Chris Davidson

Yes, As shown/stated repeatedly, the Lovelady? body orientation to Altgens should have yielded Lovelady's? shoulder blocking out any object that was behind it. Just picture the guy with glasses having his body rotated to the right matching Lovelady?

The "Five o Clock" football shadow among other interesting hair aspects. Lee, tilt the head a little upward and slightly to your right.

By the time they convinced you of that, they could then throw this in, making you believe, not only of the west wall shadow across a body with someone close to it, but the shadows ability to cast itself near the hand rail.

Thanks Paul. The "touch up artists" (wink wink) were at it again. Provenance!!!!

Natural Shadow:

Well stated Richard. Jonathan, getting back to the topic at hand, which you don't particularly care for, please provide your best argument for why we have the impossible shadow that Alan discovered in Wiegman. Here's the counterpoint to your arguments once again:

Or purposely, Continuity was achieved by overtly splicing,opaquing,excising, specific films/photos, which isn't rocket science. All depends on what continuity clock you base your conclusions on.

Towner provenance via Gary Mack's response when questioned by Bill MIller: "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." Put two and two together. It's not rocket science.

Don't know. But in Bell, I get the impression that the red at left is more torso(person1), while lower and to the right is a left arm.(person2) Remember, Towner has the splice and the first frame(with the red arrow) in the previous gif, is the first frame after the splice. Myers try's to convince us the splice has seven missing frames, but his fps rate tells a whole different story which I won't get into. Wiegman/Altgens same two person problem in the photographic record.

Yes. Which is exactly what was done in the Towner film. But, there isn't a waving flag in Towner. The waving flag illusion is actually the film being crudely masked to hide (we know who). Below the red arrow is the masking. Obscuring two figures in red was the goal. The first frame with the red arrow(below and to the left of that arrow) shows one of the red clothed participants. This person is at a higher level than the subsequent red clothed participant, who appears directly below the red arrow Just follow the red objects within that immediate area a few times and the masked affect is exposed. P.S. Yes, I did sharpen/enlarge this to get a better view of the edges.

Is it the person lowering their arm between the two women in red? Looks like a white, long sleeved arm.

We can all go home now:

Along with part of Lovelady's? chin/jaw. Do you believe the backyard photos were "touched up" ? Could a striped shirt be touched up into a shirt/tie? What color suit was Tie Man wearing, because his suit edge to the right appears to match the torso clothed Lovelady? ? Was Jones' wearing matching clothing material to what Lovelady? was wearing? How many times does the narrative have to change to fit the official story?

Keep in mind, In the Wiegman frames, both have the unexplained shadow. Lovelady? moves up a step at some point during Wiegman's filming. After initially giving Alan plenty of grief trying to explain the shadow (nothing from the photographic record disproved his point) the closest I could find was this: Close, but no dice.

Here's one possibility since Lovelady was standing in total sunlight during Wiegman's film:

Sandy, I'll stick with more of his shoulder should appear, which should be blocking out some of the white shirt? area.

I don't know who she is.

Greg, You could also find others to compare to Prayerperson as I did over a year ago using one of the Willis photos. Since humans are symmetrical I just took half her available image and horizontallly flopped and reattached her. Then sized her to appear over PrayerPerson in the "red arrow" Darnell frame. Before finding this frame, I had applied the scoop neck(doesn't have to be exact) description to the red arrow version. I'm not saying this is PrayerPerson(designating male or female) but I am saying the collar/neck match is close enough to make one pause and consider. And I'll bring this up again,that a majority of the photographic record(around the TSBD steps) shows more men with "long sleeve" suits/jackets/shirts on. Whereas there are more females with short sleeves on. Did PrayerPerson roll up their sleeves in Darnell, I don't know because the frame quality is lacking. Added to this is James' description from his 6th floor museum viewing and their are still doubts. imo

Just as the person to his left is. If we align the left shoulders to approx the same height, what would happen if you sever that left folded arm(from the person at his left shading their eyes) and extend Bells arm to that severed point. Would it give the appearance of one continuous left arm connected to a shoulder?

The proper name:

I believe Bell/Hughes along with Altgens shows that as the left arm of a human being:

Two different people with the same colored red clothing in two different films, seconds apart. One is supposed to be Lovelady, who might the other be? Is that red or reddish/brown or whatever shade of effing red you want it to be?

Response to Alan's previous posting: I believe that's the extended shadow from the woman(left side of the mailbox) running towards the steps/building. Another point being that when some videos are stabilized, even using inferior quality material, sometimes events become a little clearer. So those that question these methods might want to take that aspect into consideration. Added on edit: The object you point out could be part of a stationary shadow from the woman in white ahead of the running woman.

Yet when scaled: