Zfilm Revisited

[Bill Miller]

perhaps its one of those: Zapruder (while filming the Elm street limo) should be panning left-to-right downhill right. It appears his pan was [left-to-right UPHILL right.

Going to fast for you?

I guess the less than vertical lamppost doesn't tell you anything, so I will wait here while you figure it out. On second thought ... that may never happen so I will tell you that the leaning lamppost tells anyone with an once of sense and the slightest powers of observation that Zapruder DID NOT have his camera level and because of it ... someone like yourself might think the limo panning is running uphill.

Bill miller

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...c=5959&st=0

Post #8

David Healy: Of course there's NO proof of film alteration, something I've stated for years

Edited May 4, 2008 by Bill Miller

[David G. Healy]

perhaps its one of those: Zapruder (while filming the Elm street limo) should be panning left-to-right downhill right. It appears his pan was [left-to-right UPHILL right.

Going to fast for you?

I guess the less than vertical lamppost doesn't tell you anything, so I will wait here while you figure it out. On second thought ... that may never happen so I will tell you that the leaning lamppost tells anyone with an once of sense and the slightest powers of observation that Zapruder DID NOT have his camera level and because of it ... someone like yourself might think the limo panning is running uphill.

Bill miller

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...c=5959&st=0

Post #8

David Healy: Of course there's NO proof of film alteration, something I've stated for years

perhaps you've answered the alteration question with a silent, of course the film is altered. Can't have it both ways, son!

[Mark Knight]

I don't know what this "panning uphill/downhill" stuff may or may not say about Z-film alteration.

BUT...could it possibly just be the result of Abe Zapruder being lousy at panning with his camera?

Try this while sitting in front of your computer...tilt your head slightly to the left, and then simulate panning a camera from left to right. With your head tilted to the left, isn't the natural tendancy, when attempting to pan horizontally, to actually move"uphill"?

So maybe old Abe, who claimed to be unsteady, unconsciously had his head tilted slightly to the left as he was panning...thus the "uphill"motion.

And since there's no clear motion picture of the position of Zapruder's head, then NO, I can't prove that's what happened. But I can't prove it didn't, either.

Lots of still photographers manage to cut off subjects' heads and feet in their work; it's not too big a stretch to wonder if Abe wasn't just a bit of klutz with a movie camera, is it?

Edited May 4, 2008 by Mark Knight

[David G. Healy]

Mark Knight' wrote:

I don't know what this "panning uphill/downhill" stuff may or may not say about Z-film alteration.

dgh: little inside the trade lingo, s'all

BUT...could it possibly just be the result of Abe Zapruder being lousy at panning with his camera?

dgh: sure, makes me and a lot of others wonder though, how this klutz with a film camera, filming no-less. Zapruder standing on a pedestal, a woman holding him up, in a free fire zone, with a shot coming from behind him and have the sense and bravado to continue shooting film? Even after viewing a head expolde in his viewfinder....

Try this while sitting in front of your computer...tilt your head slightly to the left, and then simulate panning a camera from left to right. With your head tilted to the left, isn't the natural tendancy, when attempting to pan horizontally, to actually move"uphill"?

dgh: ahh, you try it, son -- nonsense***

So maybe old Abe, who claimed to be unsteady, unconsciously had his head tilted slightly to the left as he was panning...thus the "uphill"motion.

dgh: Unsteady? With gunfire around him, continuing to film, an amateur? LMFAO.... Displaying his skills that day as a camerman--knock off a few rough edges, I could get Abe assignments in combat zones as a network news cameraman -- Beruit comes to mind***

And since there's no clear motion picture of the position of Zapruder's head, then NO, I can't prove that's what happened. But I can't prove it didn't, either.

dgh: Zapruders head position is irrelevant when it comes to filming and gunfire in and around your camera position.... I've seen a cameraman hands blown off while filming, holding a camera above the top of a barrier he was hiding under/behind. His head was two feet from the cameraviewfinder and he knew the terrain --- His blind footage looked fine till the last moment***

Lots of still photographers manage to cut off subjects' heads and feet in their work; it's not too big a stretch to wonder if Abe wasn't just a bit of klutz with a movie camera, is it?

dgh:How many other camerapersons (amateur or pro) do you know who filmed a presidential assassination cutting off subjects heads and feet? None I suspect.

