Tom Neal

BTW,

What software is everyone using to make/work on these GIFs?

Tom

Tom,

Not that I recommend what I'm using, but I use the Lunapic.com website for drawing lines and text on animated GIFs. It's actually not bad, but it hates anything over 10 GB in size. Also, it doesn't like large pictures (in numbers of pixels). So if I find have trouble, the first thing I do is resize the photo to a smaller size. Then it works. One really great feature of Lunapic that it has multiple levels of undo.

When I'm done with Lunapic, I use EzGif.com to make the pixel size large again. Doing this increases the file size, but the limit on EzGif is 16 GB.

I also use Lunapic to extract individual frames and to adjust the global frame display time.

I also use a program I've installed on my PC call Microsoft GIF Animator. This is useful for individual frame display times, so parts of the video play back at different speeds. It's also useful for copying and moving frames around. And for single stepping the video. This program is no longer available, but I'd be happy to share it. It's less than 2 MB in size. To install, just move it to the folder of your choice and make a shortcut to the executable and put that where you want. It's easy to learn and use. But it crashes if the file size is too large. I'm not sure what the limit is, but it is somewhere between 10 GB and 14 GB. If the file works on Lunapic, then it works with Microsoft GIF animator.

Judging by the work Chris Davidson does, I assume he's got much better software. If he doesn't, then he must have an awful lot of time and energy to accomplish what he does.

Trying to find the best software for this job.

I'm thinkin' it took you quite a while and a lotta work to construct those GIFs!

Thanks for the info...

Tom

Suppose Baker was heading for the TSBD but planned to follow the crosswalk to the front corner of the building, follow along its side, and enter via the rear entrance rather than the front. A shooter would be unlikely to exit the front of the building, particularly if he had to push his way through a crowd making a spectacle of himself.

Baker could have quickly changed his mind and entered via the front, or continued to the corner of the building, decided it would take too long to get to the rear entrance, or dare I say it -- actually entered through the rear door. This would be unacceptable to the required timeline and could not be mentioned.

I don't recall Baker's initial statement. Did he indicate that he entered via the front door?

Tom

Sandy,

Thanks for the quote.

Tom

Tom,

Here is Baker's 11/22 statement:

Friday November 22, 1963 I was riding motorcycle escort for the President of the United States. At approximately 12:30 pm I was on Houston Street and the President's car had made a left turn from Houston onto Elm Street. Just as I approached Elm Street and Houston I heard three shots. I realized those shots were rifle shots and I began to try to figure out where they came from. I decided the shots had come from the building on the northwest corner of Elm and Houston. This building is used by the Board of Education for book storage. I jumped off my motor and ran inside the building. As I entered the door I saw several people standing around. I asked these people where the stairs were. A man stepped forward and stated he was the building manager and that he would show me where the stairs were. I followed the man to the rear of the building and he said, "Let's take the elevator." The elevator was hung several floors up so we used the stairs instead. As we reached the third or fourth floor I saw a man walking away from the stairway. I called to the man and he turned around and came back toward me. The manager said, "I know that man, he works here." I then turned the man loose and went up to the top floor. The man I saw was a white man approximately 30 years old, 5'9", 165 pounds, dark hair and wearing a light brown jacket.

Baker implies that he entered the front of the TSBD by saying that he "followed the man to the rear of the building."

I tend to find first-day statements more credible than later ones. So from reading this it appears that Baker didn't spend a great deal of time doing whatever else he was doing when he passed by the TSBD entrance. Well, maybe he did spend some time doing something else, and didn't mention it because it wasn't fruitful. But I admit that his statement makes it seem like he didn't spend a lot of time doing something else.

EXCEPT for the fact that he saw several people standing inside the TSBD when he entered. To me that says that some time elapsed before his entry. Yeah, I'm pretty sure about that. (But I can be convinced otherwise with good arguments.)

If Baker's shadow is approx 6ft, that's a total distance of 32.25ft

Chris,

FWIW, quite a while ago I had to calculate the altitude/azimuth of the sun on this date in DP:

31.59 degrees altitude

151.28 degrees azimuth

assuming Baker's height is 6' (I'm guessing - but he appears to be at least reasonably tall...)

Shadow Length = 6'/tan(31.59) = 9.75'

Since I already had the data, I figured I'd post it...

Tom

BTW,

What software is everyone using to make/work on these GIFs?

Tom

Suppose Baker was heading for the TSBD but planned to follow the crosswalk to the front corner of the building, follow along its side, and enter via the rear entrance rather than the front. A shooter would be unlikely to exit the front of the building, particularly if he had to push his way through a crowd making a spectacle of himself.

