David G. Healy

Then it's time for these "experts" to prove their case. After all they have had what, a couple of years now? So show us the proof. How hard is it? experts? who said anything about "experts"? PROFESSIONALS ! Wishing and hoping' there Craigster?

Lets see what it is they might have. Ground zero... Z film Gen 1: Master Color negative, optical blowup Gen 2: Master positive print Gen 3: Working color negative(s) Gen 4: Working color print(s) Gen 5: Hollywood 7 negative So Fetzer, what is it? speaking of what is it? what Photoshop algorithm did you use on Dr. Thompson's .jpg frame?

All the above is meagre hearsay as far as this forum is concerned, until you can provide evidence that all of the above is as you say it is. At the moment, the Hollywood 7 studies are just a propoganda rumour. You are normally not one to hold back evidence, what's the problem in this instance? All Z-film related postings here are mere hearsay and opinions dude. Unless you, of course, spend your time sitting in the archives gazing.... This thread has new, recent "professional input", unlike yours and some other uninformed "opinions". Without professional chops, I'm afraid your opinion drops to the bottom of the pile... Now imagine this: folks that really do understand Photoshop, AfterEffects, film and photo image composition, and manipulation are monitoring this thread... Plenty of folks have seen the Hollywood Z-film images -- professional film colorists AND matte artists **KNOW** what they're looking at.... So.... until you can provide Z-film authenticity and in-camera original verification (which you can't and/or won't do) you're simply advancing old news, old news that's had a thousand holes blown into it over the past 10 years (especially the last 10 years)... Old news advanced by the same DP history preservers of yore (for 45 years now)... What's fascinating is those very preservers of DP history and adherents don't seem to enjoy the advances we've made in the image technology field... maybe we should let them in on 3D commercial film making...

TRY MEASURING IT. You do understand how to do that, don't you? Lets use the Davidson image for example: 31x31 pixel average JFK's head shadow 25,26,21 rgb JFK's jacket shadow 17,18,16 rgb Kellermans head shadow 26,29,22 rgb And the blackest black, and still not crushed...the unexposed film base, plus fog 5x5 pixel average 11,4,1 rgb. LMAO! above is subject to your computer monitors gamma setting.... no benchmark, hence useless....

ya gotta except defeat with grace Craigster... you've had a good lone nutter-xxxxx run....gotta be a giant among man! Carry on!

Let me explain a simple fact of Z-film life to you and others: you, can't prove that the alleged in-camera Zapruder film original, housed at NARA is in fact the *actual* in-camera original, therefore, what you see in this thread is all speculation, on all of our parts... O-P-I-N-I-O-N Having said that: in this specific thread, some speculation and explanation regarding Z-film authenticity comes from more "informed-experienced" folks than others... explaining your own expertise-experience in matters such as possible film alteration might lend to your contribution here. Just a suggestion, after all we do get a lot of uninformed opinion concerning this specific subject matter and those new to the ways of Photshop-like software packages...

couldn't agree more, Dr. Thompson? The above image of yours (for our consideration) is, ah, how do I say it without offense, worthless... Perhaps someone will make arrangements for YOU to see the frame, yes frame... that's all that's needed to prove Zapruder film alteration, yes? (p.s. the secret? think 'contrast')

density becomes you.... your only retreat, son!

You got a problem with Farid? And yes you might be surprised to know who has seen what... So step up the the plate dave and take a swing. That would be a novel idea for you. swing at what, a wiffle ball? Perhaps someone someday soon will show Farid a frame or two, blows non-conspiracy right out of the water... Appears even Jimmy D. is getting a chance to see... the question dude is this: did someone (not who) screw with the NARA held, in-camera original Z-film? If so, why? Focus son! You are woefully uninformed. No internet in the cage? It's not secret son that belief in the WCR these days is purely a matter of FAITH. Lone Nut-SBT-LHO did it all by his lonesome kinda FAITH. Informed common sense not withstanding.... Say, by-the-way, did you guys ever, EVER find a lone-nut leaning film-photo compositor, expert yet? Oh-well, its only its been 10 years since you started the search!

