Chris Davidson Posted January 19, 2009 Share Posted January 19, 2009 Bond over Bond ? LOS appears the same. Location does not. Size of lamp-post bases at far right not even close. chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack White Posted January 19, 2009 Share Posted January 19, 2009 Bond over Bond ? LOS appears the same. Location does not. Size of lamp-post bases at far right not even close. chris Great, Chris! Can you post the FULL FRAMEs of each image? If they have different image coverage but are different sizes, your find would be very significant, since she was not using a zoom lens. Have you tried the overlay gif with all five images? Jack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Dolva Posted January 19, 2009 Share Posted January 19, 2009 Bond over Bond ? LOS appears the same. Location does not. Size of lamp-post bases at far right not even close. chris Great, Chris! Can you post the FULL FRAMEs of each image? If they have different image coverage but are different sizes, your find would be very significant, since she was not using a zoom lens. Have you tried the overlay gif with all five images? Jack Ahem, er... I don't know if it's such a significant 'find'. I posted this info a page or two back, and a detailed analysis that showed this and more with all five some time ago now, can't remember exactly when, but it did roughly coincide with the beginning of the questioning of some unquestioned things held to be true but alas not so, and therefore a hindrance, actually I think it had precicely much more to do with the muchmore analysis halted in mid air leading to a questioning of the usually used plat... Like Jack says, great work, but in my opinion basic, it's so obvious, isn't it?. A significance is that people are reognising it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Davidson Posted January 19, 2009 Share Posted January 19, 2009 Bond over Bond ? LOS appears the same. Location does not. Size of lamp-post bases at far right not even close. chris Great, Chris! Can you post the FULL FRAMEs of each image? If they have different image coverage but are different sizes, your find would be very significant, since she was not using a zoom lens. Have you tried the overlay gif with all five images? Jack Jack, Here are the original images I started with. The later in-sequence Bond (file 63) was scaled to 105.25 % and rotated 1.4 degrees CW to create the fitted composite. I then reduced the composite to 50% and posted it. John, I'm trying to follow Tom's lead. Forgive me if you have already done this. Please link us to your previous study if possible, it would save a lot of work/time. Not seeking credit for new discoveries, as Tom has shown how little I know, when it comes to the underhanded work of the WC. But, as you expressed, hopefully others are catching on. chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack White Posted January 19, 2009 Share Posted January 19, 2009 Bond over Bond ? LOS appears the same. Location does not. Size of lamp-post bases at far right not even close. chris Great, Chris! Can you post the FULL FRAMEs of each image? If they have different image coverage but are different sizes, your find would be very significant, since she was not using a zoom lens. Have you tried the overlay gif with all five images? Jack Ahem, er... I don't know if it's such a significant 'find'. I posted this info a page or two back, and a detailed analysis that showed this and more with all five some time ago now, can't remember exactly when, but it did roughly coincide with the beginning of the questioning of some unquestioned things held to be true but alas not so, and therefore a hindrance, actually I think it had precicely much more to do with the muchmore analysis halted in mid air leading to a questioning of the usually used plat... Like Jack says, great work, but in my opinion basic, it's so obvious, isn't it?. A significance is that people are reognising it. Ahem, er...John...The interesting things YOU posted were quite valuable, but did not address what I found interesting about the ANIMATION which Chris posted...particularly the distance between the two lampposts, and the seeming larger base on one of the lampposts. I was not putting your work down....just suggesting that further comparisons with FULL IMAGES overlaid as animations might be productive. Too many researchers are too sensitive that their ideas will not receive due recognition. Sorry that you felt slighted at my recognition of Chris and not you. My point is that Bond photos need more study. Jack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Davidson Posted January 19, 2009 Share Posted January 19, 2009 Jack, Your suggestion appears to have uncovered the problem. The Bond images I posted are not "FULL IMAGES". The one printed in Life magazine is fuller than what I had previously posted. Here is a revised comparison with the Life version. Which also means, the other photo does not appear to be the Full image either. Anyone have Full Image copies of all Bond photos. PS. Also, Gary Mack has informed me that these are not full images and my previous Bond animations are invalid. thanks to all, chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robin Unger Posted January 19, 2009 Share Posted January 19, 2009 (edited) Hi Chris. Any chance of posting that Life Magazine copy of Bond in a Higher Resolution. ? ( Larger ) As well as giving us the correct size for the FULL image , it also gives us a better idea of the correct coloring for the slide. Robin. Edited January 19, 2009 by Robin Unger Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank Agbat Posted January 20, 2009 Share Posted January 20, 2009 Chris, It appears that in one of the Bond photos, the lamppost base is near the edge of the field of view. Jack might be able to address this with more specific information. It is generally my understanding that inexpensive "consumer-grade" lenses will suffer a variety of aberrations, but most notably along the edges. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank Agbat Posted January 20, 2009 Share Posted January 20, 2009 John, We got stuck when analyzing the Muchmore film. Based on the plat we had available at the time, you computed the headshot (based on line of sight) to be about 5 frames earlier than actually observed on the film. This lead to a conundrum that could not be resolved at the time. Tom's West plat would probably resolve it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Dolva Posted January 20, 2009 Share Posted January 20, 2009 John,We got stuck when analyzing the Muchmore film. Based on the plat we had available at the time, you computed the headshot (based on line of sight) to be about 5 frames earlier than actually observed on the film. This lead to a conundrum that could not be resolved at the time. Tom's West plat would probably resolve it. Yes, Frank, that's about it. IMO Chris is doing impressive work here, I have no problems with that at all, just a sense of irony I suppose, having stated the bond positioning just recently (and in the past) but not getting anywhere in the end because of the lack of proper data (surveys etc) I think this is an example of how as, Don says, 'Together, everyone achieves more'. One of my earliest misguided postings, (though the experience was educational) was about plagiarism, but in all these things there's bound to be synchronicity of some kind or another. My files and notes from the time are gone. Still, that's life, no offence, Jack. (HD failure followed by an unsuccessful file recovery. Pretty much everything was corrupted). One thing (different) though is having to usually log on to view image and follow the discussions incognito. The apparent 'nuking' and 'probing' when logged on more than a few minutes bothers me. It'd be great to be able to see them without logging on, after all, there must be many who follow this forum who aren't privy to things members are but could benefit if they were and in turn the investigation in general. For example, Robert says a lot, though not in so many words. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack White Posted January 20, 2009 Share Posted January 20, 2009 Chris...I have been sharing your Bond studies with Costella. He suggests that you try scaling each of the FULL FRAMES so that the distance between lightposts is the same, and then put all together so we can see how the croppings vary. He thinks, and I agree, that each image is cropped and sized slightly different. Thanks. Jack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Davidson Posted January 20, 2009 Share Posted January 20, 2009 Chris...I have been sharing your Bond studies with Costella. He suggests that youtry scaling each of the FULL FRAMES so that the distance between lightposts is the same, and then put all together so we can see how the croppings vary. He thinks, and I agree, that each image is cropped and sized slightly different. Thanks. Jack Jack, These are the fullest frames I have beside the previous Life version. All scaled. chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack White Posted January 20, 2009 Share Posted January 20, 2009 Thanks, Chris. I sent the latest to John for his study. Jack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robin Unger Posted January 20, 2009 Share Posted January 20, 2009 (edited) Thanks Chris. Edited January 20, 2009 by Robin Unger Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Davidson Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 Muchmore over Bond. Nice fit. chris 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