Chris Davidson Posted December 20, 2007 Share Posted December 20, 2007 (edited) It would appear that the animators involved in the fabrication of the Z film had problems with this lady. (red arrow) If she is not levitating, where do her legs/body appear? Follow the ground between those in front of her. Yes that gap that extends to Houston St. Let me know when you see her legs/feet/shoes/body go by, to match her head. I believe her size was troubling too. The two frame animation is a height comparison between this lady and the gentleman's head that obscure's her, at two different points in the movie. ( tiny red lines) She must have shrunk in about a second. Maybe she was standing on a step stool. chris Edited December 20, 2007 by Chris Davidson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Davidson Posted December 20, 2007 Author Share Posted December 20, 2007 BTW, In the 2 frame animation, notice the people in the left background. Some have the same body slanting movement. What a coincidence, this occurs in the same frames a second or so apart. Telepathy among the crowd. There are other obvious mishaps. Enjoy. chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack White Posted December 20, 2007 Share Posted December 20, 2007 Excellent, Chris. In any of the films, can you find the Curry lead car? In Zapruder, it should be right behind the three lead cops, but evidently got cut out. Is it in any other films? Thanks. Jack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Davidson Posted December 20, 2007 Author Share Posted December 20, 2007 Jack, Here is Curry getting ready to turn onto Elm. chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack White Posted December 20, 2007 Share Posted December 20, 2007 It would appear that the animators involved in the fabrication of the Z film had problems with this lady. (red arrow)If she is not levitating, where do her legs/body appear? Follow the ground between those in front of her. Yes that gap that extends to Houston St. Let me know when you see her legs/feet/shoes/body go by, to match her head. I believe her size was troubling too. The two frame animation is a height comparison between this lady and the gentleman's head that obscure's her, at two different points in the movie. ( tiny red lines) She must have shrunk in about a second. Maybe she was standing on a step stool. chris Chris...that must be Tina Towner, who is not by her father on the corner. She was wearing a light blue sweater. Very odd movements. Jack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack White Posted December 20, 2007 Share Posted December 20, 2007 It would appear that the animators involved in the fabrication of the Z film had problems with this lady. (red arrow)If she is not levitating, where do her legs/body appear? Follow the ground between those in front of her. Yes that gap that extends to Houston St. Let me know when you see her legs/feet/shoes/body go by, to match her head. I believe her size was troubling too. The two frame animation is a height comparison between this lady and the gentleman's head that obscure's her, at two different points in the movie. ( tiny red lines) She must have shrunk in about a second. Maybe she was standing on a step stool. chris Chris...in the center of the frame is a FAT LADY IN BLACK and a SMALL LADY with a red scarf beside her. As I pointed out years ago, they have ONLY THREE LEGS TOTAL, NOT FOUR. Please do a study of these two women and see if you can locate the missing leg with a slow animated gif. Thanks. Jack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank Caramelli Posted December 20, 2007 Share Posted December 20, 2007 It would appear that the animators involved in the fabrication of the Z film had problems with this lady. (red arrow)If she is not levitating, where do her legs/body appear? Follow the ground between those in front of her. Yes that gap that extends to Houston St. Let me know when you see her legs/feet/shoes/body go by, to match her head. I believe her size was troubling too. The two frame animation is a height comparison between this lady and the gentleman's head that obscure's her, at two different points in the movie. ( tiny red lines) She must have shrunk in about a second. Maybe she was standing on a step stool. chris Hey Chris; Nice catch on the anomoly there. I do give it a chance that her step was obscured by what is in front of her; i.e. people. As a student of Zapruder, I think any and all avenues to knowledge should be investigated. Have a look at my article Harper Fragment Seen in Zapruder - it's on page three of the forum today. In my conclusions you will read that I straddle the line on alteration. Has Zapruder been changed? Sure - ripping out frames 207 to 211 (at least) is alteration. What I don't get honestly about those I would call "extreme alterationists" is the overall changes that have been made and for what (specific) purpose. In my article you'll read I do entertain the idea of a little hanky panky at frame 313, but even if that did occur; it doesn't seem to have really obscured much - the President's body motions are there and very believable (sidetrack - if you're like me and believe he was hit with a frangible); the splash of blood is congruent with simultaneous shots (as I believe), the skull fragment flying off and drifting under the limousine, proves the veracity of the film - at least in those most important frames. (313-337). Your expertise with the technical side of things is impressive. Keep up the good work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank Caramelli Posted December 20, 2007 Share Posted December 20, 2007 the splash of blood is congruent with simultaneous shots (as I believe), the skull fragment flying off and drifting under the limousine, proves the veracity of the film - at least in those most important frames. (313-337).Something like this Frank? or what combination of directions? Duncan I'm really pretty much open on which precise direction the simultaneous shot might have come from. I don't think Zapruder really gives us that much clarity on it - certainly no one has ever claimed to see a bullet streak (pre impact) in the film. I would go with the 313 from behind, 314 nothing, 315 from the knoll hypothesis put across by, I believe Grodin. In researching my article I was surprised at the amount of North portico evidence. Sorry I can't right now remember where I saw it (Marrs Crossfire?) but there is testimony from rail workers watching from the overpass seeing muzzle flashes in the North portico area. Actually seems like a lack of research in that area. North portico offers access (or exit) to the TSBD; easy access by car (especially a marked DPD one); and several get away possibilities -mixing with the crowd, across the train yard, or a quick walk to the downtown area. As far as your diagram; yes it's a good possibility. The bit of motion (in the bushes) seen in Muchmore is farther back, farther