For the record, even professional cinematographers need the aid of optical film printing techniques, fixing film problem areas whether it be composition problems or outright screw ups... Abe was NO Klutz... he did have the sense to negotiate one excellent financial package for himself, at the expense of LIFE magazine of course.... The Zapruder film has kept on giving over the years..... The final balloon payment coming 5+ years ago to the tune of 17 million taxpayer dollars...

Nah, old Abe was no klutz, Abe was cold and calculating, a dressmaker none-the-less***

Edited May 4, 2008 by David G. Healy

[Jack White]

David - how far ahead (time and/or distance) of JFK's limo was the "lead car" you mention?

[...]

I suspect 10 seconds, at least.... sufficent time and unexposed film remain running at 18.3fps... (notice when Zapruder picked up limo, it was well past the turn onto Elm Street)

as for Miller's nonsense concerning: "Of course there's NO proof of film alteration" That is something I've stated for years", simply dumb to go on the record saying the film is altered until the extant Z-film undergoes forensic testing.

I've been out all day, but this thread is very interesting. Thanks to all involved.

David - if the lead car was indeed 10 seconds or so ahead of JFK's limo, then that does seem to provide enough time for Zapruder to pan and follow the lead car, and then return the camera to its near original position to then pan and follow the Presidential limo as it comes into shot. Given how close in real time these two hypothesized pans would have been, the background imagery (eg positions of figures on the grass) and the light would have been very similar in both pans. It is entirely possible that if such a pan did take place, that that first "lead car" pan would have provided some useful material for any compositing that may have taken place.

Re: the generation issue. Presumably in all Hollywood special effects compositing, images from separate original film sources are combined to form a new master film (which is then copied again when various prints are made to be shown in the world's cinemas). What kind of generational loss takes place firstly in this routine compositing process when originals are combined to form a new master? And then secondly in the printing of copies from that new master for cinema audiences? Also is any grading possible on these new "masters", or would that be detectable?

Finally, I'd like to raise the question from posts 22 & 23 again. If Zapruder stopped filming between frames 132 & 133, and switched the camera off and on, as a non-professional in a handheld stance how was he able (as near as possible) to maintain a locked-off frame? I would have difficulty doing that in a handheld stance on a modern lightweight camera with a highly sensitive on/off button which I was highly familiar.

Jan...the Hughes film shows that the lead car (Curry) was turning onto Elm as JFK was turning onto Houston.

Therefore it was one block ahead, or roughly 200 feet. Now about the timing: Phil Willis was at Main and Houston

and took a photo of JFK making that turn. He then ran down a crowded sidewalk to Elm and Houston, and took

a photo of JFK making that turn. Willis was not a world champion sprinter but a middle aged man. The time frame

therefore is the time it took Willis to run more than 200 feet.

Jack

[Chris Davidson]

ts irresponsible and most reckless in my opinion for you to make such alleged earth shattering claims of alteration without consulting a single expert(s) so to be sure that YOU have your facts straight. You do realize that there are just as many smart people in the world who believe there was a conspiracy to murder John F. Kennedy as there are who think it was the work of one man, so I look forward to see who all you are able to sell your great finds to. I mean, if you are so sure of alteration, then you should have no problem getting such a great find out to the appropriate experts so they can validate your claim. I predict that not one expert will agree with you, but also that they will quickly spot your flaws and this is why such nonsense only lives on a forum such as this.

Bill[/b]

"All indications are that the image on the existing Zapruder film were filmed with the camera set to maximum zoom, the Telephoto setting of the camera. Not only does the angle of view support this, but also the fact that the images extend so far into the inter-sprocket area."

"The lack of focus in the leaves is consistent with the lens set at Telephoto."

"If Zapruder had the lens set to a 15 mm focal length, and with an f-stop between f8 and f11, anything farther than 3 to 4 feet away from the film in his camera would be in focus. Since the nearby bush, 6 feet away, was not in focus when the background objects were, it indicates Zapruder must have set the lens to a longer focal length than 15 mm."

DEPTH OF FIELD COMPARISON

BELL & HOWELL 414PD MOVIE CAMERA

WITH LENS AT UNIVERSAL FOCUS SETTING

NEAR DISTANCES

FOCAL LENGTH

9 mm 13 mm 27 mm

F-STOP Wide Angle Normal Telephoto

------ ---------- ------ ---------

f1.8 5' 5" 8' 9" 15'

f2 5' 2" 8' 5" 15'

f2.8 4' 6'10" 14'

f4 3' 5' 4" 12'

f5.6 2' 2" 4' 2" 11'

f8 1' 7" 3' 1" 8' 9"

f11 1' 2" 2' 4" 7'

f16 10" 1' 8" 5' 8"

f22 7" 1' 3" 4' 5"

"Anthony Marsh claims that the continuity of ghost images between the sprocket holes makes it virtually impossible for frames to be deleted without detection. Related work by Roland Zavada demonstrate that the intersprocket image anomalies are the natural result of filming with a Bell & Howell 414PD camera, the model Zapruder used."

