David G. Healy

that B&H414 camera at full zoom, panning left to right would need only 3-4 inches of upward/downward or sideways camera movement off-center for the liomo to disappear from the frame....

Probably considerably less as the limo moved through the head shot zone, where the car was closest to him.

Ashton

yes, of course, I didn't want to upset the Warren Commission purists.

I believe Zapruder rented out parts of the second, third, and fourth floors of the Dal-Tex. If anyone has a list of all the occupants on the West side of the building, that would be helpful. As far as why he only filmed the one film...well, he had just purchased the camera and was trying iit out, only to have this incredibly pleasant experience with it. Then the government took his camera from him. His reluctance in re-embarking into the cinematic world is understandable.

Largest response, flinch? An unsuspecting, amateur motion picture camerman? Afraid of heights, wearing glasses, had to be talked into filming the event, by a woman (Sitzman) he doesn't even name in his WC testimony, rounds going off, echos everywhere, then the presidents head exploding... That's IT, a tiny flinch? Did the guy have military experience, was he a marksman, use to hearing rounds fired. Plus, he's crying and or crying out while he continues his filming trek down Elm Street? His response to the gunshots are negligible, hardly a blip.... that B&H414 camera at full zoom, panning left to right would need only 3-4 inches of upward/downward or sideways camera movement off-center for the liomo to disappear from the frame....

Zapruder did better than some pro combat photog's I know. When they saw the Z-film, understood who took it, they were amazed [two of the four don't believe it].

duplicate post

A general gracious and hearty "Thank You!" to everyone who in good faith has supplied resources, links, and helpful suggestions.

The bravehost site consistently gives a "bandwidth exceeded" error page. I guess you have to get up early.

Ashton

Such a site as you envision, if done well, must not only have the right items in high-quality format, but a big server and high-bandwidth and lot of strong firewalls and protections from tampering/hacking..which I'd be willing to bet would be a regular feature. Apparently, the photo evidence bothers the cover-upers more than the paper and witness evidence in some ways.

not only the highest quality, but the *provenance* of said film and photos that reside on ANY server. In my estimation the lineage of every DP related film/photo should be questioned. Research regarding a image/film, the lineage of the source imagery used should be absolutely clear. The longer folks do study's on 10th generation internet downloaded .jpegs, the more time wasted.

how and why did Abe Zapruder and Ms. Sitzman continue to stand erect on a prominent raised platform in the middle of the likely firing zone with Zapruder resolutely locked on the Presidential limousine until it disappeared under the overpass?

Um, because he's not a big wuss like you?

you are the atypical Washington desk jockey, right?

I have a question.

Where are the corresponding photos to the list of hundreds of phototgraphs compiled and published in Computers and Automation article?

I am interested in viewing the photos of Dealey Plaza in the hour after the assassianation because among the mele should be the man in the brown suit coat, Jim Braden and Lummie Lewis emerging from the Dal Text building.

BK

excellent question - some of them I suspect, are housed at the 6th floor Museum. I doubt they'll [originals or 1st generations] be made available to researchers... Seems the 6th floor museum is now in the business of managing JFK-DP 'amateur' photographer photo/film assets. I'm sure others have made maximum use of Sprague's list ...

And when you did your assessment, there were about 4 messages out of the 32 that were responsive and on-topic, and it all included a visit by the forum administrator.

It doesn't take a math genius to figure out the signal-to-noise ratio.

Ashton

I agree - it's one reason I recapped the posts. I'm as guilty as anyone of piling on when the going gets rough. Someone once suggested a two hour requisite cooling-off period between reading and returning Internet emails. Posts intending to inflame and provoke are too often successful. I'm going to give it a try and see if I can make a small contribution toward comity on this forum.

MV

Thanks very much. I'll try to do my part better in that regard, too. I hope this thread can result in some kind of coordinated effort at some point, but I'm also putting out feelers on other lines. I have no doubt whatsoever that the resources exist. It's really only a matter of enough agreement on it being a worthwhile purpose to get a seed planted. It can grow and improve over time.

The first requirements are going to be a server that can bear the strain and someone with the technical savvy to set it up intelligently and maintain it. I'm making inquiries on both counts.

Ashton

Excellent - and FWIW, this site - http://www.jfk-online.com/jfklinks.html - has numerous links for info. Sorry if it's already been posted, and I have *NO* idea of the personal leanings (pro or anti conspiracy) of the web site administrator. It just seems rich in information.

MV

Dave Reitzes and Lone Nutter associates. Associate of John McAdams (creator of the moderated newsgroup alt.assassination.jfk, prof. Marquette University, USA) -- One of the most most prolific JFK assassination poster (by some count 30,000), he's disappeared the past few years, last I heard DReitzes was working with Bob Vernon on one project or another [year or so ago]. Longtime JGarrison attack specialist. Admitted convert to Lone Nutter status... a huge void was created when Reitzes "retired", hasn't be filled to this day

The film and photo archive is of questionable source -- no lineage for imagery, not bad for reference. End-all be-all regarding assassination imagery? never happen! Reitzes however is a good writer...

don't quit your day job... and above all: follow that Lone Neuter bouncing ball...

