Zfilm Revisited

[Bill Miller]

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?

The MPI film is not a 'perfect' copy by definition. The MPI film even has some mis-numbered frames in it. MPI also removed the 'start-up' frames from their version. The start-up frame is brighter than the other frames and on the original film ... there was a start-up frame each time Zapruder started filming.

Zapruder suffered from Vertigo, which is a balance problem. Most people would probably say that Zapruder's film was panned quite well considering his handicap. Of course then we would have a select few telling us that Zapruder panned too well for a man with Vertigo, thus something is running afoul here. I suspect that even if Zapruder wouldn't have come to the Plaza that day, then there would be some people saying that he purposely didn't film the assassination so to not risk getting he assassins on film. The dance of irrational and illogical thinking can go on forever.

Bill Miller

Edited May 5, 2008 by Bill Miller

[Jack White]

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.
   

Paul...excellent summary re Mr. Z filming the limo turn onto Elm...which is missing from the extant film.

Jack

[Bill Miller]

Paul...excellent summary re Mr. Z filming the limo turn onto Elm...which is missing from the extant film.

Jack

The statement that the limo turn onto Elm Street isn't seen on the Zapruder film is correct. I have owned 3 cameras like Zapruder's and all ranged right at a minute in running time on a tight wind. Zapruder had filmed Sitzman prior to the caravans arrival ... and started filming again when he saw the lead cycles. Would it not be logical for a man who has noticed that the President wasn't with the lead cycles that maybe he may wish to stop his camera and wait until the President is actually visible to him so to not run out of running time once the President did pass his location ... seems logical to me.

It is also worth noting that Tina Towner tracked the limo turn, so nothing seems to have happen to cause someone to delete a portion of Zapruder's film. More over ... half the time you people are talking like the ability to create undetectable alterations was available and implemented to these assassin supporters, only to then tell us that they must have needed to delete a portion of Zapruder's film to hide something. It's an illogical and irrational position IMO.

Bill Miller

[Chris Davidson]

"Assuming Zapruder did switch the camera off and on between frames 132 and 133, he has managed to keep it in a near perfect locked-off position. In physical process terms, even if you know the camera intimately and can hit the on/off switch "blind", the temptation is still to move the camera when switching it on and off. Did Zapruder have anyone with him who could have very carefully switched the camera off and on thus enabling him to preserve his handheld stance?"

Jan,

Very insightful.

If others will take a look at the initial part of the film, without the limo in it, they will notice somebody panning back and forth. (frames 1-132)

As if they are filming for footage, not objects.

When the film gets to about frame 130, and we continue it through to 133, which means a stop in between these two frames, the frames seem to be in continuity.

Notice how the cop cycle from before the stop and front of the limo are in the same spot in these frames. Yet there is a break in filming. So he happened to stop filming the motorcycle, and started filming the limo at the same spot.

Also how the Stemmons sign continues in line.

chris

Edited May 5, 2008 by Chris Davidson

[Bill Miller]

Bill - please expand upon your statement that "I have owned 3 cameras like Zapruder's and all ranged right at a minute in running time on a tight wind", as I'm not sure that I understand that comment at the technical level.

They didn't run on a battery, but rather had to be wound like a watch to get them running. The three cameras I had all varied just a few seconds apart before needing wound again. Winding the camera too tight could break it, thus Zapruder may not even have wound his camera up as tight as it could possibly go.

Also, earlier I said that MPI removed the start-up frames in their version, which is poorly worded. MPI corrected the lighting of those frames. Gary Mack said it best ... they merely corrected the exposure for the video. The first frame overexposure at Z132/133 can be seen in Richard Trask’s book National Nightmare and also in Roland Zavada’s report on the Z film to the ARRB.

[Jack White]

Bill - please expand upon your statement that "I have owned 3 cameras like Zapruder's and all ranged right at a minute in running time on a tight wind", as I'm not sure that I understand that comment at the technical level.

They didn't run on a battery, but rather had to be wound like a watch to get them running. The three cameras I had all varied just a few seconds apart before needing wound again. Winding the camera too tight could break it, thus Zapruder may not even have wound his camera up as tight as it could possibly go.

Also, earlier I said that MPI removed the start-up frames in their version, which is poorly worded. MPI corrected the lighting of those frames. Gary Mack said it best ... they merely corrected the exposure for the video. The first frame overexposure at Z132/133 can be seen in Richard Trask’s book National Nightmare and also in Roland Zavada’s report on the Z film to the ARRB.

Simulation of a "start-up frame" is easily done...just a bit of overexposure does the trick.

Jack

Edited May 5, 2008 by Jack White

[Jack White]

"Assuming Zapruder did switch the camera off and on between frames 132 and 133, he has managed to keep it in a near perfect locked-off position. In physical process terms, even if you know the camera intimately and can hit the on/off switch "blind", the temptation is still to move the camera when switching it on and off. Did Zapruder have anyone with him who could have very carefully switched the camera off and on thus enabling him to preserve his handheld stance?"

Jan,

Very insightful.

If others will take a look at the initial part of the film, without the limo in it, they will notice somebody panning back and forth. (frames 1-132)

As if they are filming for footage, not objects.

When the film gets to about frame 130, and we continue it through to 133, which means a stop in between these two frames, the frames seem to be in continuity.

Notice how the cop cycle from before the stop and front of the limo are in the same spot in these frames. Yet there is a break in filming. So he happened to stop filming the motorcycle, and started filming the limo at the same spot.

