Pat Speer Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 The FBI tests purportedly established that the camera was running approximately 18.3 frames per second, based upon an average of a series of tests with (if I recall correctly) the camera on the 16 frames per second setting. But the December 4 1963 FBI report on Zapruder notes "The camera was set to take normal speed movie film or 24 frames per second." This statement apparently came from Zapruder. If the camera was running 24 frames per second, of course, the shooter would have had much less time to fire three shots. If the camera was running 24 frames per second, the lone gunmen scenario would be even more doubtful, if not impossible. Subsequent to this report, the FBI ran its tests and came back saying the film was running 18.3 frames per second. The lone gunmen scenario had been saved. But there's a problem with this. I have an instruction manual to Zapruder's camera, and a non-functioning camera to compare it to. The instruction manual has a page with a block claiming Exposure Data. Beneath it it says "Run--16 frames per second. Slow Motion--48 frames per second." And "Animation--single frame". This implies these are the only three settings. If so, the FBI's assumption the camera was set to record 16 frames per second would undoubtedly be correct. But elsewhere in the manual, under the heading "Set Film Speed" there is this: "Look in the window above the Film Speed Dial. If you loaded with Daylight (outdoor) film, turn the Film Speed Dial until number "10" appears. If you loaded with Type A (indoor) film, turn the dial until "16" appears. For faster film speeds, use the setting recommended in the manufacturers instructions. The Film Speed Dial on your camera will adjust for film speeds as high as "40"." Well, in fact, there are only 4 settings on the Film Speed Dial, with half settings in between. These 4 settings are 10, 16, 25, and 40. Based upon the 12-4 FBI memo, this leads me to suspect that Zapruder had checked on the proper setting for the film he was using, and determined it to be 24 frames per second. If so, he would most logically have shot the film on the "25" setting, correct? If so, then the shooting was much more rushed than previously believed. So...questions. What was the recommended speed for the film used in the camera? If other than 16, has anyone ran the film at this speed to see if the film looks more natural at this speed? Also, has it been established that the frames in the film are contiguous? I mean, is it possible there were frames between 312 and 313, and then again between 313 and 314, showing more than one hit on Kennedy? (Or anything similarly damaging.) To be clear, I am not a Zapruder film alterationist--in that I don't suspect the film was invented in a studio, or that objects were added in to the film. But I've always been open-minded about certain other kinds of alteration. It's always seemed a bit of a coincidence, for example, that the frames spliced out of the Life version of the film were frames not showing JFK, but showing Jackie clearly staring at JFK (as opposed to merely looking in his general direction) at a time BEFORE the Warren Commission concluded he'd been hit. I apologize in advance if this leads to yet another argument over the veracity of the film. Fake or not fake, I'm trying to determine the speed at which it was shot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Lamson Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 (edited) The FBI tests purportedly established that the camera was running approximately 18.3 frames per second, based upon an average of a series of tests with (if I recall correctly) the camera on the 16 frames per second setting. But the December 4 1963 FBI report on Zapruder notes "The camera was set to take normal speed movie film or 24 frames per second." This statement apparently came from Zapruder. If the camera was running 24 frames per second, of course, the shooter would have had much less time to fire three shots. If the camera was running 24 frames per second, the lone gunmen scenario would be even more doubtful, if not impossible. Subsequent to this report, the FBI ran its tests and came back saying the film was running 18.3 frames per second. The lone gunmen scenario had been saved. But there's a problem with this. I have an instruction manual to Zapruder's camera, and a non-functioning camera to compare it to. The instruction manual has a page with a block claiming Exposure Data. Beneath it it says "Run--16 frames per second. Slow Motion--48 frames per second." And "Animation--single frame". This implies these are the only three settings. If so, the FBI's assumption the camera was set to record 16 frames per second would undoubtedly be correct. But elsewhere in the manual, under the heading "Set Film Speed" there is this: "Look in the window above the Film Speed Dial. If you loaded with Daylight (outdoor) film, turn the Film Speed Dial until number "10" appears. If you loaded with Type A (indoor) film, turn the dial until "16" appears. For faster film speeds, use the setting recommended in the manufacturers instructions. The Film Speed Dial on your camera will adjust for film speeds as high as "40"." Well, in fact, there are only 4 settings on the Film Speed Dial, with half settings in between. These 4 settings are 10, 16, 25, and 40. Based upon the 12-4 FBI memo, this leads me to suspect that Zapruder had checked on the proper setting for the film he was using, and determined it to be 24 frames per second. If so, he would most logically have shot the film on the "25" setting, correct? If so, then the shooting was much more rushed than previously believed. So...questions. What was the recommended speed for the film used in the camera? If other than 16, has anyone ran the film at this speed to see if the film looks more natural at this speed? Also, has it been established that the frames in the film are contiguous? I mean, is it possible there were frames between 312 and 313, and then again between 313 and 314, showing more than one hit on Kennedy? (Or anything similarly damaging.) To be clear, I am not a Zapruder film alterationist--in that I don't suspect the film was invented in a studio, or that objects were added in to the film. But I've always been open-minded about certain other kinds of alteration. It's always seemed a bit of a coincidence, for example, that the frames spliced out of the Life version of the film were frames not showing JFK, but showing Jackie clearly staring at JFK (as opposed to merely looking in his general direction) at a time BEFORE the Warren Commission concluded he'd been hit. I apologize in advance if this leads to yet another argument over the veracity of the film. Fake or not fake, I'm trying to determine the speed at which it was shot. Film "speed" refers to the sensitivity of the film to light. The greater the sensitivity, the "faster" the film "speed". This data is used by the light metering system so that the camera or the photographer can set the proper exposure. Film speed was rated using the ASA nomenclature in years past and is now (if you can still find film) as ISO. Zapruder used Kodachorme film. A common speed for that film was ASA 25. Edited August 22, 2009 by Craig Lamson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pat Speer Posted August 21, 2009 Author Share Posted August 21, 2009 The FBI tests purportedly established that the camera was running approximately 18.3 frames per second, based upon an average of a series of tests with (if I recall correctly) the camera on the 16 frames per second setting. But the December 4 1963 FBI report on Zapruder notes "The camera was set to take normal speed movie film or 24 frames per second." This statement apparently came from Zapruder. If the camera was running 24 frames per second, of course, the shooter would have had much less time to fire three shots. If the camera was running 24 frames per second, the lone gunmen scenario would be even more doubtful, if not impossible. Subsequent to this report, the FBI ran its tests and came back saying the film was running 18.3 frames per second. The lone gunmen scenario had been saved. But there's a problem with this. I have an instruction manual to Zapruder's camera, and a non-functioning camera to compare it to. The instruction manual has a page with a block claiming Exposure Data. Beneath it it says "Run--16 frames per second. Slow Motion--48 frames per second." And "Animation--single frame". This implies these are the only three settings. If so, the FBI's assumption the camera was set to record 16 frames per second would undoubtedly be correct. But elsewhere in the manual, under the heading "Set Film Speed" there is this: "Look in the window above the Film Speed Dial. If you loaded with Daylight (outdoor) film, turn the Film Speed Dial until number "10" appears. If you loaded with Type A (indoor) film, turn the dial until "16" appears. For faster film speeds, use the setting recommended in the manufacturers instructions. The Film Speed Dial on your camera will adjust for film speeds as high as "40"." Well, in fact, there are only 4 settings on the Film Speed Dial, with half settings in between. These 4 settings are 10, 16, 25, and 40. Based upon the 12-4 FBI memo, this leads me to suspect that Zapruder had checked on the proper setting for the film he was using, and determined it to be 24 frames per second. If so, he would most logically have shot the film on the "25" setting, correct? If so, then the shooting was much more rushed than previously believed. So...questions. What was the recommended speed for the film used in the camera? If other than 16, has anyone ran the film at this speed to see if the film looks more natural at this speed? Also, has it been established that the frames in the film are contiguous? I mean, is it possible there were frames between 312 and 313, and then again between 313 and 314, showing more than one hit on Kennedy? (Or anything similarly damaging.) To be clear, I am not a Zapruder film alterationist--in that I don't suspect the film was