Another sad attack of Internet Tourette's Syndrome. ROFLMAO

forgot you said it deserves a TV series? Get to it Mr. Valenti, that IS your day job isn't it?

What is it with you Lone Neuter's, can't spell a guys last name correctly --- sheesh, another graduate of the Lamson school of etiquette...

Ashton has bemoaned the state of this thread. Let's recap the posts and see where it went all screwy:

1. Ashton starts the thread asking for info about photographs.

2. John Dolva offers some helpful links.

3. Peter Lemkin applauds Ashton's question and complains about "Masta don' wanna show his cards and 'iz alwaz pullin' slight 'o hand"

4. Bill Miller responds by saying the Groden DVD can be purchased for as little as ten bucks.

5. David Healey suggests Jack White and Gary Mack as sources for photos.

6. David Healey says "roflmao" again. Suggests Bill Miller is a disinformation agent.

7. Bill Miller responds to David Healy's attack by suggesting he (David) is schizophrenic.

8. David Healy calls Bill Miller a "pidly voice" Writes "roflmao" again.

9. Ashton Grey "PLONKS" and infers that Bill Miller is an incurable scumbag.

10. Bill Miller responds to David Healy's attack.

11. Ashton Grey thanks John Dolva for the information.

12. Jack White chimes in saying that Bill Miller isn't Bill Miller, and in any case, he is irrelevant. Posts photos of Bill Miller.

13. Brendan Slattery calls Jack White a putz.

14. Mike Hogan corrects the record, says Bill Miller is, in fact, Bill Miller. Says he likes both Bill Miller and Jack White.

15. MV chimes in his admiration for Bill Miller.

16. Ashton Grey alludes to the "nice guyness" of Ted Bundy and Richard Helms in discussing Bill Miller. Complains that the thread has been hijacked.

17. Mike Hogan suggests that Ashton Grey is a less classy guy than he had believed.

18. Brendan Slattery says Ashton Grey is not a nice guy.

19. Ashton repeats his desire to create a photo database.

20. John Simkin says Bill Miller is really Bill Miller. Says Bill spends too much time attacking Jack White.

21. MV spews about why people question Jack White on his research techniques.

22. Ashton Grey writes humanity's epitath.

23. Robin Unger offers some helpful links.

24. Jack White says that the JFK research community is full of dual identities.

25. Bill Kelly tries to cool down the thread with a humorous assertion about dual identities.

26. Peter Lemkin encourages Ashton Grey to keep on keeping on.

27. David Healy responds to MV, saying he should follow the "Lone Nutter bouncing ball."

28. Bill Miller explains his responses to Jack White.

29. Bill Miller wonders why others don't objectively critique Jack White.

30. Peter Lemkin says Bill Miller doesn't merely critique, he attacks.

31. Bil Miller suggests that Jack White's friends treat him with kid gloves, which harms the possibility of reopening the investigation.

32. Ashton Grey calls the Forum a "petri dish for such agent provocateurs and idiots"

This stuff deserves its own TV series...

MV

don't quit your day job... and above all: follow that Lone Neuter bouncing ball...

Bill, I hear you saying you are critical of Jack in order to further the true facts on the JFK Case. My problem with you has always been, that while some critical observations may be needed of Jack's and everyone's posts, your criticism are always IMO attacks and serve just the opposite end IMO as you state you wish to achieve.

Peter, you are another one who shows a very biased opinion of the things Jack says. Let my post be directed at Von pein or Slattery, then you would never have a negative thing to say about it. Your thinking is so biased that I can see that you are still a bit confused as why I respond to all Jack's claims in the manner that I do. Well, let me make this clear for I have said it before ... many of us don't have Jack's notoriety and with fame should come responsibility. People who know little of the assassination and who certainly won't have a way of checking the evidence for themselves will think that because Jack White says something ... that it must be true because most people believe that people of Jack's notoriety want to be sure to have run a thorough inquiry before attaching their name to something. If nothing else, the 'hoax' book that Jack participated in showed how silly errors could even fool what would be otherwise intelligent people at a first glance. The seriousness of this type of recklessness cannot be down played because it not only has misled those people who have no way of checking Jack's claims for accuracy, but it also has given ammunition to those who want CT's to not be heard and what a better way to do that than to show how badly researched many of their views are.

Bill Miller

Must be a very, VERY difficult forum for you to participate in, eh? What with being the ONLY non-confused, non-reckless, non-mentally challenged member regarding DP/JFK related film/photos? Throw in feeble attemps being this forums self-designated house mother, mental faculty analyst, photo editor, postage stamp sized .gif photo animator and man, you've got yourself a *flaming* fulltime job...

I do have a question that causes me to have concern for your balance: how do you, Bill Miller know what someone, anyone, is thinking ...? How do you know that? Or is the answer simple; a plain case of J E A L O U S Y on your part? Perhaps you're coming to fragmented conclusions?

If Ashton pursues a combined JFK-DP-Assassination photo/film database-photo analysis project, he'll do just fine. Sprague clearly defines the subject matter, laid out a road map, and for those that write code, he also laid out 'key' terms. Not just for database purposes, for photo-film "investigative" purposes

After carefully re-reading the entire article, Sprague's Computers and Automation re JFK's Assassination, guess what? Your name appears no where, nor does mine, Gary Mack or Jack White's. However, Penn Jones, Harold Weisberg and Josiah Thompson names do [amongst many others], only one person I know of [on this forum] that has disussed the case with a few of them, Jack White!

