On the two men Bowers saw ....

[Bill Miller]

Alan,

Is your finger pointing to lens' grunge?

What Alan pointed to may be the result of several things ... some of which may be the result of the transfer of the images onto DVD as MPI had done. But common sense would tell me that if it was 'lens grunge' as you call it, then it would be seen in every Zframe in this film and it is not.

This is why I mentioned the "C" shaped swirls seen on the film because I think we can rule out 'lens grunge' being on Zapruder and Wiegman's camera that would show the exact same formation pattern and shapes on their independent films.

Bill Miller

Edited September 29, 2007 by Bill Miller

[Alan Healy]

My animation is clearer & it's zoomed into the fence. I've concluded it's not a hat but the shape of the wheel arch on the white vehicle in the background.

So IMO "if you want to know where "Hatman" was positioned", don't look at Nix because "it" is not seen it that film.

Next!

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

Alan.

Here are a couple ,one a close up, by Rick, I believe if not ??..The other moves quicker than the one you posted..

...However have a look...The information re Sam Holland and Mary Moorman, are from "SSID"....Thompson.

B

Nice one Bernice thank you.

I picked out the best frame from my version & attempted to clean it up a little without changing anything to the main features of the black blob & vehicle.

Compare that to any frame of Ricks'.

Slightly better is all I'm saying, the frames are just not that great for this close up work, simple as that & we could say they are just as bad as each other, that's fine too.

Anyway we're all free to make up your own mind but we must be careful of connecting two items

just because they were in close proximity to each other.

I personally think that the position of the "hat" in Moorman is behind the bush in Nix, further east than what you guys have "zoomed in on" so to speak.

I have no problem with what Holland said or where he stood to illustrate where he saw the smoke, it is close to the "hat" in Moorman, very close(no doubt Thompson moved him a foot or two to get that picture looking just right but, who cares?).

Holland saw smoke coming out from under the trees around fifteen feet from the eastern corner & I believe him but, where is that smoke in Moorman if you believe it came from the position of the "hat"?

Edited September 29, 2007 by Alan Healy

[Miles Scull]

Alan,

Is your finger pointing to lens' grunge?

What Alan pointed to may be the result of several things ... some of which may be the result of the transfer of the images onto DVD as MPI had done. But common sense would tell me that if it was 'lens grunge' as you call it, then it would be seen in every Zframe in this film and it is not.

This is why I mentioned the "C" shaped swirls seen on the film because I think we can rule out 'lens grunge' being on Zapruder and Wiegman's camera that would show the exact same formation pattern and shapes on their independent films.

Bill Miller

You kiddin' ?

Or, have you missed the boat yet again?

As every boy with his first camera knows, lens grunge appears & disappears, with the angle of incidence of sunlight change & the light refraction attitude change, as the camera is moved.

Lens grunge changes colouration as well, depending on camera motion.

So, obviously, the grunge cannot be seen in some frames, but is glaring in others.

Sorry, no cigar & no smoke, either.

Just lens grunge.

[Alan Healy]

Alan,

Is your finger pointing to lens' grunge?

Are you a member of the grunge brigade?

What do you think?

It's not Miles because it remains stationary while the camera is moving & as we see in that end of the Zfilm clip that shows the fence corner, the "grunge" moves as the camera does.

Stationary, or very little movement if any.

http://img486.imageshack.us/img486/3996/za...mirroredkh1.gif

[Bill Miller]

I have no problem with what Holland said or where he stood to illustrate were he saw the smoke, it is close to the "hat" in Moorman, very close(no doubt Thompson moved him a foot or two to get that picture looking just right but, who cares?).

Holland saw smoke coming out from under the trees around fifteen feet from the eastern corner & I believe him but, where is that smoke in Moorman if you believe it came from the position of the "hat"?

Not sure what it meant by saying the Thompson moved anything by a foot or two, but like you said - who cares!

I think it sounds like you are saying that at least some smoke was seen by witnesses and its fair to say that Moorman's photo was taken after the last shot, so where is any smoke in Moorman's photo ... how can that be explained?? Oh yes, it was explained when someone said that Moorman, nor Nix were at the right angle to the sun for the light to pass through the smoke and illuminate it like it did from the angle Wiegman's and Zapruder's camera had.

Bill Miller

[Miles Scull]

Alan,

Is your finger pointing to lens' grunge?

Are you a member of the grunge brigade?

What do you think?

It's not Miles because it remains stationary while the camera is moving & as we see in that end of the Zfilm clip that shows the fence corner, the "grunge" moves as the camera does.

Stationary, or very little movement if any.

http://img486.imageshack.us/img486/3996/za...mirroredkh1.gif

Alan,

You are correct. I checked the gif. The hand is pointing to leaves in shadow. Your idea?

( your image URL doesn't seen to work)

But the so-called swirls in Z-419 are grunge effects as can be seen by comparing adjacent frames.

Edited September 29, 2007 by Miles Scull

[Bill Miller]

Alan,

Is your finger pointing to lens' grunge?

What Alan pointed to may be the result of several things ... some of which may be the result of the transfer of the images onto DVD as MPI had done. But common sense would tell me that if it was 'lens grunge' as you call it, then it would be seen in every Zframe in this film and it is not.