invented in a studio, or that objects were added in to the film. But I've always been open-minded about certain other kinds of alteration. It's always seemed a bit of a coincidence, for example, that the frames spliced out of the Life version of the film were frames not showing JFK, but showing Jackie clearly staring at JFK (as opposed to merely looking in his general direction) at a time BEFORE the Warren Commission concluded he'd been hit. I apologize in advance if this leads to yet another argument over the veracity of the film. Fake or not fake, I'm trying to determine the speed at which it was shot. Film "speed" refers to the sensitivity of the film to light. The greater the sensitivity, the "faster" the film "speed". This data is used by the light metering system so that the camera or the photographer can set the proper exposure. Film spped was sated using hte ASA nomenclature in years past and is now (if you can still find film) as ISO. Zapruder used Kodachorme film. A common speed for that film was ASA 25. Thanks, Craig, for clearing that up. So 16 on the Film Speed Dial does not correlate to 16 frames per second, and the repeat of the 16 is just a coincidence. To what, then, do the numbers 10, 16, 25, and 40 refer? I don't want to make this same mistake again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerry Logan Posted August 22, 2009 Share Posted August 22, 2009 (edited) The FBI tests purportedly established that the camera was running approximately 18.3 frames per second, based upon an average of a series of tests with (if I recall correctly) the camera on the 16 frames per second setting. But the December 4 1963 FBI report on Zapruder notes "The camera was set to take normal speed movie film or 24 frames per second." This statement apparently came from Zapruder. If the camera was running 24 frames per second, of course, the shooter would have had much less time to fire three shots. If the camera was running 24 frames per second, the lone gunmen scenario would be even more doubtful, if not impossible. Subsequent to this report, the FBI ran its tests and came back saying the film was running 18.3 frames per second. The lone gunmen scenario had been saved. But there's a problem with this. I have an instruction manual to Zapruder's camera, and a non-functioning camera to compare it to. The instruction manual has a page with a block claiming Exposure Data. Beneath it it says "Run--16 frames per second. Slow Motion--48 frames per second." And "Animation--single frame". This implies these are the only three settings. If so, the FBI's assumption the camera was set to record 16 frames per second would undoubtedly be correct. But elsewhere in the manual, under the heading "Set Film Speed" there is this: "Look in the window above the Film Speed Dial. If you loaded with Daylight (outdoor) film, turn the Film Speed Dial until number "10" appears. If you loaded with Type A (indoor) film, turn the dial until "16" appears. For faster film speeds, use the setting recommended in the manufacturers instructions. The Film Speed Dial on your camera will adjust for film speeds as high as "40"." Well, in fact, there are only 4 settings on the Film Speed Dial, with half settings in between. These 4 settings are 10, 16, 25, and 40. Based upon the 12-4 FBI memo, this leads me to suspect that Zapruder had checked on the proper setting for the film he was using, and determined it to be 24 frames per second. If so, he would most logically have shot the film on the "25" setting, correct? If so, then the shooting was much more rushed than previously believed. So...questions. What was the recommended speed for the film used in the camera? If other than 16, has anyone ran the film at this speed to see if the film looks more natural at this speed? Also, has it been established that the frames in the film are contiguous? I mean, is it possible there were frames between 312 and 313, and then again between 313 and 314, showing more than one hit on Kennedy? (Or anything similarly damaging.) To be clear, I am not a Zapruder film alterationist--in that I don't suspect the film was invented in a studio, or that objects were added in to the film. But I've always been open-minded about certain other kinds of alteration. It's always seemed a bit of a coincidence, for example, that the frames spliced out of the Life version of the film were frames not showing JFK, but showing Jackie clearly staring at JFK (as opposed to merely looking in his general direction) at a time BEFORE the Warren Commission concluded he'd been hit. I apologize in advance if this leads to yet another argument over the veracity of the film. Fake or not fake, I'm trying to determine the speed at which it was shot. Film "speed" refers to the sensitivity of the film to light. The greater the sensitivity, the "faster" the film "speed". This data is used by the light metering system so that the camera or the photographer can set the proper exposure. Film spped was sated using hte ASA nomenclature in years past and is now (if you can still find film) as ISO. Zapruder used Kodachorme film. A common speed for that film was ASA 25. Thanks, Craig, for clearing that up. So 16 on the Film Speed Dial does not correlate to 16 frames per second, and the repeat of the 16 is just a coincidence. To what, then, do the numbers 10, 16, 25, and 40 refer? I don't want to make this same mistake again. Pat, I don't want to step on Craig's reply - but....... 10, 16, 25, 40 refer to the sensitivity of different films to light. Zapruder's camera accepted a variety of films; you set this number so the camera knows how much light the film needs for a proper exposure. 