Pamela Brown Posted January 13, 2010 Share Posted January 13, 2010 Also, the version of the Zapruder Groden aired on Geraldo, though he claims to have enhanced it, scoped it, whatever, was of inferior quality in terms of color and definition compared to a very good copy. Why was this the public not provided with at least a screening of the best copy available? Add these things to the so-called 'accidental' splices in at least two places on the original (just how do you burn film like that unless you are trying to alter it in the first place?), the missing copy of the film that we are apparently supposed to forget, plus the rogue copies, and we can get an idea of the scope of the shell game, if not hoax, being perpetrated on us right before our eyes. Why does it raise a red flag that the copy Groden showed on "Geraldo" was not "the best copy available?" The film was not officially available to researchers at that point, so he was working from the best copy he had access to. Are you implying that he purposefully didn't screen his best version? If so, what on earth would be the point in him doing that? As for "rogue copies," why are these automatically part of some "shell game" or "hoax?" It has been well-documented that when the Z film was in New Orleans during the Garrison trial that it was heavily bootlegged. It is then logical to assume that further copies would be made of these copies, resulting in an influx of not very good dubs into the research community and beyond. I'm just trying to understand why these things lend credence to arguments about the authenticity of the overall Z film. Rogue copies of the Z-films were available quite early; some LIFE executives had copies, there was at least one showing in a movie theater in 1964, so the 'not available to researcher' idea is not exactly true. Groden apparently got his copy from Moses Wietzman who made copies for LIFE. There were clear copies available. Why was the copy shown on Geraldo so faded? How many generations removed from *the* original was it? The rogue copies are a part of the question of whether there was a shell-game involved. So far, we don't even know exactly how many copies were made and what happened to each one of them, do we? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dean Hagerman Posted January 14, 2010 Share Posted January 14, 2010 (edited) ever since he was a lab technician at a NJ photo lab ... Moe Weitzman's lab was in New Jersey? Here all along I thought it was in New York. David you are correct Moe Weitzman ran EFX Laboratories in New York City nt New jersey as Barb claims It was at EFX that Moe went from 8mm to 35mm in one step Groden of course worked for Moe and from him got most of his early Z-film (s) I loved Liftons POAL chapter in TGZFH, the background of the researchers trying to get any type of copy of the Z-film, Marcus stealing Newcombs copy of the Z-film ( ) such a great history that Lifton was involved in, one of the reasons I look up to Lifton and the early reaserchers so much Edited January 14, 2010 by Dean Hagerman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack White Posted January 14, 2010 Share Posted January 14, 2010 Hi Jerry.I like to ask you a couple of questions before i went into detail regarding my improved windshield crack study. It has been said in your/Barb and Josiah's article that: John Hunt, working from photos he obtained in the Archives, has come up with an ingenious but simple proof that the “windshield switch theory” is wrong. He compared Frazier’s photo of the windshield taken in the wee hours of November 23rd with a later photo of the windshield taken by the HSCA circa 1978:As Hunt points out, “cracks don’t go away.” If cracks were present in the windshield when photographed by Frazier on November 23rd while the windshield was still attached to the limousine and those cracks are not present in the HSCA windshield in 1978, then we are dealing with two different pieces of evidence. However, the photos show a marked similarity in the position and number of the cracks. The photos indicate that the two windshields are the same and that the Lifton/Fetzer “windshield switch theory” is wrong. Can you, or anyone else guide me to the original article from John Hunt's windshield study? I can't find it here nor on Lancer or Google. Is it hidden in alt.assassination groups? What i like to see is the whole expert's report from John Hunt about this ingenious but simple proof . Another question i have is.......what is the source of this photograph taken ca. 1978 for the HSCA: Ok, i can't find it in my files nor on any other online source (Mary Ferrell). Who made it and for what purpose? Thank you forward. As i said, every help is much appreciated. Martin Andy Walker is TOTALLY UNQUALIFIED to comment on the hole in the windshield. Jack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barb Junkkarinen Posted January 