7.669sec - 129/18.3 = 7.049 sec = .62sec x 18.3 = 11.35 frames + 38 = 49.35 frames

What works for Mark is Z447-Z318 = 129Z frames / 16.82fps = 7.66seconds (One 18.3fps camera winding down or two cameras?)

Wiegman264 = 11 seconds from the Wiegman start = 264/11 = 24fps

1 hour ago, Paul Bacon said:

Frame removal, which was one of the major alterations in the Zapruder film, will create no discrepancy with other photographs.  Only the Nix film, where it overlaps the Zapruder film, would have had to have been also altered.  And we all know the provenance of that film is in question.

The conspirators were not stupid.

Paul,

Add a few other overlapping films to your list and you've hit paydirt.

Yours is a most appropriate response to Thompson's review by Jeremy.

3 hours ago, Jonathan Cohen said:

Chris - are you suggesting that the "same" alterations made to the Zapruder film were made to every other motion picture taken in Dealey Plaza?

Jonathan,

My answer is provided by editing your question.

1 hour ago, Matt Allison said:

Trying to suggest every film and photo taken in Dealey Plaza was altered is easily one of the most ridiculous things I've ever read.

You have already misread/misinterpreted the quote.