Chris Davidson Posted December 4, 2007 Share Posted December 4, 2007 This animation is 12 frames apart, or 1/2 second in time, if my information on the Towner camera FPS specs. is correct. I used the concrete column edge as my anchor point. They had just a few problems when they were changing the background on this. Aspect ratio/camera angle Perhaps now we can apply this knowledge to other films and photos. chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Crane Posted December 4, 2007 Share Posted December 4, 2007 This one is over my head.I`m not sure if your suggesting that the distance is not correct or the background scenery is not correct.Something tells me that this might possiby be a case of a Incredible Shrinking Man? Brain dead minds wanna know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Crane Posted December 4, 2007 Share Posted December 4, 2007 (edited) Upon closer inspection,it appears that the gentleman in the hat seems to be A) Walking down a sloped terrain B)Gotten shorter c) Changed locations D) None of the above Edited December 4, 2007 by Michael Crane Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Davidson Posted December 4, 2007 Author Share Posted December 4, 2007 Michael, How does the distance between stationary objects (tree branch, concrete column edge)(designated people,concrete column edge) change. This is by the same filmer within a 1/2 second. How does the gentleman with the hat, in front of the column, enlarge. Why does the background enlarge. I was waiting for the patented parallax answer. Oops. Same photographer. Not this time chris P.S. Animation speed increased for movement clarity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Crane Posted December 4, 2007 Share Posted December 4, 2007 Sneaky bastids are pulling disappearing acts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Crane Posted December 4, 2007 Share Posted December 4, 2007 Alot of changes taking place in the faster version.I believe that the Police Officer passing by on the motorcycle,could possibly distort the sequence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Dolva Posted December 4, 2007 Share Posted December 4, 2007 The Towner Film is a good study in panning and the lens caused distortions that occur as the camera swings and is moved by the movements of the person filming (amatreur in this case) with a regular background and subject close. (TSBD and other fixed structures, moving Limo). Perspectives shift, though in a predictable fashion. Assuming otherwise is flawed. The lens is never perfect and the area of greatest truthful representation as embedded on the film surface can be quite small. When the subject is close and moving towards across and away in an everchanging relationship to the plane of the lens the distortions stand out the most. Professional Cinematographers are armed with a great array of lenses and planning that accommodates this. An off the shelf, amateurs camera used 'on the spur of the moment', is bound to produce interesting effects in many situations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Bailey Posted December 4, 2007 Share Posted December 4, 2007 The slower version of the Towner film clip posted on another thread looks like Tina was zooming in on the president. An object will become larger when you zoom in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Varnell Posted December 4, 2007 Share Posted December 4, 2007 This is beautiful indeed, Chris. Thanks! JFK's gleaming white shirt collar at the back of his neck is clear as day. Arguably the most under-rated piece of evidence in the entire case. The SBT cannot be reconciled with the holes in JFK's clothing and the Towner film showing the jacket collar in a normal position at the base of JFK's neck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Davidson Posted December 5, 2007 Author Share Posted December 5, 2007 The Towner Film is a good study in panning and the lens caused distortions that occur as the camera swings and is moved by the movements of the person filming (amatreur in this case) with a regular background and subject close. (TSBD and other fixed structures, moving Limo). Perspectives shift, though in a predictable fashion. Assuming otherwise is flawed. The lens is never perfect and the area of greatest truthful representation as embedded on the film surface can be quite small. When the subject is close and moving towards across and away in an everchanging relationship to the plane of the lens the distortions stand out the most. Professional Cinematographers are armed with a great array of lenses and planning that accommodates this. An off the shelf, amateurs camera used 'on the spur of the moment', is bound to produce interesting effects in many situations. Thanks John, Would another of those oddities be a white antenna that becomes transparent, and allows one to see a human face through the transparent antenna? chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Dolva Posted December 5, 2007 Share Posted December 5, 2007 Chris, yuo're welcome. Possibilities: Antennas vibrate (naturally, engine rhythm (big thumpers the Harley, and by this time after running hot at low continuous speed prone to the odd backfire, gust of wind.), shutters are open for a defined period of time, the luminance of the face is 'strong'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack White Posted December 5, 2007 Share Posted December 5, 2007 Chris...would you post the two images separately without the animation? The animation is interesting and you may be onto something odd...but the frames are hard to study in motion. I would like to compare the frames side by side, not in motion...and maybe I can explain the oddities you see. Jack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Davidson Posted December 5, 2007 Author Share Posted December 5, 2007 Sure Jack. Here are the originals. chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack White Posted December 5, 2007 Share Posted December 5, 2007 Sure Jack.Here are the originals. chris Thanks Chris! I can confirm that you have noticed a very unusual anomaly. I am still working on what to make of it. I will let you know. It may not be sinister, but is certainly unusual. Jack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Bailey Posted December 6, 2007 Share Posted December 6, 2007 The background of this clip shows the camera was zooming in on the president. Don Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now