been my mantra for years Dr. John. Great to seeya, mate! Hope you and your family had a great Christmas. David

You got a problem with Farid? And yes you might be surprised to know who has seen what... So step up the the plate dave and take a swing. That would be a novel idea for you. swing at what, a wiffle ball? Perhaps someone someday soon will show Farid a frame or two, blows non-conspiracy right out of the water... Appears even Jimmy D. is getting a chance to see... the question dude is this: did someone (not who) screw with the NARA held, in-camera original Z-film? If so, why? Focus son!

Craig, You are trading in double talk. It is obvious. I haven't time for bafoons who masquerade as know-it-alls. Let's see... where is that "IGNORE A MEMBER" option again? Oh yeah, there it is. Goodbye. Translated from Burnhamspeak...I'm toast, I NEED to run away...FAST. Nothing new here, you are in over your head. I see you're still living in fantasy-land, eh? LMAO! You just knew someone would open the cage and them it out.... Lots of interesting stuff on the table, will you or Costella actually step up to the plate? I've seen the frames, know the Z-film imagery pedigrey-lineage, what's to step up to? The 1963 imagery-frames don't lie... You and most Z-film non-alteration advocates have a problem, Indiana.

Interesting post, but of course I don't share you views. Just a few questions. When will these frames be released? There is an IMPORTANT change in the side of JFK's head from 315 to 317. The side of his head was blown open. The only area in 317 that has a sharp edge shadow transition is direct above the ear, exactly where the portion of his skull is missing. So how does your claim reconcile this?? Finally are you aware that a 3d model has been created to check the shadow location on the back of JFK's head at 317 to locate the size and shadow of expected shadow and has found it to be correct? lmao.... 3D model to determine shadow location? Is this turning into the Dale *see my emmy* Myers school of photo interpretation? Come on craigster, LMAO! There's a few others here that I suspect have seen these frames, some, the entire 35mm *in-motion* film.

And here's a close up taken directly from the DVD, saved in BMP and the crop saved in PNG format. No painted in patch at the back of the head. get a grip son.... the contrast in this image is so far out of whack its pathetic..... what is the lineage your posted image? how many generations is it from the alleged NARA held, in-camera Z-film?

Craig, You are trading in double talk. It is obvious. I haven't time for bafoons who masquerade as know-it-alls. Let's see... where is that "IGNORE A MEMBER" option again? Oh yeah, there it is. Goodbye. Translated from Burnhamspeak...I'm toast, I NEED to run away...FAST. Nothing new here, you are in over your head. I see you're still living in fantasy-land, eh? LMAO!

Patrick.... welcome to this forum. Belief in the alleged Zapruder Film is an act of FAITH by lone nutters, WCR supporters and SBT adherents. It (the film) provides a comfort zone if you will... When it comes to the Z-film common sense goes out the window, in fact discussing Z-film alteration (ANY alteration) brings out self proclaimed photogs, even those that haven't picked up a camera for years.... don't let them get you down, when discussing image Kennedy related imagery topics insist on film-photo imagery lineage AND sources.... only way to keep the Z-film faithful in line...

No, Jim. What is bizarre, is that you and other supporters of this wacky theory fail to understand, that if the Zapruder film is faked, then all of the known films, and photographs showing the same Geographical areas at the same time as the Zapruder film must also have been faked and altered accordingly in the same lab and at the same time for on site comparision purposes, in order to implement the alleged synchronization process, ie, Zapruder, Muchmore, Bronson and Nix. It's simple logic, a logic which does not require having a PHD of any kind. well now there something which may, just MAY, prove your photo research is worth something anyway (something which Bill Miller never did, although requested multiple times). Establish a baseline comparisons (side-by-side comparisons) of all Nov 22nd 1963 DP films... full frame comparisons (in motion), off of in-camera originals with declared lineage including signed affidavits. Dude, till then, you and Lammie are just other roving opinions, I could care less if you think your the second coming of Ansel Adams...O-P-I-N-I-O-N-S The Zapruder film as we see it today is flawed. All the whining won't change that. So SHOW US the film (in motion) comparisons!

congratulations...