east (back edge of the bushes) than where you have badgeman. I have problems with badgeman. The guy doesn't look like he's concentrating. His eye (head) does not seem to be close enough to the rifle/sight to be believable as someone firing a rifle. He looks to be holding a rifle in front of his chest rather than up to his eye. I would certainly like to see a bigger blow up of the guy farther down the fence area (to the west). Could you post that image alone? Thanks for your time Frank Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Davidson Posted December 20, 2007 Author Share Posted December 20, 2007 It would appear that the animators involved in the fabrication of the Z film had problems with this lady. (red arrow)If she is not levitating, where do her legs/body appear? Follow the ground between those in front of her. Yes that gap that extends to Houston St. Let me know when you see her legs/feet/shoes/body go by, to match her head. I believe her size was troubling too. The two frame animation is a height comparison between this lady and the gentleman's head that obscure's her, at two different points in the movie. ( tiny red lines) She must have shrunk in about a second. Maybe she was standing on a step stool. chris Chris...that must be Tina Towner, who is not by her father on the corner. She was wearing a light blue sweater. Very odd movements. Jack The Towner family from Dorman's movie. Tina is wearing dark shoes with white socks. Nice contrast Mrs.Towner is wearing dark shoes. Socks? chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Davidson Posted December 21, 2007 Author Share Posted December 21, 2007 It would appear that the animators involved in the fabrication of the Z film had problems with this lady. (red arrow)If she is not levitating, where do her legs/body appear? Follow the ground between those in front of her. Yes that gap that extends to Houston St. Let me know when you see her legs/feet/shoes/body go by, to match her head. I believe her size was troubling too. The two frame animation is a height comparison between this lady and the gentleman's head that obscure's her, at two different points in the movie. ( tiny red lines) She must have shrunk in about a second. Maybe she was standing on a step stool. chris Chris...in the center of the frame is a FAT LADY IN BLACK and a SMALL LADY with a red scarf beside her. As I pointed out years ago, they have ONLY THREE LEGS TOTAL, NOT FOUR. Please do a study of these two women and see if you can locate the missing leg with a slow animated gif. Thanks. Jack Jack, It appears the lady with the red scarf is the problem. Here is a time lapse animation. Put your mouse cursor on each leg as it plays. Lady in black owns 2 legs. Lady with scarf owns 1. chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack White Posted December 21, 2007 Share Posted December 21, 2007 It would appear that the animators involved in the fabrication of the Z film had problems with this lady. (red arrow)If she is not levitating, where do her legs/body appear? Follow the ground between those in front of her. Yes that gap that extends to Houston St. Let me know when you see her legs/feet/shoes/body go by, to match her head. I believe her size was troubling too. The two frame animation is a height comparison between this lady and the gentleman's head that obscure's her, at two different points in the movie. ( tiny red lines) She must have shrunk in about a second. Maybe she was standing on a step stool. chris Chris...in the center of the frame is a FAT LADY IN BLACK and a SMALL LADY with a red scarf beside her. As I pointed out years ago, they have ONLY THREE LEGS TOTAL, NOT FOUR. Please do a study of these two women and see if you can locate the missing leg with a slow animated gif. Thanks. Jack Jack, It appears the lady with the red scarf is the problem. Here is a time lapse animation. Put your mouse cursor on each leg as it plays. Lady in black owns 2 legs. Lady with scarf owns 1. chris Thanks, Chris. Then you agree that a leg is missing? I think two of the legs belong to the smaller lady and the big lady just has one. Could you enlarge it and crop it to just the two ladies with very slow animation? At that small size it it difficult to tell. Looks like two THIN legs go with the small lady. Jack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Davidson Posted December 21, 2007 Author Share Posted December 21, 2007 Another try. chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Lamson Posted December 21, 2007 Share Posted December 21, 2007 Another try.chris One leg overlaps the other..look at the shoes in the sharp frame. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Davidson Posted December 23, 2007 Author Share Posted December 23, 2007 It would appear that the animators involved in the fabrication of the Z film had problems with this lady. (red arrow)If she is not levitating, where do her legs/body appear? Follow the ground between those in front of her. Yes that gap that extends to Houston St. Let me know when you see her legs/feet/shoes/body go by, to match her head. I believe her size was troubling too. The two frame animation is a height comparison between this lady and the gentleman's head that obscure's her, at two different points in the movie. ( tiny red lines) She must have shrunk in about a second. Maybe she was standing on a step stool. chris Hey Chris; Nice catch on the anomoly there. I do give it a chance that her step was obscured by what is in front of her; i.e. people. As a student of Zapruder, I think any and all avenues to knowledge should be investigated. Have a look at my article Harper Fragment Seen in Zapruder - it's on page three of the forum today. In my conclusions you will read that I straddle the line on alteration. Has Zapruder been changed? Sure - ripping out frames 207 to 211 (at least) is alteration. What I don't get honestly about those I would call "extreme alterationists" is the overall changes that have been made and for what (specific) purpose. In my article you'll read I do entertain the idea of a little hanky panky at frame 313, but even if that did occur; it doesn't seem to have really obscured much - the President's body motions are there and very believable (sidetrack - if you're like me and believe he was hit with a frangible); the splash of blood is congruent with simultaneous shots (as I believe), the skull fragment flying off and drifting under the limousine, proves the veracity of the film - at least in those most important frames. (313-337). Your expertise with the technical side of things is impressive. Keep up the good work. Thanks Frank, Should we see her Black Shoes in this animation? chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robin Unger Posted December 23, 2007 Share Posted December 23, 2007 (edited) Tall lady in black head scarf as seen in Betzner. Edited December 23, 2007 by Robin Unger 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