You elevating yourself to that class of investigator? Let there be NO doubt; Thompson, Weisberg and Jones ARE/WERE successful investigators.

Another voice in the dark thinking book, perhaps? All you need is a publisher!

'Mark Valenti' wrote:

I agree with Mike on both points. I met Bill last year in Dallas and he is definitely the man in the photograph.

I cannot understand why Bill spends so much time attacking Jack. I do not agree with a lot of his recent theories but he should be respected for his earlier work.

dgh: some of us do, the short answer is simply; because he can --///

John,

He is. I have said in several posts I respect the work he has done. Nobody else has put in the effort that he has. But if he offers a theory that is obviously wrong and someone points it out, Jack calls that person names, followed quickly by his defenders.

In the past month, Jack has been demonstrably wrong several times and yet he never acknowledges this. Instead, he ignores the correction, accuses people of being mere provocateurs, and his Cheerleaders pile on. Lone Nutters. Newbies. But these wild theories add up. It all starts to reach a tipping point. And then even the serious researchers come off badly.

dgh: nonsense, most serious researchers here and elsewhere, post infrequently. Jack White wrote the book on JFK photo research, not to mention he has the inante ability to draw out the frauds, plain and simple -- he's been doing it for years...///

Let's put it this way: Say you had spent a year teaching your students how to build a car. One of your prized pupils begins coming to class with a theory that he can build a car with sticks and mud. You explain how this is incorrect - but the very next day he returns saying he can build a car with bubble gum and lemonade. Eventually, you forget how great a student he used to be, and you start thinking he's just being a wiseass or has turned a serious corner in his thinking.

dgh: how about this; your prized ex-student returns with years of auto manufactuing experience behind him, shows your new stock of students how, in the REAL world, to cut auto manufacturing time and costs by 80%. Think Detroit would be happy with that?

Your sticks and mud analogy remind me of that old 'feet of clay' story...///

I think Jack can stand the scrutiny. He has kept his eyes on the goal for years and shows no signs of stopping. But I do wish that he and his cheerleaders would consider the possibility that these issues can be considered and reconsidered and reconsidered endlessly in good faith.

dgh: there's all sorts of cheerleaders Mr. Valenti, the ones that know Jack [on this forum and others] are quite competent in their JFK research endeavours, one of the reasons we were invited here a few years back (along with driving traffic to this board of course). Not sure who or what your JFK field of endeavour is, perhaps we'll figure that out down the road, eh?///

If they think it's *all* figured out, settled once and for all, why do they continue to post here? Why not just crack open a bottle of Dom and retire?

dgh: Mr. Valenti, perhaps you can point to where anyone has stated it's "all figured out?" We were invited to this board to post, Mr. Valenti, perhaps its time for you to follow the Lone Nutter bouncing ball? Miller is real familiar with the bouncing, seek his counsel...///

MV

'Robin Unger' wrote:

Sitzman in the shelter.

************

yep, I'd recognize her, anywhere...., Sorry !

'Bill Miller' dronned:

roflmfao! Is there disinfospecialist in the house?

There is now! You tell people not to trust anything they cannot hold in their hand, but who amongst those, including yourself, would actually know what they are looking at? Your statements are for the ignorant that cannot see the lack of logic and sound reasoning in the things you say. Thank goodness that their numbers are few.

dgh: of course there are, been so for a year or two, right after you got here, in fact -- you go from forum to forum post 10,000 or so posts then wander off to the next [with the exception of Rich's forum - he got your game immediately, you were gone quick]. Strangely enough though, you never appear on the big internet newsgroups discussing the evidence, -- I don't make conclusive statements about the DP photographic record, I've never analyzed the in-camera *original* DPfilms, nor have you - just more whistling out your ass, yes?

David Lifton's chapter in The Great Zapruder Film Hoax, in part on Robert Groden, is quite revealing. As for internet, DVD imagery.... I bet half these loons out here don't know gamma settings for PC-Windoz/Apple computer monitors --

Lifton, while I admired his investigation into the subject so many years ago, is another one who couldn't see that Moorman's camera was above the cycles in the #5 Polaroid that Mary had taken. You will note that in the 'Hoax' book that he doesn't offerr peer review by experts who would know the subject better than he. Again, you play on peoples paranoi and lack of knowledge of the subject.

dgh: was that before or after Lifton told you to get lost? Peer review by who? YOU? A guy who appeared out of no where, just another pidly voice yelling NO film alteration, cause Gary or tink told me.....? ROFLMFAO

Do I need to post more of the symptoms of schizophrenia to see how many apply to your postings?

dgh: when it comes to the DP photos/film of JFK assassination its called *caution*, beefstick -- EXTREME Caution, especially homebrewed .gif animations from questionable, unsourced material - ontop of questionable, unsourced, unknownledgable posters... need I continue?

Distrust or Suspiciousness

Poor Memory or Learning Ability

Overly Dependent Behavior

Reckless or Impulsive Behavior

Obsessive Thinking or Compulsive Rituals

... and it is said that people with this ailment are not aware that they have it.

dgh: tell you what champ, I'd gladly sit down and speak to a Shrink on-camera, you do the same? We'll do it together, eh?