And, I was once of the opinion that I was the only one here who was sufficiently foolish enough to attempt to cast a few unsavory facts about Jimbo. Tom P.S. I got your back! Enjoy his back, Tom... The dude still can't convince anyone here who has a modicum of case knowledge that LHO acted alone and the WCR wasn't a farce... Sgt Mikey simply needs an audience at the cost of JGarrison's defects or not of character... So he advances nothing other than wasting bandwidth. Have a nice Christmas.

Closer than most! 1. CE399 penetrated only a short distance (base-first). Striking the right transverse process of the C7 vertebrae in a base-first attitude, this sheared a 4.5mm width lead protrusion(which had squeezed out the bullet base) from the base of the bullet. The lead core protrusion exited the anterior throat of JFK and is responsible for the small anterior throat wound. The lead core protursion was recovered and is one of those fragments found in CE840, which by the way, weighed 0.9 grains. (P.S.) It is no coincidence that the "punch-type" back wound of JFK measured 4mm X 7mm, and the deformed(flat) base to CE399 also measured 4mm X 7mm. Just as it is no coincidence that a portion of the copper jacket base to CE399 was removed at some point while this bullet was in the National Archives. The copper jacket base to this bullet contained "impact damage" created as a result of impact with a bone of the vertebral column, as well as having a "raised" edge completely around the perimeter of the bullet base. Which edge could have been created ONLY by the bullet having passed through a material of such density that it litterally "stretched" the copper jacket backwards. (P.P.S) The "abrasion collar" of the back wound (as determined by the HSCA as being located at the bottom edge of he wound of penetration, is merely the result of the end-over-end tumbling of the bullet as it struck JFK in the back. Thereby creating this (direct contradiction to normal ballistics) abrasion collar at the bottom of the wound penetration as opposed to being located at the top of the wound pentration. (P.P.P.S) The back wound of JFK has it's longest axis (7mm wide) in the horizontal, as opposed to the normal downward striking of a bullet, which causes the longest axis to be in the verticle. (P.P.P.P.S) The reason for the "punch-type" penetrations through the coat; inner liner of the coat; and shirt worn by JFK is merely a result of the bullet striking with it's "flat-base" forward. Which, not unlike a paper-punch, punched out the fabric from the items of clothing. (P.P.P.P.P.S) Which, also, contradictory to normal ballistic fact, also carried considerable fabric from the clothing down into the wound of entry into the back of JfK. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ That should sufficiently explain why Dr. Humes could insert his finger, as well as (later) a stainless steel probe down into the back entry wound of JFK, without the lprobe (or his finger) finding any pathway for the bullet. +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ As far as the second shot (which happens to be the Z312/313 impact, this is the "cowlick" entry which the HSCA found. Due to a variety of reasons, this bullet (abnormally) fragmented and the fragments passed through the upper area of the parietal lobe of the brain of JFK, creating immense damage. And, just as stated by JBC's Parkland Dr. a fragment from this bullet "escaped" and is responsible for the wrist wound of JBC. +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Now! Onward to the true "MAGIC BULLET" (the one that pulled the disappearing act) First off, this bullet struck JFK in the head also. JFK was approximately 30-feet farther down Elm St. from the Z312/313 impact when this bullet struck. And, since I am neither smarter than, nor more qualified than the elements of the SS and FBI, this also happens to be the impact location which each of these government agencies determined as the third shot impact, and so noted on their respective survey plats. (SS--12/5/63)--(FBI--2/7/64) Which happens to have struck at survey stationing 4+95. (as opposed to stationing 4+65.3 for the Z313 impact) Now! After having penetrated through JFK's head (having struck in the EOP region of the skull, the bullet exited JFK's head in an area of which considerable damage already existed from the Z312/313 impact. The INTACT bullet thereafter continued on (downwards) to strike JBC in the right shoulder as he lay across the jump seats with his head in Nellie's lab, thereby exposing his shoulder and back to the flight of the bullet as well as the cerebral tissue which was blown forward from the head of JFK. And, as they say, now you know the rest of the story: Being: Why JBC's coat got washed and laundered, as the back of the coat would have been covered with cerebral tissue, which could not have occurred with the Z313 impact as a result of the back of the jump seat would have prevented cerebral tissue from having been blown forward and striking all over the back of JBC's coat. As well as, the bullet penetration into JBC's back was elongated slightly to the horizontal.---Which the WC attempted to blame on a bullet that was "yawing". When, one places JBC leaned over across the jump seats, then the elongaged horizontal wound of entry now becomes a correctly oriented downward wound of entry that is in fact elongated vertically, as it should be. The bullet then, of course, penetrated throuogh the chest of JBC and exited to thereafter enter his leg. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ But, then again, this may in fact be more than one wants to know about the FACTS of the assassination, as it certainly puts a crimp in chasing mythological creatures throughout Dealey Plaza. Tom. P.S. It is all now a matter of "published record", of which The JFK Assassination Museum" is now in possession. (along with a few others who appear to be quite adept at understanding simple facts.) The above which, at a minimum: a *cover-up* in the murder of JFK. Thanks for your work Tom Purvis! Have a nice holiday.