First you tell us Zavada is the expert on the workings of the B/H 414. And his conclusion is the film was not altered.

Well his conclusion also is: ghost images appear only on TELEPHOTO setting. (Might reread post 55)It's from Zavada's report.

Now you tell us that the telephoto setting was not used in the Zfilm, but we have ghost images.

And lastly, you now refer to Anthony Marsh for reading about the workings of this camera. Did Zavada fall to the back of the line?

I'll just keep posting my comparisons, and let others make up their minds.

You consult the experts and get back to us. Preferably with a visual comparison.

Someday, maybe you'll supply us with a non-telephoto ghost image frame, but I'm not holding my breath.

Talk about irresponsible!!!

chris

P.S.

Anthony Marsh quote:

Bill,

We're still waiting for your source to tell us what lens setting the Zfilm was shot at it.

Remember, you've already provided us with the information that Zapruder's recollection was wrong, and he wasn't using the telephoto setting.

So that's 2 that believe it. Your source and you. Anyone else care to join that conclusion.

Still Waiting and Waiting and Waiting.

chris

[Chris Davidson]

I don't know what this "panning uphill/downhill" stuff may or may not say about Z-film alteration.

BUT...could it possibly just be the result of Abe Zapruder being lousy at panning with his camera?

Try this while sitting in front of your computer...tilt your head slightly to the left, and then simulate panning a camera from left to right. With your head tilted to the left, isn't the natural tendancy, when attempting to pan horizontally, to actually move"uphill"?

So maybe old Abe, who claimed to be unsteady, unconsciously had his head tilted slightly to the left as he was panning...thus the "uphill"motion.

And since there's no clear motion picture of the position of Zapruder's head, then NO, I can't prove that's what happened. But I can't prove it didn't, either.

Lots of still photographers manage to cut off subjects' heads and feet in their work; it's not too big a stretch to wonder if Abe wasn't just a bit of klutz with a movie camera, is it?

Mark,

This animation is 3 frames apart.

There is more of a difference in movement in these 3 frames, than 101/167.

Which means in less than a third of a second, I wasn't able to keep my camera as steady as Zapruder, who stopped filming, started filming and from

frame 133 to 167 got his camera position exactly within 1 degree CCW to where he was when he stoppped filming.

I believe in coincidences, just not this time.

chris

[Jack White]

I believe that THE MAN WHO DOES NOT MOVE was used by the animators as some

sort of marker or registration point, which other things were made to fit to. He could

not remain perfectly still for that long.

Note the several women WHOSE HEADS REMAIN STATIONARY, BUT THEIR BODIES

MOVE WILDLY FROM SIDE TO SIDE. Markers again?

Jack

Edited May 4, 2008 by Jack White

[David G. Healy]

'Jan Klimkowski' wrote:

David - how far ahead (time and/or distance) of JFK's limo was the "lead car" you mention?

[...]

I suspect 10 seconds, at least.... sufficent time and unexposed film remain running at 18.3fps... (notice when Zapruder picked up limo, it was well past the turn onto Elm Street)

as for Miller's nonsense concerning: "Of course there's NO proof of film alteration" That is something I've stated for years", simply dumb to go on the record saying the film is altered until the extant Z-film undergoes forensic testing.

I've been out all day, but this thread is very interesting. Thanks to all involved.

David - if the lead car was indeed 10 seconds or so ahead of JFK's limo, then that does seem to provide enough time for Zapruder to pan and follow the lead car, and then return the camera to its near original position to then pan and follow the Presidential limo as it comes into shot. Given how close in real time these two hypothesized pans would have been, the background imagery (eg positions of figures on the grass) and the light would have been very similar in both pans. It is entirely possible that if such a pan did take place, that that first "lead car" pan would have provided some useful material for any compositing that may have taken place.

dgh: SAME film type, SAME camera, SAME camera/lens settings, SAME camera position, SAME sun position, SAME cameraman, SAME natural light, NO artifical light, all film processed one time, SAME roll ALL filmed sequences, hence the soup is SAME. Perfect! A effects director couldn't call it any better. As we used to say a NO-BRAINER