Get that computer screen *gamma* Apple OS/PC-Windoz issue straightend out, yet? Your going to need to know, Bill. Check with Lamson, he knows (I hope)... Heretell we're getting close to a new and improved Zavada report... get to that email....

Bill Miller

'Masta don' wanna show his cards and 'iz alwaz pullin' slight 'o hand 2) entropy, poverty and minor turf battles within the research community. I appoint you director of the JFK film and photo repository. There are some websites that contain some of the materials, but as you point out the maximum resolution, standard format and naming and other factors are far from optimal.

One of you guys can buy a copy of Groden's DVD which has the assassination films on it, then you can post every frame from every film to a web page or forum if you want to and people then can save the images for free. Or those same people who have no money can try and get a copy of the same DVD off of ebay which has sold for as little $10.00 on occassions.

roflmfao! Is there disinfospecialist in the house?

David Lifton's chapter in The Great Zapruder Film Hoax, in part on Robert Groden, is quite revealing. As for internet, DVD imagery.... I bet half these loons out here don't know gamma settings for PC-Windoz/Apple computer monitors --

they're gonna tell us all about contrast in JFK related images though.... LMAO

'Ashton Gray' wrote:

I've been somewhat amazed at the seeming difficultly of locating anything resembling an easily accessible comprehensive repository of the known photos and films from the Kennedy assassination.

I have no idea what role copyright ownership, and/or bandwith and logistical hurdles might play in this scattering and dearth, but it seems to me that the collection and effective presentation of as much as possible of the visual record would be of inestimable value and use to researchers and posterity. If I had the access, means, and time I certainly would be embarking on such a worthwhile project.

I merely happened across this reference from the Wikipedia page on the Zapruder film while briefly browsing the forum this morning and trying to find out what the "Bell" film was:

• There are at least eleven known films and photographs in Dealey Plaza during the assassination by these amateurs with cameras: F. Mark Bell, Charles Bronson (not the actor with the same name), Robert J. E. Hughes, John Martin, Charles Mentesana, Patsy Paschall, Elsie Dorman, Tina Towner, Marie Muchmore, and Orville Nix, along with an unidentified "Babushka Lady". Nix's, Muchmore's, and Bronson's films include the fatal head shot, and the films of Bronson and Hughes show the open 6th-floor window of the Texas School Book Depository.
  

That alone was staggering information for me, and I have yet to find any place to view just the Bell film.

In the many threads concerning still photos, the images posted in the forum itself are often of little use for any kind of actual analysis, since they are usually low resolution jpegs, often cropped, and already, in many cases, processed in some way.

Of course another major problem is that there is no standardized naming or identifying convention for the various images, so one often has no ideal what even to search for.

I'm sure I don't need to belabor this further, so I'll only say that it would be a vastly worthwhile project to assemble the best (closest to original) still images that can be collected, get them scanned at least at actual size and 300 dpi resolution, and make them available somewhere, in some format with as little in the way of artifacts as possible (meaning no jpegs). And for the films, of course, to make as many available as possible in a widely-available digital format for viewing or downloading for research and educational purposes.

I do realize there are copyright issues as well as bandwidth and other technical issues in a project of such scope, but I also believe people could be found who might help make such arrangements as a charitable contribution. If there were enough interest, perhaps even a non-profit organization could be set up to be a repository and trustee of such works for educational purposes. Lord knows it would be a welcome counterpoint to the profiteers and vested interests. It also would tend to show those in their appropriate light through the listings of images made available vs. those withheld.

This is not a fully formed plan. It's merely an observation of a much needed resource that seems resoundingly absent, with a hope to get that corrected at some point in time. As I've mentioned, I don't personally have the means, but if others are interested, I'm happy to help in any way I'm able, and I'd like to hear other thoughts about it.

Ashton Gray

***********

Ashton,

As a starting point, some found the Computers and Automation magazine, May 1970 issue (vol.10 no.5) pages 20 thru 60, authored by Richard E. Sprague [not to be confused with other Sprague], very helpful.

(1970 IS the correct year)

Title of the article is:

The Assassination of President John F. Kennedy

The Application of Computers to the Photographic Evidence

On page 52 he compiled a list of every known photographer whose photos/film covered the assassination (Dealey Plaza, Parkland, etc.) The article includes (double truck pg 48-49) a northern Dealey Plaza spatial chart/plat positioning major camera/photographer positions along Houston, Main and Elm St's. Page 51 is a schematic timing flow chart of major DP film/photos (how they overlap with each other)

The 6th Floor Museum has an extensive collection of Dallas-JFK Assassination related, 1963-64 images (film, photo and some videotape) and of course Lone Nutter written works (both fact and fiction - imho).

NARA of course is where the *alledged* Zapruder in-camera original is housed along with the remains of original Zaprduer-Jamieson/KODAK prints (one intact another in pieces with frames missing- the 3rd of course is at the 6th floor museum, they obtained that 1st generation film print via "donation" from the Zapruder trust.

As for film copyright issues: Attorney Mike Pincher wrote a extensive brief (including case law) regarding the Zapruder film, very interesting reading...