10 speed film needs 4x the light of 40 speed film to turn out right. Zapruder's camera automatically adjusted the camera aperture to get a proper exposure for whatever film was used, but it had to know how much light the film needed. Film speed has nothing to do with frame rate - you can run ASA 40 film at 16, 18, 24 or 48 frames per second and you can do exactly the same with ASA 10 film. It's common for people who don't use movie cameras to be confused by this. Film speed sounds like how fast the film moves through the camera, but it's actually how quickly the film reacts to light. Perhaps the FBI agent didn't understand what Zapruder was telling him because Kodachrome II had an ASA rating of 25 for daylight exposures. The agent may have simply mistaken film speed for frame rate. I hope this helps. Best to you, Jerry Edited August 22, 2009 by Jerry Logan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David G. Healy Posted August 22, 2009 Share Posted August 22, 2009 ...Perhaps the FBI agent didn't understand what Zapruder was telling him because Kodachrome II had an ASA rating of 25 for daylight exposures. The agent may have simply mistaken film speed for frame rate. I hope this helps. Best to you, Jerry amazing how many things in this investigation were "misunderstood", including Dealey Plaza eye witnesses to the limo slowdown/stop... And here the entire FBI couldn't tell the difference between film speed from frame rate.... perhaps FBI-SA Shaneyfelt should of been consulted on this too. And to think the LHO/SBT shooting sequence depends on the Z-film frame rate (fps). What a lone nut farce.....! Worse than the 3 Stooges... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerry Logan Posted August 22, 2009 Share Posted August 22, 2009 (edited) ...Perhaps the FBI agent didn't understand what Zapruder was telling him because Kodachrome II had an ASA rating of 25 for daylight exposures. The agent may have simply mistaken film speed for frame rate. I hope this helps. Best to you, Jerry amazing how many things in this investigation were "misunderstood", including Dealey Plaza eye witnesses to the limo slowdown/stop... And here the entire FBI couldn't tell the difference between film speed from frame rate.... perhaps FBI-SA Shaneyfelt should of been consulted on this too. And to think the LHO/SBT shooting sequence depends on the Z-film frame rate (fps). What a lone nut farce.....! Worse than the 3 Stooges... Sure David, that's because every FBI agent is an expert on everything - we shouldn't expect any mistakes from any of them - ever. And of course SA Robert Barrett who conducted the interview had attended film school and was instructed to review the witness statement for technical accuracy. No, no chance of a mistake there. In your knee jerk reaction you've missed the obvious point that someone was mistaken. The camera had three frame rate settings, 16 frames per second, 48 per second and single frame. Zapruder didn't have the option of filming at 24 fps. Therefore, either Zapruder was mistaken or the agent who interviewed him was mistaken. In either case, you've picked a very poor example of "a lone nut farce" because there was a demonstrable mistake on someone's part. But, since you're very knowledgeable about films and cameras and such, I'm sure you can tell us how Zapruder managed to set his camera to run at 24 fps? Maybe he just clicked the single frame 24 times a second. Of course, it might make sense that the FBI agent mistook film speed for frame rate. But since FBI agents are experts on everything Zapruder must have customized his 414PD. Unless, of course, 24 fps was the frame rate for the "real camera" and Zapruder let the cat out of the bag. And then the FBI puppet masters left the "real" number in the report. But that can't be because only LN's believe in mistakes - why you'd have to think Zapruder, Barrett, and FBI headquarters were the 3 Stooges to have let that slip through. Jerry Edited August 22, 2009 by Jerry Logan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Lamson Posted August 22, 2009 Share Posted August 22, 2009 (edited) ...Perhaps the FBI agent didn't understand what Zapruder was telling him because Kodachrome II had an ASA rating of 25 for daylight exposures. The agent may have simply mistaken film speed for frame rate. I hope this helps. Best to you, Jerry amazing how many things in this investigation were "misunderstood", including Dealey Plaza eye