Re: the generation issue. Presumably in all Hollywood special effects compositing, images from separate original film sources are combined to form a new master film (which is then copied again when various prints are made to be shown in the world's cinemas). What kind of generational loss takes place firstly in this routine compositing process when originals are combined to form a new master? And then secondly in the printing of copies from that new master for cinema audiences? Also is any grading possible on these new "masters", or would that be detectable?

dgh: If the original Zapruder film footage was destroyed, gone, fini.... who knows... simply, there is nothing to compare a 35mm 1st generation composite down to a 8mm KodacolrII dupe to. Simple as that. In general it depends on the stock your blowing up to, the light house settings, optical printing lenses, etc... Bump the entire in-camera 8mm original Z-film to 35mm negative, you're pretty much free to do as you wish...

Finally, I'd like to raise the question from posts 22 & 23 again. If Zapruder stopped filming between frames 132 & 133, and switched the camera off and on, as a non-professional in a handheld stance how was he able (as near as possible) to maintain a locked-off frame? I would have difficulty doing that in a handheld stance on a modern lightweight camera with a highly sensitive on/off button which I was highly familiar.

dgh: amazing isn't Zapruder for a klutzy amateur cameraman? Today we'd need a computer controlled pedestal or a jimmy-jib at the very least recreating something like that. With no guarantees...

pssst, Jan.... expect a few off-board emails from Gary Mack, now that he knows your a docu producer, director, editor, cameraman....

Edited May 4, 2008 by David G. Healy

[David G. Healy]

David - just to clarify I'm a documentary producer and director. I have shot stuff but I always prefer working with a professional camera crew. Same with editing: I spend weeks of my life sitting in an edit suite with an editor.

However, I couldn't produce & direct films if I didn't understand a lot of the process - and the challenges - of filmmaking.

understood.... re "optical film printing" reference, think 2D After Effects compositing app from Adobe

Edited May 4, 2008 by David G. Healy

[Bill Miller]

perhaps you've answered the alteration question with a silent, of course the film is altered. Can't have it both ways, son!

What now, David ... are the voices in your head talking to you again!

Paranoid perceptions and behavior may appear as features of a number of mental illnesses, including depression and dementia, but are most prominent in three types of psychological disorders: paranoid schizophrenia, delusional disorder (persecutory type), and paranoid personality disorder (PPD).

Individuals with paranoid schizophrenia and persecutory delusional disorder experience what is known as persecutory delusions: an irrational, yet unshakable, belief that someone is plotting against them. Persecutory delusions in paranoid schizophrenia are bizarre, sometimes grandiose, and often accompanied by auditory hallucinations. Delusions experienced by individuals with delusional disorder are more plausible than those experienced by paranoid schizophrenics; not bizarre, though still unjustified. Individuals with delusional disorder may seem offbeat or quirky rather than mentally ill, and, as such, may never seek treatment.

Persons with paranoid personality disorder tend to be self-centered, self-important, defensive, and emotionally distant. Their paranoia manifests itself in constant suspicions rather than full-blown delusions. The disorder often impedes social and personal relationships and career advancement. Some individuals with PPD are described as "litigious," as they are constantly initiating frivolous law suits. PPD is more common in men than in women, and typically begins in early adulthood.

[Bill Miller]

understood.... re "optical film printing" reference, think 2D After Effects compositing app from Adobe

David, please cite the chemical properties and characteristics of Kodachrome II film. I only ask you because Zavada isn't here and you seem to think you know as much as he does ... so you have the floor ...

Also, you tend to like to talk about 'optical printing' as if thats all that one needs to have successfully altered the Zapruder film so well that modern day experts cannot see signs of the deception. Below is a clip from a reference that was made in 'Assassination Science' ... Groden is also skilled in Optical printing and he says that you are way off the mark and haven't a clue about what would need to happen for what you say to be true. The clip below comes from the movie "Mary Poppins". Think 2D when seeing the obvious flaws. LOL!!!

[Don Bailey]

My belief in the JFK TOO LOW IN FRAME SEQUENCE has always been the problem

created by BILL AND GAYLE NEWMAN AND THEIR TWO CHILDREN, PLUS THEIR

REFLECTIONS IN THE SIDE OF THE LIMO.

In my opinion, having done many photos from the pedestal, that a person standing

on the curb like Newman and family WOULD BE IN ANY FRAME SHOWING THE

LIMO PASSING HIM, AS WELL AS THEIR REFLECTIONS. If frames were removed

at this point to delete the limo stop, Newmans and their reflections would have

created massive alteration problems...so they moved the limo to bottom and

added grass at top.

The "JFK TOO LOW IN FRAME" has always puzzled me.

Thanks to Jack, Jan, and Chris for the helpful information on this thread.

Don

[Paul Rigby]

My belief in the JFK TOO LOW IN FRAME SEQUENCE has always been the problem

created by BILL AND GAYLE NEWMAN AND THEIR TWO CHILDREN, PLUS THEIR

REFLECTIONS IN THE SIDE OF THE LIMO.

In my opinion, having done many photos from the pedestal, that a person standing

on the curb like Newman and family WOULD BE IN ANY FRAME SHOWING THE

LIMO PASSING HIM, AS WELL AS THEIR REFLECTIONS. If frames were removed

at this point to delete the limo stop, Newmans and their reflections would have

created massive alteration problems...so they moved the limo to bottom and

added grass at top.

And then there's the Chaney problem...Dropping the presidential limo to the bottom of the frames permitted a spuriously plausible elimination of the problematic motorcycle outrider. Compare the relevant Z-frame - 245?- with Altgens' most famous photo of the shooting and one sees exactly how big a fraud we are faced with. Failure to eliminate Chaney would have left visual/photographic corroboration of his and the supporting statements concerning his ride to the car containing Lawson et al. Couldn't have that now, could we?

Paul

[Paul Rigby]

Now, there is a clear real time transition between frames 132 & 133. Just to spell it out, in frame 132, a lead police motorcycle is (roughly) centre frame. In frame 133 the limo is moving towards centre frame and the lead police motorcycle has cleared frame. My understanding is that because we are officially looking at the camera master (or a perfect copy), this means Zapruder must have switched off the camera at frame 132, and switched it back on at frame 133. Please correct me if I'm wrong. Also, does Abraham Zapruder himself confirm that he took this action?

Jan,

Zap's earliest testimony, and that of the journalists who saw the original version, follows:

From the thread "The edited Zapruder film: the vanishing left turn from Houston onto Elm":

1. Abraham Zapruder, WFAA-TV, circa 1400hrs CST, 22 November 1963: “And I was [filming?] as the President was coming down from Houston Street making his turn…,” Richard Trask, Pictures of the Pain (Danvers, Mass.: Yeoman Press, 1994), p.77
   
2. Dan Rather, CBS radio, 25 November 1963: “Well let me tell you then, give you a word picture of the motion picture that we have just seen. The President’s automobile which was proceeded by only one other car containing Secret Service Agents…the President’s open black Lincoln limousine…made a turn, a left turn off of Houston Street in Dallas onto Elm Street…This left turn was made right below the window from which the shot was fired…as the car made the turn completed the turn…,” Richard Trask, Pictures of the Pain (Danvers, Mass.: Yeoman Press, 1994), pp.86-87
   
3. Dan Rather, CBS Evening News (TV), 25 November 1963: “The films we saw were taken by an amateur photographer…The films show President Kennedy’s open, black limousine, making a left turn, off of Houston Street on to Elm Street…a left turn made just below the window in which the assassin was waiting,” Richard Trask, Pictures of the Pain (Danvers, Mass.: Yeoman Press, 1994), p.8
   
4. Arthur J. Snider (of the Chicago Daily News, in syndicated piece), Fort Worth Star-Telegram, 27 November 1963, also described several scenes from the film:"As the fateful car rounded the turn and moved into the curving parkway, the President rolled his head to the right, smiling and waving. At that instant. . .the sniper. . .fired his cheap rifle. . .the President clutched his throat for a bewildered instant, then began to sag. A second blast from the high-powered rifle ripped into the right rear of his head at about a 4 o 'clock position,” Arthur J. Snider (Chicago Daily News syndicated piece), “Movies Reconstruct Tragedy,” Fort Worth Star-Telegram, (Evening edition), November 27, 1963, section 2, p.1
   
5. Warren Report, September 1964: “The position of President Kennedy’s car when he was struck in the neck was determined with substantial precision from the films and onsite tests. The pictures or frames in the Zapruder film were marked by the agents, with the number ‘1’ given to the first frame where the motorcycles leading the motorcade came into view on Houston Street. The numbers continue in sequence as Zapruder filmed the Presidential limousine as it came around the corner and proceeded down Elm,” The Warren Report: The Report of the President’s Commission on the Assassination of President John F. Kennedy (Associated Press, 1964), p.41.