Simple advice: trust the provenance of no DP film/photo you see OR receive over the net, if you can't hold it in your own hand, red flags should go up! Especially from the known preservers of Dealey Plazas' historic photographic record... (especially the simplistic .gif animations so prevelant on this and a few other boards)

In my estimation there are two JFK related photo researchers you can trust for *accurate* JFK related information - Jack White and yes, Gary Mack... Gary Mack has a on-camera [and other media] public personna to maintain, you'll get the straight scoop as to what the 6th floor museum has on hand. Whether you get to see it or not is another story... To the best of my knowledge: only SBTheory proponents get access to the 6th floor research data and "original photos" (whatever the hell that suppose to mean)... note: Gary does well on-camera, I can't say the same in how he deals with those being interviewed from behind the camera

Jack has been there and done that for years, listened to every half-baked excuse as to why this and that. He makes mistakes, he owns up to them, IF he's proven wrong. His photo-database should NOT be overlooked, he's an excellent resource...

Poor Jack. Still "stuck on stupid." Marina Oswald took those backyard photos. She admitted as much on Nov 23 and does so today. His head. His body. His newspapers. His rifle. His revolver. Zero credible/scientific evidence of fakery. End of story.

Hey Measley Mouth Pencil D*ck,

you sure look like Jim Plunkett - can we have your autograph?

note: I sincerley apologize to the forum for calling you a Pencil D*ck

Okay, okay, I sincerley apologize to the forum for calling you a 'measley mouth' Pencil Dick.

How about dropping the D.C. PR nonesense Slattery, nobody believes you, anymore than they believe Bill Miller, so - jump in! Lone Nutter's are alive and well around here!

'Bill Miller' wrote:

dgh: Save you're Jesus comments for the unsaved -- which leads us tooooooo..... why was ANY "filming" stopped by the camera operators (and I suspect there may be 1 realistic excuse) at the corner making the turn? They all do show a break in the action. Including the Zapruder Film, which picked up the limo what, 30 yards down Elm? After all two of those cameras were in position to see the "entire" turn, including **Zapruders**...

I'll leave your salvation to the creator.

dgh01: thank you, thank you very much -- I'm sure my creator will accept your benevolence, like I said; save you're Jesus comments for the unsaved...

However, I can respond to your paranoia and lack of knowledge concerning the timing of those films you mentioned although it will be nothing that hasn't been said to you several times before. First of all, one might ask Tina Towner (a young teenager at the time of the assassination) why she stopped filming. The same can be said for Hughes, Bell, and Martin. To question why ordinary people do the things they did under extraordinary circumstances as if there is a set standard to filming a presidential motorcade is a bit over the top for most people and could be considered a poor attempt at trying to find fault with something where no fault ever existed. And while it is true that some Dealey Plaza films had breaks in them of a few 18ths of a second and others only recorded segments of the limo's turn onto Elm Street - there is no point at which the President's car was never being captured and filmed on Elm Street by someones camera. Now having said this once again .... it seems that a sensible person would see that there is nothing suspicious about the films concerning JFK's turn from Houston onto Elm, while on the other hand - a paranoid non-educated indivdual who hasn't bothered to piece together the available evidence pertaining to the overlapping of these various films just might see things differently.

dgh01: "a paranoid non-educated individual" that's not very nice, Bill -- only problem with your sensible bullxxxx Bill is: its still BULLxxxx! None of it P R O V A B L E, just more Lone Neuter "unbiased" opinion...

If camera operators positioned to see the complete turn HALTED filming "during" the turn on to Elm St., WHY? Perhaps, to re-wind? I can buy a little of that -- If that's the case, then it was great luck Zapruder had his false start, if not the false start, I suspect Abe wouldn't had enough wind to capture the entire limo run down Elm St.

Didn't Zapruder say, no filming stop downs, [to paraphrase:] one continuous pass down Elm St., no rewinding -- that he captured the entire ride down Elm St.? He clearly was in position to see the Limo turn from Huston onto Elm. Why not film it? If he had plenty of wind (after the false start), it makes absolutely no sense why we don't see the entire Elm St. portion including the turn in the Zapruder film. He would of had plenty of *wind* to get the entire run down Elm including the false start.

A Zapruder type camera (Model 414 PD Bell & Howell Zoomatic Director Series Camera) runs anywhere from 50 to 66 seconds on a full wind, less if the camera is not wound tightly. Winding it too tightly means running the risk of breaking it and in that event ... no film of the President's arrival would not be obtained by Zapruder. I know this because I have owned several of them and tested each one.

dgh: "winding too tightly"? Care to tell me where I can find that in the camera operating manual, got one right here?

Where do you find this nonesense? Pure and simple, unmitigated bullxxxx -- LMAO that in the Zavada report? Oh lord!

I believe that Zapruder filmed the lead cycles so to get a feel of the tracking speed of the motorcade ... a type of test if you will.

dgh: Bill read my words, where did Zapruder say that?