Also how the Stemmons sign continues in line.

chris

I think a still frame comparison shows it better.

Jack

[Chris Davidson]

Jan,

To add a little more.

A dry run (no film) on full wind goes 70 seconds for me.

So with film resistance, I believe we're in the same ballpark.

There is a window near the crank handle which displays the wording (Full Wind) when you wind to that point. You also feel the resistance in winding.

According to the camera manual, full wind will shoot about 15 feet of film.

The camera is suppose to run at 16 FPS in normal mode.

chris

[Jack White]

Chris - thanks for that added technical information in post #94.

Jack - thanks for that still frame comparison of frames 131 & 133 in post #93 which is very clear. Looking at that, I would say the frames are not particularly locked-off. The framing is similar, but certainly not identical.

Does anyone have a link to the first 130 or so frames as moving image? Pretty much all of the moving versions - stablized and unstabilized - that I've seen don't include the footage of the first motorcycle.

Chris - if Zapruder is loosely panning the camera in the first 130 frames or so, I'm now really puzzled by what we're seeing in your post #1 here with regard to the near non-movement of "black-hat gentleman" in frames 101 & 167.

Jan, you should keep in mind that many of us believe that Zapruder did not shoot the extant film

and in fact may not have even been on the pedestal. Zapruder was around 5'11. Photos of the man

on the pedestal show him to be 5'5" or less.

Be sure to click to enlarge the image to full width.

Jack

Edited May 5, 2008 by Jack White

[Jack White]

Jan...Charles Bronson, standing across the plaza with a fine Leica camera, shot a single slide

which shows many things, including Zapruder and Sitzman on the pedestal.

Attached is a closeup of them. As an experienced movie maker, what is your opinion of what

Zapruder is filming?

If you say SITZMAN'S BOOBS, I agree.

Jack

Edited May 5, 2008 by Jack White

[Bill Miller]

Jan, you should keep in mind that many of us believe that Zapruder did not shoot the extant film

and in fact may not have even been on the pedestal. Zapruder was around 5'11. Photos of the man

on the pedestal show him to be 5'5" or less.

'Many of us believe that Zapruder did not shoot ......... and was never on the pedestal'? And what makes the number 'many' ... There isn't but just a small cult of people who hold that claim. If there were any validity in that nonsense, then one would not have to come onto a forum such as this to hear such unfounded garbage.

And oh yes ... the ol' Zapruder and Sitzman were added to the pedestal claim. In the real world when the woman (Moorman) who takes her instant photo and keeps it in her pocket until 35 minutes later when a news crew films it ... and that image shows two people on the pedestal, it becomes nothing more than a belief system with an agenda to continue posting otherwise in the face of that crucial point.

[Bill Miller]

Jan...Charles Bronson, standing across the plaza with a fine Leica camera, shot a single slide

which shows many things, including Zapruder and Sitzman on the pedestal.

Attached is a closeup of them. As an experienced movie maker, what is your opinion of what

Zapruder is filming?

If you say SITZMAN'S BOOBS, I agree.

Jack

The only way to agree with Jack's ridiculous remark would be to misinterpret the poor Bronson image. One would think that with a world full of CTs ... that Jack could get someone to validate his observation, but it just hasn't happened.

[Jack White]

Jan...Charles Bronson, standing across the plaza with a fine Leica camera, shot a single slide

which shows many things, including Zapruder and Sitzman on the pedestal.

Attached is a closeup of them. As an experienced movie maker, what is your opinion of what

Zapruder is filming?

If you say SITZMAN'S BOOBS, I agree.

Jack

The only way to agree with Jack's ridiculous remark would be to misinterpret the poor Bronson image. One would think that with a world full of CTs ... that Jack could get someone to validate his observation, but it just hasn't happened.

Well, Dr. Fetzer thought enough of the image to feature it on the cover of

THE GREAT ZAPRUDER FILM HOAX. It has happened. Get over it.

And except for slight motion blur, the Bronson slide is an excellent image.

Get with it. Your fading credibility is sinking lower in the water.

Jack

[Bill Miller]

Well, Dr. Fetzer thought enough of the image to feature it on the cover of

THE GREAT ZAPRUDER FILM HOAX. It has happened. Get over it.

And except for slight motion blur, the Bronson slide is an excellent image.

Get with it. Your fading credibility is sinking lower in the water.

Jack

Jack, for your information - Fetzer went on Lancer and came under fire for the unfounded, often times poorly thought-out claims you made, and Jim told the readers that he was merely the editor and didn't see himself responsible for the claims in the book.

David Healy is another person who had seen your goofy Zapruder Waltz claim and he has since said that he has seen "NO PROOF" of alteration.

Bill Miller

[Jack White]

Well, Dr. Fetzer thought enough of the image to feature it on the cover of

THE GREAT ZAPRUDER FILM HOAX. It has happened. Get over it.

And except for slight motion blur, the Bronson slide is an excellent image.

Get with it. Your fading credibility is sinking lower in the water.

Jack

Jack, for your information - Fetzer went on Lancer and came under fire for the unfounded, often times poorly thought-out claims you made, and Jim told the readers that he was merely the editor and didn't see himself responsible for the claims in the book.

David Healy is another person who had seen your goofy Zapruder Waltz claim and he has since said that he has seen "NO PROOF" of alteration.

Bill Miller

I do not believe what you say Fetzer said. Give us the quote and let's see what he actually said.

Jack