This is why I mentioned the "C" shaped swirls seen on the film because I think we can rule out 'lens grunge' being on Zapruder and Wiegman's camera that would show the exact same formation pattern and shapes on their independent films.

Bill Miller

You kiddin' ?

Or, have you missed the boat yet again?

As every boy with his first camera knows, lens grunge appears & disappears, with the angle of incidence of sunlight change & the light refraction attitude change, as the camera is moved.

Lens grunge changes colouration as well, depending on camera motion.

So, obviously, the grunge cannot be seen in some frames, but is glaring in others.

Sorry, no cigar & no smoke, either.

Just lens grunge.

Miles, please take the three seconds it will take for you to tell us 'all you know' about the sun's position to Zapruder, the direction his camera was facing, and the angle of reflection changes that took place to make what you stated to be true .... starting right now - 1001, 1002, 1003. I see you didn't not all three seconds! I bet I have taken more pictures in direct sunlight than you have eaten doughnuts and I understand reflective angles and glare better than you think.

Now getting back to those swirls ... still no comment yet???

And please don't tell us that Wiegman's camera must have gotten into the same grunge problem that you are attributing to Zapruder's camera and from two different angles to the sun ... try to respond intelligently and with actual forethought.

Thanks!

Bill Miller

Edited September 29, 2007 by Bill Miller

[Alan Healy]

I have no problem with what Holland said or where he stood to illustrate were he saw the smoke, it is close to the "hat" in Moorman, very close(no doubt Thompson moved him a foot or two to get that picture looking just right but, who cares?).

Holland saw smoke coming out from under the trees around fifteen feet from the eastern corner & I believe him but, where is that smoke in Moorman if you believe it came from the position of the "hat"?

Not sure what it meant by saying the Thompson moved anything by a foot or two, but like you said - who cares!

I think it sounds like you are saying that at least some smoke was seen by witnesses and its fair to say that Moorman's photo was taken after the last shot, so where is any smoke in Moorman's photo ... how can that be explained?? Oh yes, it was explained when someone said that Moorman, nor Nix were at the right angle to the sun for the light to pass through the smoke and illuminate it like it did from the angle Wiegman's and Zapruder's camera had.

Bill Miller

I'm saying that the only way Thompson got Holland to appear in the exact same spot as the "hat" in Moorman5, is because he either moved Holland or he moved the camera so that it would line up.

Very much like Turner did to Arnold only not as extreem as that.

So Hatman's smoke was invisible to Moorman but Badgeman's was so dense it could block out everything behind it?

Explained to whos satisfaction? Not mine or anyone elses, only yours I think.

[Miles Scull]

Alan,

Is your finger pointing to lens' grunge?

Are you a member of the grunge brigade?

What do you think?

It's not Miles because it remains stationary while the camera is moving & as we see in that end of the Zfilm clip that shows the fence corner, the "grunge" moves as the camera does.

Stationary, or very little movement if any.

http://img486.imageshack.us/img486/3996/za...mirroredkh1.gif

Alan,

You are correct. I checked the gif. The hand is pointing to leaves in shadow. Your idea?

( your image URL doesn't seen to work)

But the so-called swirls in Z-419 are grunge effects as can be seen by comparing adjacent frames.

Alan,

One other point re: the Wiegman alleged smoke.

The quantity or volume of the smoke allegedly seen is too great by a factor of 10 !

Was a blunderbuss discharged? Or a small ceremony canon? OR this? ----->

I think Miller, yet again (!), has overlooked the patently obvious.

Just look at the distance of the alleged smoke cloud from the fence.

This cloud might rain on the sidewalk, if you're not careful.

Go figure.

Edited September 29, 2007 by Miles Scull

[Alan Healy]

Alan,

Is your finger pointing to lens' grunge?

Are you a member of the grunge brigade?

What do you think?

It's not Miles because it remains stationary while the camera is moving & as we see in that end of the Zfilm clip that shows the fence corner, the "grunge" moves as the camera does.

Stationary, or very little movement if any.

http://img486.imageshack.us/img486/3996/za...mirroredkh1.gif

Alan,

You are correct. I checked the gif. The hand is pointing to leaves in shadow. Your idea?

( your image URL doesn't seen to work)

But the so-called swirls in Z-419 are grunge effects as can be seen by comparing adjacent frames.

Miles.

My hand is pointing to a cluster of leaves not in shadow but, either in direct sunlight or enveloped by smoke. I think it's sunlight, I mean, it looks like sunlit leaves to me but it resembles smoke too(IMO).

I just saw Z419 that Bill referred to, I think I've seen the same shapes in one of the coloured Zframes I have but it's not marked as Z419(maybe they're numbered differently?). I can't see how he can be so sure these shapes originate from smoke but I'll take another look.

[Bill Miller]

I'm saying that the only way Thompson got Holland to appear in the exact same spot as the "hat" in Moorman5, is because he either moved Holland or he moved the camera so that it would line up.

Very much like Turner did to Arnold only not as extreem as that.

