Chris Davidson Posted November 30, 2008 Share Posted November 30, 2008 Does anyone see the extended/dual streak in this stabilization? chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack White Posted December 1, 2008 Share Posted December 1, 2008 I do not understand the question. Are you referring to the "projector scratches"? Jack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Davidson Posted December 1, 2008 Author Share Posted December 1, 2008 I do not understand the question. Are you referring to the "projector scratches"?Jack Jack, The red arrows point to the extended streak in 3 frames. Is this any easier to see? chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed LeDoux Posted December 1, 2008 Share Posted December 1, 2008 That is interesting to say the least. Good eye Chris. Could you show a gif with the frames that are directly before and after the streak (5 frames) and a little slower. Does this appear to be coming from his head, rather than towards it? Chunk of the cranium maybe...or? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Miller Posted December 1, 2008 Share Posted December 1, 2008 (edited) That is interesting to say the least. Good eye Chris.Could you show a gif with the frames that are directly before and after the streak (5 frames) and a little slower. Does this appear to be coming from his head, rather than towards it? Chunk of the cranium maybe...or? It's the same debis/bone fragment(?) seen in Z313. It's been referenced many times from the Nix film over the years. Here is one such reference of it leaving the skull, along with what appears to be another artifact coming off the rear of the head of JFK. Bill Miller Edited December 1, 2008 by Bill Miller Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Davidson Posted December 1, 2008 Author Share Posted December 1, 2008 That is interesting to say the least. Good eye Chris.Could you show a gif with the frames that are directly before and after the streak (5 frames) and a little slower. Does this appear to be coming from his head, rather than towards it? Chunk of the cranium maybe...or? Ed, 5 frames for you. chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed LeDoux Posted December 1, 2008 Share Posted December 1, 2008 Thanks Chris, the slower speed helped too. That bone fragment(?) really had some velocity imparted to it, If that is what were seeing. I would wonder what the trajectory of the fragment is in to relation to the limo (ie to the left or right, or straight forward) . Bill, Thanks for showing the piece exiting to the rear also. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Roberdeau Posted December 6, 2008 Share Posted December 6, 2008 (edited) Good Day CHRIS.... Thank You for providing that gif. Researcher DAVID WIMP has also provided everyone an interesting stabilized NIX clip, circa President KENNEDY's head explosion, here The, initial, velocity of the upward and forward moving piece of President KENNEDY's head calculates to be approximately 37.8 mph. The angle upward from his head of that forward moving fragment was 57 to 58 degrees to the NIX perspective-to-true-horizontal. This calculation is based for the distance, initially, traveled of approximately 36" between the first and second NIX film frames after the bloody explosion (corresponding approximately to Z-314 and 315). The 36" is determined by the head fragment measurable NIX apparent angle travel distance when scaled to a known dimension of the limousine, the 36" diameter tires. NIX's camera tested at an average of 18.5 frames per second, while ZAPRUDER's, tested at an average of 18.3. A theorized bullet, streaking in at a minimum of 2000 feet per second, slammed into President KENNEDY's head at 1364 mph. The light colored, blasted off head fragment seen in the NIX film continues on the same approximate 57 to 58 degrees upward, forward, and straight trajectory as it vanishes up and out of the NIX film frame. My calculations show that from ZAPRUDER's perspective, that same moving forward head fragment was trajecting upward at a 62 to 63 degrees angle apparent perspective-to-true-horizontal, and had a velocity of 34.2 mph between Z-314 and 315. This calculation is based for the distance, initially, traveled of 32.9" between z-314 and 315. The 32.9" is determined by the head fragment measurable apparent travel distance when scaled to a known dimension of the limousine, the 11.6" width of the permanent right side window. Both NIX and ZAPRUDER had their movie cameras at nearly the exact same height above sea level (ZAPRUDER's camera lens was only about 1' higher than NIX's lense), with ZAPRUDER's camera much closer and pointed more downward. I think that the slight difference between NIX and ZAPRUDER in the head fragment apparent trajectory angle upward and forward is because of the combination that ZAPRUDER's camera was pointed more downward, while NIX's