Had he not stopped filming, then he surely would have run the possibility of running out of filming capability when the President finally arrived. Common sense tells me that Zapruder stopped his camera. One reason for saying this is because there is a 'start-up' frame at Z133. A start-up frame as you know is brighter than the following frames. The second thing is that Zapruder from his earlier test pans of the cycles would be aware that until the President was visible west of the lamppost

dgh: there's those "test" pans again, **cite** please

- he would be obsecured by the tree foilage. Zapruder did what I would have expected and that was to wait until he saw the President come into full view so to utilize his cameras remaining running time to the fullest. With the limo advancing at just under 1' per film frame, it appears that Zapruder was off and filming within one second of him seeing the President emerging from behind the lamppost. That's roughly 4 seconds before the first shot was fired. While someone looking to find fault with Zapruder and/or his film may see it differently, I feel as though I have looked at his actions in an unbiased way that is both logical in hindsight and the most plausible explanation when considering the evidence as a whole. Below is Z25 with a crop of the limo from Z133 inserted into the image.

dgh: you have "looked at his actions in a unbiased..."? Oh brother, come on, will'ya --- we're talking evidence Bill Miller, Zapruder's testimony, you forget that? Did he say he interrupted his pan down Elm Street.

What you *would* of expected Zapruder to do? How in the hell can you achive that? LMAO...

What did Zapruder say he did?

Zapruder "TEST" pans? When did he say he did TEST pans? *Cite* please!

All you guys need is one single witness/Kodak/Jamieson/LIFE/US media employee that viewed unsplit in-camera original-#0183 verifying Zapruders false start is/was indeed seen in #0183, as we see it today -- a few Z-film alteration problems will disappear. Not ALL DP photo/film alteration problems mind you, but some of them...

To date, all of the alteration concerns I have witnessed has been the result of paranoia, poor research, and a lack of knowledge of the facts. For those individuals there will never be any closure concerning Zfilm alteration. The biggest reason for this is because those who have been making such claims have not shown any signs of being able to understand their mistakes.

dgh: is that a fact, so, you've spent 5 years following the paranoids around, eh? Who are you Bill Miller? Correcting film/photo professionals about issues you have zero expertise in....? Absolutely sure your not paid to follow us around? Tough to believe the level of committment some Lone Neuter's display is protecting something that was deceided and declared 40+ years ago. Especiallty those Neuter's who stand to gain NOTHING for 12-18 hours a day work... tsk-tsk

Did LIFE magazine rep's while in Dallas Nov 23rd/24th view the unsplit #0183 film?

On pages 83 and 84 of Trask's book (POTP) it is said that Richard Stolley (Life) was present on the morning of the 23rd when Zapruder took out his film and projected it for the SS and others who were there wanting to see it. Zapruder had kept the original film and a 1st generation copy. So unless someone broke into Zapruder's safe and altered the film and the copy - the opportunity was never there IMO.

dgh: wow Bill, as for the immediate above nonsense - save it for the uninitiated, will ya. If you don't know what was projected by Zapruder the morning of the 23rd, say so -- can't you read? SPLIT or UNSPLIT Z-film? Your ego is getting in the way of your eyesight.. What was projected by Zapruder, SPLIT or UNSPLIT film --

All you need is one, ONE witness who was at the screening who can tell us he/she saw a Zapruder film false start at the films headend, the same false start we see these day's. Truck on guy!

Bill Miller

Listen up, PR dude -- there's not one film that covers that corner without a break in the action (read: stop down, splice) - do your homework dufus!

David, Jesus said, "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone". While you are correct that each assassination film may not cover the complete Houston to Elm Street turn of the limo ... combined, they do account for every second of that turn. So do YOUR homework, dufus!

Bill Miller

dgh: Save you're Jesus comments for the unsaved -- which leads us tooooooo..... why was ANY "filming" stopped by the camera operators (and I suspect there may be 1 realistic excuse) at the corner making the turn? They all do show a break in the action. Including the Zapruder Film, which picked up the limo what, 30 yards down Elm? After all two of those cameras were in position to see the "entire" turn, including **Zapruders**...

If camera operators positioned to see the complete turn HALTED filming "during" the turn on to Elm St., WHY? Perhaps, to re-wind? I can buy a little of that -- If that's the case, then it was great luck Zapruder had his false start, if not the false start, I suspect Abe wouldn't had enough wind to capture the entire limo run down Elm St.

Didn't Zapruder say, no filming stop downs, [to paraphrase:] one continuous pass down Elm St., no rewinding -- that he captured the entire ride down Elm St.? He clearly was in position to see the Limo turn from Huston onto Elm. Why not film it? If he had plenty of wind (after the false start), it makes absolutely no sense why we don't see the entire Elm St. portion including the turn in the Zapruder film. He would of had plenty of *wind* to get the entire run down Elm including the false start.

All you guys need is one single witness/Kodak/Jamieson/LIFE/US media employee that viewed unsplit in-camera original-#0183 verifying Zapruders false start is/was indeed seen in #0183, as we see it today -- a few Z-film alteration problems will disappear. Not ALL DP photo/film alteration problems mind you, but some of them...

Did LIFE magazine rep's while in Dallas Nov 23rd/24th view the unsplit #0183 film?

If #0183 got to Life (Chicagop/NYC) SPLIT [as well as a first generation Jamieson film dupe] you have a uphill battle when it comes to posible Z-film alteration issues. Maybe they'll comment?

'Brendan Slattery' dronned on:

Listen up, PR dude -- there's not one film that covers that corner without a break in the action (read: stop down, splice) - do your homework dufus!

Moron, the Towner film covers the entire turn and part of its procession up Elm. Greer was incompetent, but he didn't come close to clipping the curb. Nor did any eyewitness on that corner testify to that effect.

Slattery or whatever the hell your name is, listen up real close, pal....? Frame-by-frame on the towner film little guy, when you find the point let me know, I'm not doing anymore ground work for *stumps* ...

Zapruder lied about what he was paid for the film he alledgedly shot -- deal with it!

David, can you f*cking READ? Assuming you can, go read Appendix E again. Do you not realize what that's implying? Profiting from a film after the fact (i.e. Time-Life) is not the same thing as ACTING AS A WILLING, PAID, CO-CONSPIRATOR IN THE MURDER OF THE PRESIDENT. F*cking RETARD.

dgh: Of course I can't read you inside-the-beltway leech... I'm responding through the 'mobius thought connection'. Implying? Appendix E is "implying"? You're "implying", something, anything regarding the JFK assassination? Either it is or it isn't laddie, no gray for you Lone Neuter's. You are a newbie aren't you.... such a potty mouth too!

I don't recall saying Zapruder was a conspirator or CO-conspirator you idiot-stick. What Zap did was cut himself a great deal. And the family/trust continued his great tradition as witnessed a few years back (16 million and the American taxpayer [who paid the 16 million, not to mention alledged tax write-offs] was not afforded the films copyright) a joke...

P.S. Regarding "homework," Time-Life came to him, not the other way around. Somewhere, a remedial history class awaits you.

dgh: ah, and what does that have to do with his lying about what he was paid? Keep swinging slugger

congrat's Jack White -- Great looking site!

I too, had to add the "l" (as in LIMA) in the url. Look forward to new site additions.

David healy

dgh: the post where they have communicated to you the same or is this more unsupportable BS from you?

dgh: I believe the alledged witnesses, I prefer to call them *film-viewers* describe film coverage of the JFK assassination, Nov 22nd 1963

dgh: I believe you should be stating you were on the JFK Assassination Forum when YOU, Bill Miller, first heard of another film....

dgh: name to YOU? rofl, roflmfao! Why YOU?

dgh: perhaps your game was uncovered early on...

dgh: of that I'm sure, tsk-tsk

dgh: then why do you run around in circles when these issues prop up every now and then? If the topic is so unimportant, ignore it! It should be painfully evident to the lurkers, your not here to search for solutions and answers [where it be the photographic record or not] AGAIN, perhaps your game was uncovered early on...?

Was there another slow day on the job, David ... so you thought you'd XXXXXX on the ol' JFK forum again? Let's see if I can address all the say-nothing trolling remarks you made above in one sweep ...

The first stupid thing you said is answered by the third stupid thing you said. (see above) The topic was discussed in detail on the looney forum (aka: JFKResearch) Those threads should still be archived, unless like some post made there that was damaging to the theme of alteration .. they may have been removed and are no longer obtainable.

The second stupid remark in the list is typical for you and I expected little else. Only someone with an agenda or lacking the basic skills of comprehension would not see the descrepencies I mentioned in an earlier post concerning what these various alleged witnesses had seen on the particular films they saw.

Stupid remark #4 refers to why they would answer any questions I had asked. One might assume that a forum that is claiming to be searching for the truth would not mind answering questions put forth by other members there. In fact, there were several people there who were wanting to know more about the circustances surrounding the alleged witnessing of this 'other film'. Burnham and Myers both had responded to my inquiries and that is how I know about the particulars concerning the alleged films they had seen. About the only thing these alleged witnesses had in common was that none of them could verify the month and year they saw this 'other film'. Keep in mind that ths was supposed to be some of the most vivid images of JFK's assassination and before anyone had really seen the Zapruder film and certainly not a good clean image of it. Yet no one could offer any names of people who were present at these showings so someone could seek independent collaboration.

The 5th and 6th stupid remark you made goes to what has becaome common knowledge and that is that anyone challenging the alteration crowd on the looney forum soon had their memberships revoked. In my case it wasn't until DellaRosa had cashed my check for my fees. And if anyone thinks that the attitude of that forum is not like that I have stated here, then just let them read the many sorry responses that you give instead of taking the time to rebut what has been said with actual data.

Bill Miller

(edit:removal of offensive phrase quoted from previous post)

looks like you're the one having a slow day, actually, a R E A L slow day. I could start 100+ threads on this forum (I'll save the lurkers that pain, of course they already know) discussing the nonesense you've posted. Especially concerning those that have more knowledge about photos and film than you'll ever have much let alone able to demonstrate -- I think you have a real serious self-image problem, not to mention a sever need for undivided attention...

How many years ago were you, Bill Miller thrown of the JFKResearch forum?... 4-5 years ago -- and you're STILL crying about it -- you got caught - live with it. Your nonsense was seen through then, as it is, NOW! So show us some REAL stuff, I and other lurkers want to be wooed and dazzled by your brilliance. Your 300 word postings about how someone responds to you on this board and boards long ago is B O R I N G, where's the B E E F...

The state of Lone Nutterism is on the way out...