So Hatman's smoke was invisible to Moorman but Badgeman's was so dense it could block out everything behind it?

Explained to whos satisfaction? Not mine or anyone elses, only yours I think.

This is just my opinion, but I believe you are merely speculating as to anyone moving somebody so they would line up.

And in the latter comment - you are again assuming that what is seen with Badge Man is smoke, but I do not believe that to be the case. There was never a second plume of smoke said to be seen on the knoll coming over the concrete wall by any witnesses. The other thing is that what you are calling smoke from Badge Man's gun looks like the dispersal of a muzzle flash to me, thus these are apples being compared to oranges IMO.

Bill Miller

[Miles Scull]

Alan,

Is your finger pointing to lens' grunge?

Are you a member of the grunge brigade?

What do you think?

It's not Miles because it remains stationary while the camera is moving & as we see in that end of the Zfilm clip that shows the fence corner, the "grunge" moves as the camera does.

Stationary, or very little movement if any.

http://img486.imageshack.us/img486/3996/za...mirroredkh1.gif

Alan,

You are correct. I checked the gif. The hand is pointing to leaves in shadow. Your idea?

( your image URL doesn't seen to work)

But the so-called swirls in Z-419 are grunge effects as can be seen by comparing adjacent frames.

Miles.

My hand is pointing to a cluster of leaves not in shadow but, either in direct sunlight or enveloped by smoke. I think it's sunlight, I mean, it looks like sunlit leaves to me but it resembles smoke too(IMO).

I just saw Z419 that Bill referred to, I think I've seen the same shapes in one of the coloured Zframes I have but it's not marked as Z419(maybe they're numbered differently?). I can't see how he can be so sure these shapes originate from smoke but I'll take another look.

Good, thx.

It's a joke.

The absurd smoke CLOUD might have resulted from a salvo of picket rifles, maybe flint locks.

NOT A CONTEMPORANEOUS SINGLE SNIPER'S RIFLE !! ONE SHOT ?

Maybe this one? ----------->

BTW, is this a car parked adjacent to the other on the right? See the pointing arrows.

[Bill Miller]

One other point re: the Wiegman alleged smoke.

The quantity or volume of the smoke allegedly seen is too great by a factor of 10 !

What have you (Miles) posted to show this forum that you have distinguished the smoke from the foliage? When I posted on this subject ... I mentioned that some of the area was obviously the distant tree leaves because of the shading in and amongst the light area. But it was the swirls and the dense white cloud that where nothing is seen through it in the Wiegman film that separates the foliage from the actual smoke.

Bill Miller

[Bill Miller]

Good, thx.

It's a joke.

The absurd smoke CLOUD might have resulted from a salvo of picket rifles, maybe flint locks.

The joke is you (Miles) trying to disrupt yet another thread with these idiotic remarks. Even yourself have posted that you believe a shot was fired from the RR yard. You (yourself) posted where you believed the smoke came over the fence. Nowhere did you add to your post some stupid remark about flint-locks and such ... WHY IS THAT, MILES??? You cannot have it both ways, so why is it that you save that childish idiotic crap for your responses to others and not put those same opinions in your own post???

In past post it was mentioned that a freshly oiled gun barrel will put off smoke. The type of round used could cause the same effect. And it was pointed out that when the HSCA had a sharp shooter fire at the sandbags in the street - his rifle (which wasn't a flintlock) also smoked. So again, why do you ignore these things and post such stupid remarks that can only be designed to xxxxx and disrupt the flow of information being presented????????

Bill Miller

[Miles Scull]

Good, thx.

It's a joke.

The absurd smoke CLOUD might have resulted from a salvo of picket rifles, maybe flint locks.

The joke is you (Miles) trying to disrupt yet another thread with these idiotic remarks. Even yourself have posted that you believe a shot was fired from the RR yard. You (yourself) posted where you believed the smoke came over the fence. Nowhere did you add to your post some stupid remark about flint-locks and such ... WHY IS THAT, MILES??? You cannot have it both ways, so why is it that you save that childish idiotic crap for your responses to others and not put those same opinions in your own post???

In past post it was mentioned that a freshly oiled gun barrel will put off smoke. The type of round used could cause the same effect. And it was pointed out that when the HSCA had a sharp shooter fire at the sandbags in the street - his rifle (which wasn't a flintlock) also smoked. So again, why do you ignore these things and post such stupid remarks that can only be designed to xxxxx and disrupt the flow of information being presented????????

Bill Miller

In past post it was mentioned that a freshly oiled gun barrel will put off smoke.

Is this bop the Bozo, or what?

First of all, a professional sniper does not carry a freshly oiled rifle on an ops. He cleans & dries it with wads & solvents (Ever used AV gas?), of course, just exactly because he is looking for & preparing for a CLEAN, PRECISE, OPTIMUM shot & opportunity optimization for success. Do you know anything at all about rifles? No.

No, he does not shoot a blunderbuss, which would have generated this massive cloud.

If you are saying that a single rifle, carefully prepared for a vital mission by a trained assassin sniper, would have, by a single discaharge, prodused this HUGE CLOUD at this DISTANCE from the fence:

then I will show you what two such rifles firing twice will produce: