Chris Davidson

The adjustment at z168-z171 reveals the 1/4 difference between 18fps and stepped down 24fps. z168-z171 = 3.734mph z168-z186 = 18frames x 1.016 = 18.3fps @ 21.6ft x 1.016 = 21.96ft per sec / 1.47 (1mph) 14.938mph 3.734mph / 14.938mph = .25 Difference between 18 and 24fps = 6fps 6fps/24fps =.25 P.S. Here's a simple question for you. How many frames do you expel to end up with a 1/4 ratio? Added on edit below:

z173-z232 = 59frames Reconstruction = frame 181-236 = 55 frames 59 Impala is 3.77ft shorter than the limo. 3.77ft made up in terms of average speed throughout this span = 3.57 frames = 4 whole frames. 55 + 4 =59 fames = Reconstruction total The cars front and rear ends in relation to the Stemmons sign are the markers. 59frames to cover the same distance in each film. 59/24fps = 2.458sec 62.35ft / 2.458 = 25.36 ft per sec = 17.25mph The recreation film is shot at 24fps. The extant zfilm is a stepped down frame version.

Before I post the landmark frame comparison, here's my question to non-alterationist believers: If two vehicles travel the same distance in the same amount of film frames, is the frame rate in both cameras the same? I'll give them a little while to ponder that.

The distance per frame for the 17.25mph average is: 17.25 x 1.47 = 25.35ft per sec / 24 frames = 1.056 ft per frame The 1959 Impala is 3.77ft shorter than the limo so any comparison between the two in terms of landmarks has to be considered. 3.77ft / 1.056ft per frame = 3.57 frames or 4 whole frames added.

Since I have the landmark frame comparison completed and ready to post, I'll do the R X T = D formula first. I chose z173- z232 for a total of 59 frames partly because we can get feedback on the WC specs from CE884 final plat version of May 1964. Their span from z171-z231= 60 frames @ 63.4ft traveled A 24fps movie using these numbers will get you this: 60/24 = 2.5seconds 63.4ft/2.5sec = 25.36ft per sec = 17.25mph 59 frames using that average would equal the same 17.25mph That would be quite a consistent speed with the overlay comparison movie between the lexus and limo. Added on edit below:

Now, all one has to do is apply a rate x time = distance equation and/or a frame count comparison between the two films using common Dealy Plaza landmarks in relation to the same part of the vehicles. Here's a hint at this time. That is a 1959 Chevy Impala Sport Coupe. It is 210.9" long = 17.57ft. The difference in length between the two vehicles is 3.77ft

for those uninitiated, the why's of 29.97fps is explained here... https://documentation.apple.com/en/finalcutpro/usermanual/index.html#chapter=D%26section=6%26tasks=true for those uninitiated, the why's of 29.97fps is explained here... https://documentation.apple.com/en/finalcutpro/usermanual/index.html#chapter=D%26section=6%26tasks=true David, More math, you know how much I hate that subject.

I then took the liberty of removing all but the progressive frames from the SS reconstruction video so now we're only dealing with whole frames. You might remember this: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BwrExtVD005OUmxsRlJLSGhwNE0/view?usp=sharing

It seemed a stretch to believe that Underwood or an associate would have filmed the SS recreation at 18fps since the camera he normally used was most likely a "Bell and Howell Filmo" standard 16mm/24fps camera. The pulldown frames conversion answered that question. Reconstruction shot at 24fps.

The version of the SS recreation film which includes the pulldown footage is here:

I created a gif showing the end result of reverse telecining which shows the conversion of the 3/2 pulldown or 5 frames back to its original 4 progressive. The top part of the gif is the 3/2 pulldown process from the original. The middle part is the reverse telecine result converting it back to its original four progressive frames. Added on edit: I would suggest downloading this and playing it at full view so the pulldown frames are quite obvious to see. https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BwrExtVD005OTjgyVDJSTXlnZUE/view?usp=sharing

There was a suggestion that the SS recreation video was shot at approx 18/18.3fps. If that was indeed true, the pulldown conversion ratio would have been different. 29.97/18 = 1.665/1 ratio = 5/3 pulldown ratio.

After the 3/2 pulldown conversion was completed, the final version specs looks like this.

One aspect of the (added on edit: SS recreation) film I did validate was this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-two_pull_down

Those with a good memory will remember the above frame. Along with a quote I made a few years back: "I am trying to convey that 24fps or some form of it, was used as part or all of the coverup." Didn't quite have the math worked out to fully support this premise at the time.