witnesses to the limo slowdown/stop... And here the entire FBI couldn't tell the difference between film speed from frame rate.... perhaps FBI-SA Shaneyfelt should of been consulted on this too. And to think the LHO/SBT shooting sequence depends on the Z-film frame rate (fps). What a lone nut farce.....! Worse than the 3 Stooges... amazing how many things in this "research" were "misunderstood"... And here the star "physicist" of the CT crowd can't understand basic physics nor the properties of light and shadow.... perhaps this "physicist" should have consulted a decent photographer.... And to think this "physicist" claims to have proven beyond a doubt the z film fake.... What a CT farce.....! Worse than the 3 Stooges... www.craiglamson.com/costella.htm www.craiglamson.com/costella2.htm www.craiglamson.com/apollo.htm Edited August 22, 2009 by Craig Lamson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Karl Kinaski Posted August 23, 2009 Share Posted August 23, 2009 Quote G.Lamson And here the star "physicist" of the CT crowd can't understand basic physics nor the properties of light and shadow.... Close Quote Nobody need to know basic physics to find out that the Zappy-Film, as we know it, is a poor(and stupid) forgery. Here is just one stupid mistake, the forgers made: (Thx to J. White.) KK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David G. Healy Posted August 23, 2009 Share Posted August 23, 2009 ...Perhaps the FBI agent didn't understand what Zapruder was telling him because Kodachrome II had an ASA rating of 25 for daylight exposures. The agent may have simply mistaken film speed for frame rate. I hope this helps. Best to you, Jerry amazing how many things in this investigation were "misunderstood", including Dealey Plaza eye witnesses to the limo slowdown/stop... And here the entire FBI couldn't tell the difference between film speed from frame rate.... perhaps FBI-SA Shaneyfelt should of been consulted on this too. And to think the LHO/SBT shooting sequence depends on the Z-film frame rate (fps). What a lone nut farce.....! Worse than the 3 Stooges... amazing how many things in this "research" were "misunderstood"... And here the star "physicist" of the CT crowd can't understand basic physics nor the properties of light and shadow.... perhaps this "physicist" should have consulted a decent photographer.... And to think this "physicist" claims to have proven beyond a doubt the z film fake.... What a CT farce.....! Worse than the 3 Stooges... www.craiglamson.com/costella.htm www.craiglamson.com/costella2.htm www.craiglamson.com/apollo.htm perhaps our star physicist and your attorney, Jer Logan can get together, review the alleged Z-film, compare college degrees and come to a conclusion, eh.... Then the ever present CT bomb, that no one knows whats on the original Zapruder in-camera all we see this day are copies of the *alleged* altered film.... Now you have your hissy fit by your lonesome, us big kids have the end of summer to celebrate..... anf btw guy, think you can prove that film all locked up tight at NARA is the "original Z-film"? In your fondest dreams .... the best we can get these days from the lone nut-xxxxx camp is N-O-I-S-E, the latest being Jer 'the nutter att'y' Logan... Carry on! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerry Logan Posted August 24, 2009 Share Posted August 24, 2009 (edited) Quote G.LamsonAnd here the star "physicist" of the CT crowd can't understand basic physics nor the properties of light and shadow.... Close Quote Nobody need to know basic physics to find out that the Zappy-Film, as we know it, is a poor(and stupid) forgery. Here is just one stupid mistake, the forgers made: (Thx to J. White.) KK Karl, I was hoping your post might be some kind of hip, post modern irony, but it seems as though you're serious. Why would you think that photographs taken at different times would show exactly the same people in exactly the same positions? Altgens has had time to cross the street, walk up the incline toward the pergola, turn around and walk back down past the Newmans. Why isn't there time for someone to step behind the truck? Jerry Edited August 24, 2009 by Jerry Logan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerry Logan Posted August 24, 2009 Share Posted August 24, 2009 ...Perhaps the FBI agent didn't understand what Zapruder was telling him because Kodachrome II had an ASA rating of 25 for daylight exposures. The agent may have simply mistaken film speed for frame rate. I hope this helps. Best to you, Jerry amazing how many things in this investigation were "misunderstood", including Dealey Plaza eye witnesses to the limo slowdown/stop... And here the entire FBI couldn't tell the difference between film speed from frame rate.... perhaps FBI-SA Shaneyfelt should of been consulted on this too. And to think the LHO/SBT shooting sequence depends on the Z-film frame rate (fps). What a lone nut farce.....! Worse than the 3 Stooges... amazing how many things in this "research" were "misunderstood"... And here the star "physicist" of the CT crowd can't understand basic physics nor the properties of light and shadow.... perhaps this "physicist" should have consulted a decent photographer.... And to think this "physicist" claims to have proven beyond a doubt the z film fake.... What a CT farce.....! Worse than the 3 Stooges... www.craiglamson.com/costella.htm www.craiglamson.com/costella2.htm www.craiglamson.com/apollo.htm perhaps our star physicist and your attorney, Jer Logan can get together, review the alleged Z-film, compare college degrees and come to a conclusion, eh.... Then the ever present CT bomb, that no one knows whats on the original Zapruder in-camera all we see this day are copies of the *alleged* altered film.... Now you have your hissy fit by your lonesome, us big kids have the end of summer to celebrate..... anf btw guy, think you can prove that film all locked up tight at NARA is the "original Z-film"? In your fondest dreams .... the best we can get these days from the lone nut-xxxxx camp is N-O-I-S-E, the latest being Jer 'the nutter att'y' Logan... Carry on! I take the sputtering, name-calling and subject shifting to mean that you haven't figured out how Zapruder got his 414PD to run at 24 frames per second. Maybe we'll all look the other way and not remember your first post. Did someone mention NOISE? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David G. Healy Posted August 24, 2009 Share Posted August 24, 2009 ...Perhaps the FBI agent didn't understand what Zapruder was telling him because Kodachrome II had an ASA rating of 25 for daylight exposures. The agent may have simply mistaken film speed for frame rate. I hope this helps. Best to you, Jerry amazing how many things in this investigation were "misunderstood", including Dealey Plaza eye witnesses to the limo slowdown/stop... And here the entire FBI couldn't tell the difference between film speed from frame rate.... perhaps FBI-SA Shaneyfelt should of been consulted on this too. And to think the LHO/SBT shooting sequence depends on the Z-film frame rate (fps). What a lone nut farce.....! Worse than the 3 Stooges... amazing how many things in this "research" were "misunderstood"... And here the star "physicist" of the CT crowd can't understand basic physics nor the properties of light and shadow.... perhaps this "physicist" should have consulted a decent photographer.... And to think this "physicist" claims to have proven beyond a doubt the z film fake.... What a CT farce.....! Worse than the 3 Stooges... www.craiglamson.com/costella.htm www.craiglamson.com/costella2.htm www.craiglamson.com/apollo.htm perhaps our star physicist and your attorney, Jer Logan can get together, review the alleged Z-film, compare college degrees and come to a conclusion, eh.... Then the ever present CT bomb, that no one knows whats on the original Zapruder in-camera all we see this day are copies of the *alleged* altered film.... Now you have your hissy fit by your lonesome, us big kids have the end of summer to celebrate..... anf btw guy, think you can prove that film all locked up tight at NARA is the "original Z-film"? In your fondest dreams .... the best we can get these days from the lone nut-xxxxx camp is N-O-I-S-E, the latest being Jer 'the nutter att'y' Logan... Carry on! I take the sputtering, name-calling and subject shifting to mean that you haven't figured out how Zapruder got his 414PD to run at 24 frames per second. Maybe we'll all look the other way and not remember your first post. Did someone mention NOISE? oh sitdown, Jer.... I forgot more about the camera than even Zavada knows.... so chill dude! Best let Lampoon do your talking... I'm not impressed as others with you Tink, and Bab's.... Of course you Nutter-trolls certainly needed someone to change the subject, so you'll do for the time being.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Karl Kinaski Posted August 24, 2009 Share Posted August 24, 2009 Quote G.LamsonAnd here the star "physicist" of the CT crowd can't understand basic physics nor the properties of light and shadow.... Close Quote Nobody need to know basic physics to find out that the Zappy-Film, as we know it, is a poor(and stupid) forgery. Here is just one stupid mistake, the forgers made: (Thx to J. White.) KK Karl, I was hoping your post might be some kind of hip, post modern irony, but it seems as though you're serious. Why would you think that photographs taken at different times would show exactly the same people in exactly the same positions? Altgens has had time to cross the street, walk up the incline toward the pergola, turn around and walk back down past the Newmans. Why isn't there time for someone to step behind the truck? Jerry In the Cancellare-pic, the man is sitting on the truck-bed. The Z-Frame shows a blanket on the very same truck bed. The only explanation(in the case the Z-Frame is not forged)is: the man was under the blanket during the shooting, removed the blanket pronto after the shots were fired, and than came out of his cranny...strange behavior, if true. LOL All I say is this: nobody needs special photographic knowledge, to figure out, that the crappy-zappy film is the most tortured piece of film in history! (And the most expensive film too! Do you think, the US-Government would pay 18 mio for a Z-film-Version everybody can watch at Y-tube? I am not that naiv. The Original is out there, but not in the reach of ordinary people. Note: Einsteins brain was "unlocatable" for 50 years...) KK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerry Logan Posted August 24, 2009 Share Posted August 24, 2009 ...Perhaps the FBI agent didn't understand what Zapruder was telling him because Kodachrome II had an ASA rating of 25 for daylight exposures. The agent may have simply mistaken film speed for frame rate. I hope this helps. Best to you, Jerry amazing how many things in this investigation were "misunderstood", including Dealey Plaza eye witnesses to the limo slowdown/stop... And here the entire FBI couldn't tell the difference between film speed from frame rate.... perhaps FBI-SA Shaneyfelt should of been consulted on this too. And to think the LHO/SBT shooting sequence depends on the Z-film frame rate (fps). What a lone nut farce.....! Worse than the 3 Stooges... amazing how many things in this "research" were "misunderstood"... And here the star "physicist" of the CT crowd can't understand basic physics nor the properties of light and shadow.... perhaps this "physicist" should have consulted a decent photographer.... And to think this "physicist" claims to have proven beyond a doubt the z film fake.... What a CT farce.....! Worse than the 3 Stooges... www.craiglamson.com/costella.htm www.craiglamson.com/costella2.htm www.craiglamson.com/apollo.htm perhaps our star physicist and your attorney, Jer Logan can get together, review the alleged Z-film, compare college degrees and come to a conclusion, eh.... Then the ever present CT bomb, that no one knows whats on the original Zapruder in-camera all we see this day are copies of the *alleged* altered film.... Now you have your hissy fit by your lonesome, us big kids have the end of summer to celebrate..... anf btw guy, think you can prove that film all locked up tight at NARA is the "original Z-film"? In your fondest dreams .... the best we can get these days from the lone nut-xxxxx camp is N-O-I-S-E, the latest being Jer 'the nutter att'y' Logan... Carry on! I take the sputtering, name-calling and subject shifting to mean that you haven't figured out how Zapruder got his 414PD to run at 24 frames per second. Maybe we'll all look the other way and not remember your first post. Did someone mention NOISE? oh sitdown, Jer.... I forgot more about the camera than even Zavada knows.... so chill dude! Best let Lampoon do your talking... I'm not impressed as others with you Tink, and Bab's.... Of course you Nutter-trolls certainly needed someone to change the subject, so you'll do for the time being.... It's a simple question David. Do you really think all the silly names will distract anyone from recognizing that you can't answer it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerry Logan Posted August 24, 2009 Share Posted August 24, 2009 Quote G.LamsonAnd here the star "physicist" of the CT crowd can't understand basic physics nor the properties of light and shadow.... Close Quote Nobody need to know basic physics to find out that the Zappy-Film, as we know it, is a poor(and stupid) forgery. Here is just one stupid mistake, the forgers made: (Thx to J. White.) KK Karl, I was hoping your post might be some kind of hip, post modern irony, but it seems as though you're serious. Why would you think that photographs taken at different times would show exactly the same people in exactly the same positions? Altgens has had time to cross the street, walk up the incline toward the pergola, turn around and walk back down past the Newmans. Why isn't there time for someone to step behind the truck? Jerry In the Cancellare-pic, the man is sitting on the truck-bed. The Z-Frame shows a blanket on the very same truck bed. The only explanation(in the case the Z-Frame is not forged)is: the man was under the blanket during the shooting, removed the blanket pronto after the shots were fired, and than came out of his cranny...strange behavior, if true. LOL All I say is this: nobody needs special photographic knowledge, to figure out, that the crappy-zappy film is the most tortured piece of film in history! (And the most expensive film too! Do you think, the US-Government would pay 18 mio for a Z-film-Version everybody can watch at Y-tube? I am not that naiv. The Original is out there, but not in the reach of ordinary people. Note: Einsteins brain was "unlocatable" for 50 years...) KK Karl, A better copy of Cancellare shows that the man is standing behind the pickup with his hands resting on the rail. A better view of Zapruder shows that the "blanket" is actually the sidewalk behind the pickup truck. That's why the "blanket" disappears behind the front of the large truck. Best to you, Jerry 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