Yes John, he is back I suppose he is back, as a story-teller. But he is yet to establish himself as the thinker he ought to be. He has recycled an old Quantum Leap episode and made it seem original. But that doesn't excuse his bald-faced lie he's read tons of books on the assassination and that all of them--even the conspiracy books--depict Oswald as an attention-starved nut. I mean, what a bunch of crud. Some of his flock might even take him seriously. His claim Oswald beat his wife is also revealing of bias, as no one really knows what went down between Marina and Lee besides Marina, and she, to this day, refuses to portray him as a cruel wife-beater. I mean, does his book even deal with the medical evidence, and its problems? I'd suspect not. Like Hoover and the FBI, King's "investigation" appears to have begun and ended with Oswald. Could he have done it? Well, yeah. "And look, the DPD and FBI found some evidence! Well, that seals it!" Never mind that a frame-up--to the outside, and to one only looking at Oswald--would look quite like Oswald did it. Never mind that the FBI's and Army's tests proved it highly unlikely Oswald could pull off the shots with that rifle. In short, it's clear King is a featherweight thinker in the ring with a heavyweight issue. It seems Pat most writers who perceive their American dream slipping away want to do a book on the JFK's assassination... their faith has been challenged, go figure.

let's have an order of *crispy* in honor of a guy who turned his back on JFK... ya need a life, hon!

appears you and Blackburst are losing to the Team Judyth PR machine... Momentum is building. Perhaps old Martin Shackleford was right, eh?

Thanks Tom, here's a better one, that is very clear. JFKcountercoup and two more - JFKcountercoup: Pew Trust In Government Poll Graphs There has been a lot of analysis and examination of these polls, but few of these acute observers dare mention the spike that began shortly after the assassination, or even mention the origins of the decline. How Americans View Government | Pew Research Center for the People and the Press analysis of Post 9/11 Spike: poli.haifa.ac.il/~terror/pages/maamarim/ar2.pdf Thank you very much, Bill (and Tom Scully).

Bill... Is the below referenced graph available anywhere on the web? quote-Doug on "I published the graph used by Phillips as Figure71, in my own book, "Inside the Assassination Records Review Board,"published in 2009 and still available at Amazon.com). Study of the graphreveals that this trust starting dropping precipitately after January of 1964." quote-Doug off Thanks, David