camera was closer than ZAPRUDER's to being 90 degrees perpendicular to the head fragment true initial trajectory. This, and other considerations, indicates that this forward and upward trajected head fragment could very well be the "Harper fragment," which WILLIAM HARPER diagrammed he found 117' forward and had trajected left of the president's 313 location, and concurrently had trajected to the right of President KENNEDY's 313 head facing direction. Best Regards in Research, Don Don Roberdeau U.S.S. John F. Kennedy, CV-67, "Big John," Plank Walker Sooner, or later, The Truth emerges Clearly Under the "magic-limbed-ricochet-tree": Z-188, then, Z-203 to 206 Discovery: ROSEMARY WILLIS's Zapruder Film Documented 2nd Headsnap: West, Ultrafast, & Directly Towards the "Grassy Knoll" Dealey Plaza Professionally-surveyed Map Detailing 11-22-63 Victims precise locations, Witnesses, Photographers, Evidence, Suspected bullet trajectories, Important information & Considerations President Kennedy "Men of Courage" Speech, & JFK Assassination Research & Discoveries, Don Roberdeau, 1975 to Present T ogether E veryone A chieves M ore National Terror Alert for the United States: Edited December 6, 2008 by Don Roberdeau Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Karl Kinaski Posted December 6, 2008 Share Posted December 6, 2008 One has to be very careful: some Nix frames are missing, others are corrupted(According to Nix himself)...maybe this "dust" was put in afterwards...by brush...(like the pinkish- gaping head wound in Z 313 314)... Not only the Zappi film is altered... (I rather trust the eyewitness(Hill, Hofmann, Bowers, Holland, Carr, Price, Brehm, Brennan Newman, than any pics or movies taken that day at DP. KK Pics and movies are very impressive...and thats why the most impressive falsifications are...movies and pics...no better stuff than pics and movies to mislead researchers... KK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Miller Posted December 6, 2008 Share Posted December 6, 2008 One has to be very careful: some Nix frames are missing, others are corrupted(According to Nix himself)...maybe this "dust" was put in afterwards...by brush...(like the pinkish- gaping head wound in Z 313 314)...Not only the Zappi film is altered... (I rather trust the eyewitness(Hill, Hofmann, Bowers, Holland, Carr, Price, Brehm, Brennan Newman, than any pics or movies taken that day at DP. KK Pics and movies are very impressive...and thats why the most impressive falsifications are...movies and pics...no better stuff than pics and movies to mislead researchers... KK KK, At first glance you are correct, but if you were to actually learn about what would need to be done in 1963/64 to alter films of this size and type, then you'd find yourself hard pressed to continue on with the alteration talk. For instance, have you ever really considered that every film frame of Zapruder's has varying degrees of motion blur in them from either the limo moving, Zapruder moving his camera, or both. You simply cannot draw in motion blur to the degree the film captured it. You simply cannot cut and paste from another frame because no two are the same. These things an expert could spot in a New York minute. Also, Kodachrome II film is made for outdoor light. It would call for artificial light to try and recreate these illusions you speak of and then color shifts between sunlight exposure and artifical light would also be detectable by experts. Bill Miller Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David G. Healy Posted December 6, 2008 Share Posted December 6, 2008 (edited) One has to be very careful: some Nix frames are missing, others are corrupted(According to Nix himself)...maybe this "dust" was put in afterwards...by brush...(like the pinkish- gaping head wound in Z 313 314)...Not only the Zappi film is altered... (I rather trust the eyewitness(Hill, Hofmann, Bowers, Holland, Carr, Price, Brehm, Brennan Newman, than any pics or movies taken that day at DP. KK Pics and movies are very impressive...and thats why the most impressive falsifications are...movies and pics...no better stuff than pics and movies to mislead researchers... KK KK, At first glance you are correct, but if you were to actually learn about what would need to be done in 1963/64 to alter films of this size and type, then you'd find yourself hard pressed to continue on with the alteration talk. For instance, have you ever really considered that every film frame of Zapruder's has varying degrees of motion blur in them from either the limo moving, Zapruder moving his camera, or both. You simply cannot draw in motion blur to the degree the film captured it. You simply cannot cut and paste from another frame because no two are the same. These things an expert could spot in a New York minute. Also, Kodachrome II film is made for outdoor light. It would call for artificial light to try and