Baker could have quickly changed his mind and entered via the front, or continued to the corner of the building, decided it would take too long to get to the rear entrance, or dare I say it -- actually entered through the rear door. This would be unacceptable to the required timeline and could not be mentioned.

I don't recall Baker's initial statement. Did he indicate that he entered via the front door?

Tom

Tom, did I say anything of the like?

We dug them up and I published them for everyone's reading pleasure and that's that!

If I had my observations / conclusions I would have have posted them, but I am tied up with a ton of other stuff.

Best

B

Sorry Bart,

I was being sarcastic. I think this guy had a lot to hide--hence the sweating smilie. He was less cooperative and more evasive than even Pierre Fink. And I DO appreciate that you posted these, especially the Jamison of the Miami SS.

Sorry for the misunderstanding,

Tom

Bart,

It's obvious SS Robert Jamison has nothing to hide...

Tom

BTW, the figure four in Carol's essay is worth the read.

Absolutely. It's impossible to be totally silent, so the next best thing is to reduce the chances of the minimized sound revealing your location.

An excellent article, for sure!

Tom

Thanks Chris,

This one downloads just fine.

Tom

When Stetson man (foreground) turns his hat leftward, Truly (who I'm identifying as Truly) with his hat on, is revealed. Truly begins his turn toward the TSBD just as Baker passes him. ...this person forces Baker to veer off his original path. imo

Chris,

Thanks for the reply.

Until viewing your GIF I had not noticed the unknown guy on the steps who turns around as Baker approaches. I thought he was the person you were referring to, which had me doubting that the guy in the hat was Truly as I had previously believed.

So we are both identifying the guy in the hat (that turns around as Baker passes) as Truly. I agree with you that Baker turns to his right in order to avoid Truly. Baker certainly could have continued to the TSBD steps, but from this film we can't tell where he goes after passing Truly.

BTW, I saved this BAKER3.GIF to my hard drive, planning to put an ellipse around Truly for identification, but for some reason, it produces an error when I try to play it. Any ideas as to why? I have saved many GIFs from this site in the past without any problems.

Tom

Baker deciding which fork in the road he takes.

Chris,

Is that Truly on the steps that turns around to face Baker at the very end of this clip?

Thanks,

Tom

Jim,

Thanks for posting this. I had read it way back when, but I'd forgotten about this theory that some shooters may have used silencers which would allow for more shots.

Also, I sent you a PM. When you have a chance, I'd appreciate it if you can give it a read...

Thanks!

Tom

This is the 'reduced speed' file, with brightness reduced; contrast increased, and slightly sharpened:

Baker-2

Tom

This video plays at a reduced speed making it easier to follow Baker:

CLICK this link and it should play...

Baker

If it doesn't; use Ray's link to Photobucket, and DOWNLOAD the MP4 file.

Tom

DUPE

Sandy,

Excellent job with the gifs!

Have you considered 'triangulating' the individual positions of Bakers' footsteps relative to landmarks? These coordinates could then be transformed onto an overhead view of the surrounding buildings. The position vectors of his footsteps would then reproduce his path and implied destination.

Question:

Is Jimmy Darnell following Baker with his camera? A "running policeman" would certainly be of interest, and Baker does appear to be in the center of the frames until the camera begins to pan back to the left rather than follow Baker. If I'm interpreting this correctly, I have to wonder why he decided to pan back to the left rather than continue to follow Baker?

Hello Mr. Lifton,

Apologies to Douglas Caddy for the OT, and to you for being a pest - but I have run out of possible sources...

Did you receive my request sent on the 3rd of this month, re Wallace Milam's interview of Margaret Henchliffe?

Thanks,

Tom

DELETED POST

Isn't it interesting that after Franco saves JFK, the world goes totally to hell?

In this new history, Nixon becomes the next president after JFK. They don't say what

happened to the USA, or when, but JFK's presidency was most likely a complete failure

because his 1960 opponent Nixon is next elected. Obviously, the public realized that

they should have elected RMN instead of JFK!

According to the story, the *only* historical change was that JFK was NOT assassinated,

and went on to serve a second term. This places the blame for the horrific conditions

in the USA squarely on JFK. He is the catalyst for disaster.

The lesson taught here by the not too subtle Mr. King; is that JFK's murder was actually

a good thing for the country. Kinda makes me think of the upper level SS's well publicized

assertion that due to JFK's "reckless" behavior and "death wish" it was not the SS fault

that JFK was assassinated. It was JFK himself who was responsible for his own death.