Way back when, Michael Walton posted a link to a SS recreation video: The most valuable part of this version is missing. No, I'm not insinuating that he knew of the missing segment. Lets fill in a little information about this abbreviated version. The bottom frames were extracted from the video above.

Thanks for the response and the additional information. BTW, I am having NO PROBLEM following your logic. Tom btw, At this time, I look at the film splices in math terms. For instance, 1/2 frames removed first pass. The remaining film is 1/2 full. If I choose to deal with 1/4 frames of the 1/2 remaining in a particular section, I've chosen 1/8 of the frames to deal with for that section. 1/2 eliminated first pass, 1/8 eliminated per section: 4/8 + 1/8 = 5/8 =.625 Something along that line. Hopefully that's easier to visualize for the rest.

You can just exchange the word through for "it". That you fail to disregard not only the "rate x time = distance" formula, but the overlay video as well, speaks volumes. You have contributed absolutely nothing to this topic but the same parroted message. Save everyone the bother and go do something more interesting. The recreation video is waiting in the wings for anyone who needs a challenge.

Jim, It's at the bottom of Page15 in this PDF: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BwrExtVD005OSEEwdzREeUNha3c/view?usp=sharing

Chris, IIRC, there is a single splice in what is allegedly the ORIGINAL Z-film - is this correct? And if so, then only the copies represent the "assassination movie" in its alleged original form. If this is true, and any ORIGINAL frames are 'missing' at the splice; no alteration of any destroyed frames in the original was required - just alteration or fabrication of the copy... Tom Tom, I don't know what the Original film consists of. I can only refer to the splices in the extant film. The alteration of any destroyed frames (originals that we'll never see) might not have been necessary, but the extant film is not clean enough. imo In terms of the splices and frame count, look back at my overall scenario. Cut the frame total in half to 462.78 (1st pass on Optical printer) 462.78 - 353 = 109.78 to get rid of. 109.78/462.78 = .237 closest whole frame ratio would be 1/4 (surprised) or .25 Difference between .2372 and .25 in terms of 925.56 total frames = .0128 x 925.56 = 11.84 frames or 12 whole frames. Removal of 12 original frames so the math gets back to whole fames. CE884 WC published version z161 Station# 3+29.2 obtained by eliminating 7 frames = z168 = Station# 3+29.2 from CE884 WC final plat version May 1964. Splice at z133, approx z157, splice at approx z208. 12 original frames left to vanish over 3 splices from an original 48fps film. Piece of cake.

You could always take the slow-motion version I supplied previously, count the total number of frames (144) I believe, cut that amount in half, then half it again: Or 144/2 =72/2 = 36 z171- z207 = 36 frames: Refer to overlay video. Amazing!!!

And, if you would like to connect the 3.74mph( actually it's 3.734mph) from the frames prior to the extant 313 headshot back to where it's introduced on CE884 at z168, it looks like this: z168-z186 = 18 frames @ 21.6ft traveled We need to work with a second of time. 18.3/18 = 1.0166… x 21.6ft = 21.96ft per second 21.96/1.47 (1mph) = 14.938mph 3.734 mph remove half the frames, limo travels at 7.468mph 7.468mph remove half the frames, limo travels at 14.936mph It's all math. Why do you think Itek measured every fourth frame at that point in time?

Lets get Itek's opinion back in 1967 I believe. The following is an excerpt from that study: Added on edit: The last 12 frames designation refers to "until the headshot" extant z301-z313. Sorry I didn't specify that in the graphic". If a car is traveling at 3.74 mph on film and you remove 1/2 the frames, the car would appear to travel at 7.48mph. Every fourth frame. "Danger Will Robinson Danger" Itek was very close at 7.6mph.

Give it up. This is an excerpt from Douglas Horn's research: The Two NPIC Zapruder Film Events: "It could have happened this way—consider this: the extant film (that is, the assassination movie, not the Zapruder family scenes present on the two Secret Service copies) in the National Archives (not counting leader) consists of a strip of film 8 feet, 10 inches long (of which only 6 feet, 3 inches contains the imagery of the assassination film, and 2 feet, 7 inches is black, unexposed film with no image showing); then there is a physical splice; then there is a segment of black film." I'll break this down in math terms for everyone: 8ft 10 inches in terms of total frames pertaining to a 16mm/24 frames per sec film. There are 40 frames per physical foot of film using 16mm film. 8ft 10 inches = 8.83ft 8.83ft x 40 frames per foot =353.2 frames The first supposed 132 frames are missing from the Z film. 353.2 + 132 = 485.2 frames Rounded to the next frame = 486 frames = extant Zfilm total The noose is getting tighter.