So now an honorable man like Zapruder--who loved Kennedy--is smeared as a paid co-conspirator. Just when I think this place can't sink any lower. Castro? Benevolent dictator! Zapruder? Traitorous Jew!

P.S. The Towner film shows Greer making that turn quite smoothly. Was that faked too?

Listen up, PR dude -- there's not one film that covers that corner without a break in the action (read: stop down, splice) - do your homework dufus!

Zapruder lied about what he was paid for the film he alledgedly shot -- deal with it!

You on a "traitorus" Jew kick these day's ?-- there's forums on the internet that covers those issues, you won't find it here -- move on little doggie, move on...

It is not a Toro Sensor, but some other brand. Here is a photo.

I will look up the brand.

Jacvk

Go here ......... http://www.rainsensor.com/

Bill Miller

That company's web site administrator must be wondering why the hell they're getting so many hits all of a sudden...if they only knew...

Or maybe they do...cue Twilight Zone music...

yep, gott'a be 5 or 6 hits - watch for a crashing server.

Jack, the people you are citing about seeing this other film cannot be talking about the same film ...

dgh: the post where they have communicated to you the same or is this more unsupportable BS from you?

because the events they describe from within the film the saw has varied from testimonial to the another. I have been through this before with you and if your mind is so far gone that you cannot see the problem with there being so many different versions and how that applies here, then there is nothing more to discuss. Burnham's version saw a 1/4 to a 1/2 second limo stop. Another witness (Myers) to this 'other film' says he saw a 4 second limo stop. Scott Myers posted on the looney forum that the version he saw showed JFK getting his ass shot up as he was rounding the corner onto Elm Street. Not one witness has ever claimed that they heard any shots at this time, nor did they describe seeing the President and Connally shot this early in the Elm Street ride. In fact, Betzner said he had already taken his photo when the first shot rang out. Willis said it was the first shot sounding off that caused him to take his photo, thus Myers was either lying or there are different films out there that are being lumped together as one film called "the other film". If the latter is true, then at least some of these people saw a staged film for whatever reason that it was created.

Now you can tell this forum that all these alleged witnesses have described the same events,

dgh: I believe the alledged witnesses, I prefer to call them *film-viewers* describe film coverage of the JFK assassination, Nov 22nd 1963

but I was on that forum when all this came out and I am telling you flat out that you are mistaken.

dgh: I believe you should be stating you were on the JFK Assassination Forum when YOU, Bill Miller, first heard of another film....

Furthermore, DellaRosa could not name one person he was with when he saw this alleged "other film".

dgh: name to YOU? rofl, roflmfao! Why YOU?

DellaRosa was so vague that there was no way to even pinpoint the month and year at his school so to go back in their records and find out what events that took place there so to see who it was who was responsible for bringing the film to the school in theo first place.

dgh: perhaps your game was uncovered early on...

I remember this because I wanted to help locate this other film,

dgh: of that I'm sure, tsk-tsk

but was frustrated by the severe lack of detail that was forthcoming over this so-called shocking event. So spin it any way that you like, but you are either lying to these forum members or you are so delusional that you no longer have a grasp on reality of what transpired over this so-called "other film" business.

dgh: then why do you run around in circles when these issues prop up every now and then? If the topic is so unimportant, ignore it! It should be painfully evident to the lurkers, your not here to search for solutions and answers [where it be the photographic record or not] AGAIN, perhaps your game was uncovered early on...?

Bill Miller

'Bill Miller' dronned on

you're not telling me the Zapruder film footage we saw in the ABC documentary (and the DVD of same documentary) came from the extant film that was used in the MPI debacle are you?

You posted Mack's email to you, but it appears you didn't bother to read what he said. For instance, "The ABC special used a video tape of the National Archives'

preservation film copy of the 8mm camera original Zapruder footage."

dgh: what preservation *film* copy, when was it created... perhaps you'll can draw on your vast video experience and answer a few elementary questions regarding same, huh? You know, show off for a bit ?-- You always get this testy when someone refers to you as a "condesending twerp"? Ready for a few related video questions? After all, your the expert, should be quite simple, before I start a new thread make sure you have a thorough understanding of video 3:2 pulldown, giving you a little advance notice, my way of being a nice guy

btw, over the last 25 years I've purchased through NARA *approved* vendors over 100K worth of search time and archival films for broadcast

I'd have to see those reciepts, but it doesn't say much when you sound like the guy who took 25 years to get through high school as if he somehow was more educated than someone who did it in four years.

dgh: 25 years through high school, LOL -- you're losing it champ -- Slattery DID get to you...

For instance, I guess that you didn't view them long enough to know Moorman's photo was filmed for TV not 30 minutes following the assassination.

dgh: stay on point Bill, the thread is DMyers - Monaco Film Labs [whom I was a client]

The same can be said when you always would say that there were no identifiable pictures of Sitzman in Dealay Plaza ... despite her turning around and looking right at Zapruder before Abe had filmed the assassination footage.

dgh: stay on point Bill, the thread is DMyers - Monaco Film Labs [whom I was a client]

It's like having a library full of books and never having read any of them.

dgh: before I partake in gamesmanship with you, you ever been in the National Archives

Bill Miller