Perhaps the government cover-up was to hide the fact that he actually shot *himself* in the

head -- yet another "lone gunman..."

How anyone can say that the photo comparison proves its him eludes me. It does not.

And there are other factual errors in the piece. As the late Mike Ruppert used to complain, Wayne is not the most careful guy with facts.

The more interesting part is about the second marriage stuff and the escape to Canada. And was Michael his brother and when did he pass on?

Photo doesn't do it for me either...

What will Trump demand to see from him as proof he was not on the Grassy Knoll? The long-form of course...

And Trump, son of orangutan, bares teeth and hurls his feces at Rafael Cruz, Jr.

Thanks Pat,

And again, I don't think Frazier is hiding anything that he did wrong, or could be held accountable for. I'm

thinking Lee told him something, or Frazier was told, or overheard something said by the DPD... That sort of

thing.

I hope he does write a book. You never what minor detail he reveals might turn out be something important.

Tom

I've talked with Frazier on several occasions, and have heard him speak in public as well. I came to conclude that both

Buelll and his son are decent people, trying to tell the truth as they know it. He was essentially a "country" kid, who

got wrapped up in all this stuff against his will.

Pat,

I watched a long video interview of Frazier not too long ago, and he referred to a time when he

realized that people thought of him as basically a dumb hick. This clearly affected him deeply, and

he began to educate, and improve himself.

This is what an intelligent, thinking person would do. I think you are exactly correct in your

opinion of him. I regard Mr. Frazier as a sincere, honest person, caught up in a traumatic event

that shook the country. How strongly this has affected him is obvious, and I can't imagine what

it would be like to walk in his shoes.

IMO, he has something that he would like to say, but cannot for fear of his and his families life.

I have no idea what this may be, but he appears to be struggling with conflicting emotions when

he speaks about the events of 11-22-1963 (and I am NOT referring to the Hulu miniseries!).

Having spoken with him in person, were you left with the impression that there is something that he

has had to hold back?

Tom

Excellent Jim,

Eagerly awaiting Part 2.

Mockingbird at its finest!

I agree with the first hit on JFK being at about 190. ...and so did CBS in their 1967 special.

*CBS* agreed with Z-190? Hmmmmmmmm... Now I'm confused -- is this evidence for or against frame 190?

In 1993, at the Harvard Conference, Groden showed his slowed down, stabilized version of the film with the

excised frames inserted. He projected it in 16 mm, on an auditorium size screen. I had never seen it complete,

in that format, or projected onto a large screen like that.

It was plain to me, and many others, that Kennedy is hit from behind before he disappears behind the sign. And

his head buckles forward as he does so.

The back shot is the one I could never pin to a specific Z-frame, so thanks for this info!

Mr. Meyersvision, is meant to conceal and disguise the fact of that reaction.

When I read Myers statement that after carefully aligning the position of JFK's head to the film, the first time he

projected a line through the head wounds and it went "right through the center of window" in the TSBD Sniper's Nest,

without even seeing his "animation" I knew he was full of it. Just to be certain I sat right down and with a little

trigonometry determined that at a distance of 100 yards, a 1 degree error in head angle was enough to miss the

window completely. Can a 1 degree error be discerned from the Z-film? And, this presumes that he managed to get the

precise distance from the window to his head in all 3 dimensions. How he aligned the bullet 'exit hole' precisely

through the 3 or 4" 'entry' hole in the back of his skull has never been explained...

And I believe this is why those frames were excised in the first place.

Jim,

The next time that you watched the Z-film, with the knowledge that the back shot was at 190, could you pick up JFK's

forward movement, or was it all restricted to those excised frames? Is this version available anywhere on line, or has

Groden kept it in his possession?

The problem was that JBC said it was all wrong since he was not hit with the first shot, he couldn't have been. And

BTW, if you read McBride's book, he has a very good source that JBC thought the whole firing sequence in the WC was

nothing but pure malarkey.

With the full knowledge that his statement alone eliminates the SBT completely, sinking the WC in the process, he says

in public, that he believes the WC. I guess he didn't want to have one of those accidents so common to those who refuse

to toe the line, and I give him a LOT of credit for refusing to change his story.

Hello Mr. Lifton,

Tried to PM you, but your mailbox appears to be full...

Thanks,

Tom

You can reach me at DSL74@Cornell.edu

DSL

Thank you, David!

Tom