recreate these illusions you speak of and then color shifts between sunlight exposure and artifical light would also be detectable by experts. Bill Miller more nonsense from those with a Lone Nut/SBT/LHO did-it-all-by-his-lonesome agenda, not to mention: the uninitiated in optical film composing and composition..... what-a-motion-film klutz you are! New York minute? ROFLMAO, next we'll hear you were Robert Groden (the Amateur Optical Film Lab Assistant) assistant! Carry on! Edited December 6, 2008 by David G. Healy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Roberdeau Posted December 7, 2008 Share Posted December 7, 2008 (edited) Good Day Bill.... Thank You for providing that NIX enhanced animation. Here is a similar enhanced ani that i saved for future reference, that, iirc, you provided several years ago.... JOSIAH also provides NIX still frames in his Six Seconds in Dallas that anotate what he thinks was a head piece trajecting rearward that, imho, may very well have been the same "something" that very close witness, WWII and Korean War U.S. Army Ranger, CHARLES BREHM told LANE in 1966.... "I saw a piece fly over in the area of the curb where I was standing. ... It seemed to have come left and back. ... Sir, whatever it was that I saw did fall, both, in that direction, and, over into the curb there." (my emphasis) Relatedly, imho, here is what ROBERT "Bobby" WELDON HARGIS, the very close D.P.D. motorcycleman-Presidential limousine escort, was quoted 11-22-63 as saying in the 11-23-63 New York Daily News.... "...then, I saw the president's head explode. Then, I felt something hit me, which could have been concrete. I thought at first I might have been hit." (my emphasis) Additionally, as with several other close witnesses, HARGIS did not know if it was "his" second audible muzzle blast or mechanically suppress fired bullet bow shockwave that he remembered hearing that coincided with the President's head exploding, or, if it was "his" third audible muzzle blast or mechanically suppressed bullet bow shockwave that he remembered hearing that coincided with the President's head exploding. Very importantly, HARGIS also told the warrenatti that he thought a gunshot(s) originated from a source.... "right next to me" I found it more than extremely interesting----in fact, I found it very revealing----that in the recent Discovery Channel documentary, "Inside the Target Car," that, either, HARGIS chose to not mention that he was hit so hard with something that he thought he had actually been shot, AND, Hargis chose to not mention that he thought a shot(s) originated from right next to him....OR....he DID mention one/both of his important considerations, BUT, the ITTC editors chose to EDIT OUT his very key attack experiences statements.... Best Regards in Research, Don Don Roberdeau U.S.S. John F. Kennedy, CV-67, "Big John," Plank Walker Sooner, or later, The Truth emerges Clearly Under the "magic-limbed-ricochet-tree": Z-188, then, Z-203 to 206 (Updated 12-28-08) http://img504.imageshack.us/img504/2446/20...k1102308ms8.gif Dealey Plaza Professionally-surveyed Map Detailing 11-22-63 Victims precise locations, Witnesses, Photographers, Evidence, Suspected bullet trajectories, Important information & Considerations (Updated 12-28-08) http://imgcash2.imageshack.us/img160/7642/dpjpg110508mb6.gif President Kennedy "Men of Courage" speech, and JFK Assassination Research, Maps, & Discoveries for Your Considerations (Updated 12-28-08) http://profile.imageshack.us/user/droberdeau T ogether E veryone A chieves M ore National Terror Alert for the United States: Edited January 5, 2009 by Don Roberdeau Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Miller Posted December 7, 2008 Share Posted December 7, 2008 name='Karl Kinaski' post='159595' date='Dec 6 2008, 03:16 PM'One has to be very careful: some Nix frames are missing, others are corrupted(According to Nix himself)...maybe this "dust" was put in afterwards...by brush...(like the pinkish- gaping head wound in Z 313 314)...Not only the Zappi film is altered... (I rather trust the eyewitness(Hill, Hofmann, Bowers, Holland, Carr, Price, Brehm, Brennan Newman, than any pics or movies taken that day at DP. KK Pics and movies are very impressive...and thats why the most impressive falsifications are...movies and pics...no better stuff than pics and movies to mislead researchers... KK KK, At first glance you are correct, but if you were to actually learn about what would need to be done in 1963/64 to alter films of this size and type, then you'd find yourself hard pressed to continue on with the alteration talk. For instance, have you ever really considered that every film frame of Zapruder's has varying degrees of motion blur in them from either the limo moving, Zapruder moving his camera, or both. You simply cannot draw in motion blur to the degree the film captured it. You simply cannot cut and paste from another frame because no two are the same. These things an expert could spot in a New York minute. Also, Kodachrome II film is made for outdoor light. It would call for artificial light to try and recreate these illusions you speak of and then color shifts between sunlight exposure and artifical light would also be detectable by experts. Bill Miller more nonsense from those with a Lone Nut/SBT/LHO did-it-all-by-his-lonesome agenda, not to mention: the uninitiated in optical film composing and composition..... what-a-motion-film klutz you are! New York minute? ROFLMAO, next we'll hear you were Robert Groden (the Amateur Optical Film Lab Assistant) assistant! Carry on! David, I almost forgot that several pages back you were asked if you have ever done any film composits on Kodachrome II 8MM or 16MM film??? Enlighten me if you will. Thanks, Bill Miller Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David G. Healy Posted December 7, 2008 Share Posted December 7, 2008 (edited) name='Karl Kinaski' post='159595' date='Dec 6 2008, 03:16 PM'One has to be very careful: some Nix frames are missing, others are corrupted(According to Nix himself)...maybe this "dust" was put in afterwards...by brush...(like the pinkish- gaping head wound in Z 313 314)...Not only the Zappi film is altered... (I rather trust the eyewitness(Hill, Hofmann, Bowers, Holland, Carr, Price, Brehm, Brennan Newman, than any pics or movies taken that day at DP. KK Pics and movies are very impressive...and thats why the most impressive falsifications are...movies and pics...no better stuff than pics and movies to mislead researchers... KK KK, At first glance you are correct, but if you were to actually learn about what would need to be done in 1963/64 to alter films of this size and type, then you'd find yourself hard pressed to continue on with the alteration talk. For instance, have you ever really considered that every film frame of Zapruder's has varying degrees of motion blur in them from either the limo moving, Zapruder moving his camera, or both. You simply cannot draw in motion blur to the degree the film captured it. You simply cannot cut and paste from another frame because no two are the same. These things an expert could spot in a New York minute. Also, Kodachrome II film is made for outdoor light. It would call for artificial light to try and recreate these illusions you speak of and then color shifts between sunlight exposure and artifical light would also be detectable by experts. Bill Miller more nonsense from those with a Lone Nut/SBT/LHO did-it-all-by-his-lonesome agenda, not to mention: the uninitiated in optical film composing and composition..... what-a-motion-film klutz you are! New York minute? ROFLMAO, next we'll hear you were Robert Groden (the Amateur Optical Film Lab Assistant) assistant! Carry on! David, I almost forgot that several pages back you were asked if you have ever done any film composits on Kodachrome II 8MM or 16MM film??? Enlighten me if you will. Thanks, Bill Miller You wait with baited breath for everything I post, soooooooooo -- I'm kinda waiting for you to dazzle me with your brilliance, son..... No sense going into film composing issues unless you display a modicum of knowledge concerning the subject matter. 35+ years of experience and I've published concerning the matter, have you? Now feel free in having Gary give you a hand, mount some sort worthy response, eh. For that matter any of those other trolls you hang with. I've been pushing wannabes the likes of you aside for years, you bore me and won't waste my time, eh! Edited December 7, 2008 by David G. Healy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Miller Posted December 7, 2008 Share Posted December 7, 2008 David, I almost forgot that several pages back you were asked if you have ever done any film composits on Kodachrome II 8MM or 16MM film??? Enlighten me if you will.Thanks, Bill Miller You wait with baited breath for everything I post, soooooooooo -- I'm kinda waiting for you to dazzle me with your brilliance, son..... No sense going into film composing issues unless you display a modicum of knowledge concerning the subject matter. 35+ years of experience and I've published concerning the matter, have you? Now feel free in having Gary give you a hand, mount some sort worthy response, eh. For that matter any of those other trolls you hang with. I've been pushing wannabes the likes of you aside for years, you bore me and won't waste my time, eh! David ... you didn't answer the simple question ... can we assume from yet another psychotic non-responsive rant from you that the answer is 'No ... you have not done any composites using this particular type of film. This is just like your bitching not to get to examine the alleged Zapruder film when in reality you never made a request to do so. Bill Miller 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