14, 2010 Share Posted January 14, 2010 You and David are SUCH cut ups! HAHA! Moe Weitzman?? The copy he made in 1967 would have done the WC a fat lot of good, now wouldn't it? And I thought the clues were so obvious ... sigh. LIFE (via Mr. Orth) brings the original film to D.C. to show the WC in February ... that was 1964, not 1967 :-) ... and they then send the film to a New Jersey lab, not to have bad salsa made, but to have 3 sets of first generation slides made. Robert Groden was the technician at that lab in New Jersey, who made those slides ... and made himself a copy of the film, which he then hid in a safe for years, at the same time. So, the poor copy Pamela is complaining about that Groden showed on the Geraldo show was made directly from the original. I never made any "claims" about Weitzman ... I never mentioned him. How silly that would have been. And pretty silly you both did. Barb :-) ever since he was a lab technician at a NJ photo lab ... Moe Weitzman's lab was in New Jersey? Here all along I thought it was in New York. David you are correct Moe Weitzman ran EFX Laboratories in New York City nt New jersey as Barb claims It was at EFX that Moe went from 8mm to 35mm in one step Groden of course worked for Moe and from him got most of his early Z-film (s) I loved Liftons POAL chapter in TGZFH, the background of the researchers trying to get any type of copy of the Z-film, Marcus stealing Newcombs copy of the Z-film ( ) such a great history that Lifton was involved in, one of the reasons I look up to Lifton and the early reaserchers so much Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barb Junkkarinen Posted January 14, 2010 Share Posted January 14, 2010 Really, Pamela. LIFE takes the original film to D.C. and shows it to the WC in Feb 1964. Then sends that film to a photo lab in New Jersey to have 3 sets of 1st generation slides made. Robert Groden is a technician at that New Jersey photo lab and makes himself a copy too. It was 1964, not 1967 which is when Weitzman made a copy of the film. Groden hides the copy he made in NJ away. Then showed it on the Geraldo show in 1975. Groden's copy was made from the original. Groden arguably HAD the best copy. It was 1975. Video and TV was not what it is today, as a friend in the know noted to me recently... one cannot expect tapes of that show to be as sharp and clear as what has come about over the years and up until today. Barb :-) Also, the version of the Zapruder Groden aired on Geraldo, though he claims to have enhanced it, scoped it, whatever, was of inferior quality in terms of color and definition compared to a very good copy. Why was this the public not provided with at least a screening of the best copy available? Add these things to the so-called 'accidental' splices in at least two places on the original (just how do you burn film like that unless you are trying to alter it in the first place?), the missing copy of the film that we are apparently supposed to forget, plus the rogue copies, and we can get an idea of the scope of the shell game, if not hoax, being perpetrated on us right before our eyes. Why does it raise a red flag that the copy Groden showed on "Geraldo" was not "the best copy available?" The film was not officially available to researchers at that point, so he was working from the best copy he had access to. Are you implying that he purposefully didn't screen his best version? If so, what on earth would be the point in him doing that? As for "rogue copies," why are these automatically part of some "shell game" or "hoax?" It has been well-documented that when the Z film was in New Orleans during the Garrison trial that it was heavily bootlegged. It is then logical to assume that further copies would be made of these copies, resulting in an influx of not very good dubs into the research community and beyond. I'm just trying to understand why these things lend credence to arguments about the authenticity of the overall Z film. Rogue copies of the Z-films were available quite early; some LIFE executives had copies, there was at least one showing in a movie theater in 1964, so the 'not available to researcher' idea is not exactly true. Groden apparently got his copy from Moses Wietzman who made copies for LIFE. There were clear copies available. Why was the copy shown on Geraldo so faded? How many generations removed from *the* original was it? The rogue copies are a part of the question of whether there was a shell-game involved. So far, we don't even know exactly how many copies were made and what happened to each one of them, do we? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dean Hagerman Posted January 14, 2010 Share Posted January 14, 2010 (edited) You and David are SUCH cut ups! HAHA! Moe Weitzman?? The copy he made in 1967 would have done the WC a fat lot of good, now wouldn't it? And I thought the clues were so obvious ... sigh.LIFE (via Mr. Orth) brings the original film to D.C. to show the WC in February ... that was 1964, not 1967 :-) ... and they then send the film to a New Jersey lab, not to have bad salsa made, but to have 3 sets of first generation slides made. Robert Groden was the technician at that lab in New Jersey, who made those slides ... and made himself a copy of the film, which he then hid in a safe for years, at the same time. So, the poor copy Pamela is complaining about that Groden showed on the Geraldo show was made directly from the original. I never made any "claims" about Weitzman ... I never mentioned him. How silly that would have been. And pretty silly you both did. Barb :-) ever since he was a lab technician at a NJ photo lab ... Moe Weitzman's lab was in New Jersey? Here all along I thought it was in New York. David you are correct Moe Weitzman ran EFX Laboratories in New York City nt New jersey as Barb claims It was at EFX that Moe went from 8mm to 35mm in one step Groden of course worked for Moe and from him got most of his early Z-film (s) I loved Liftons POAL chapter in TGZFH, the background of the researchers trying to get any type of copy of the Z-film, Marcus stealing Newcombs copy of the Z-film ( ) such a great history that Lifton was involved in, one of the reasons I look up to Lifton and the early reaserchers so much What in the world are you talking about? So what your saying is Groden worked at a film lab in New Jersey that made 3 copies and he made a copy for himself at the NJ lab that had nothing to do with Moe Weitzman? You are wrong Groden got the film from Weitzman who Groden worked for in New York not New Jersey What was the name of this New Jersey lab that Groden worked at and made a copy of the Z-film for himself? Your claiming that Groden had a Z-film in his safe that he made copies of in 1964 Time to show Barb she has no clue what she is talking about Groden told the ARRB that his first job that had to do with photography was in June of 1969 His first job in photography was with Moe Weitzman at EFX in New York Tell us Barb how was Groden who was 19 years old in 1964 was working at a photo lab in New Jersey when he was in the US Army? Do you want me to keep going? Edited January 14, 2010 by Dean Hagerman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barb Junkkarinen Posted January 14, 2010 Share Posted January 14, 2010 Hi Jerry.I like to ask you a couple of questions before i went into detail regarding my improved windshield crack study. It has been said in your/Barb and Josiah's article that: John Hunt, working from photos he obtained in the Archives, has come up with an ingenious but simple proof that the “windshield switch theory” is wrong. He compared Frazier’s photo of the windshield taken in the wee hours of November 23rd with a later photo of the windshield taken by the HSCA circa 1978:As Hunt points out, “cracks don’t go away.” If cracks were present in the windshield when photographed by Frazier on November 23rd while the windshield was still attached to the limousine and those cracks are not present in the HSCA windshield in 1978, then we are dealing with two different pieces of evidence. However, the photos show a marked similarity in the position and number of the cracks. The photos indicate that the two windshields are the same and that the Lifton/Fetzer “windshield switch theory” is wrong. Can you, or anyone else guide me to the original article from John Hunt's windshield study? I can't find it here nor on Lancer or Google. Is it hidden in alt.assassination groups? What i like to see is the whole expert's report from John Hunt about this ingenious but simple proof . Another question i have is.......what is the source of this photograph taken ca. 1978 for the HSCA: Ok, i can't find it in my files nor on any other online source (Mary Ferrell). Who made it and for what purpose? Thank you forward. As i said, every help is much appreciated. Martin Andy Walker is TOTALLY UNQUALIFIED to comment on the hole in the windshield. Jack Uh, Jack, that quote was from our article ... Andy Walker was kind enough to post the whole thing for us so the quote came up in his name. Soooo...just to be clear, again, that was not Walker's comment, that quote is part of our Eternal Return article. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dean Hagerman Posted January 14, 2010 Share Posted January 14, 2010 (edited) You and David are SUCH cut ups! HAHA! Moe Weitzman?? The copy he made in 1967 would have done the WC a fat lot of good, now wouldn't it? And I thought the clues were so obvious ... sigh.LIFE (via Mr. Orth) brings the original film to D.C. to show the WC in February ... that was 1964, not 1967 :-) ... and they then send the film to a New Jersey lab, not to have bad salsa made, but to have 3 sets of first generation slides made. Robert Groden was the technician at that lab in New Jersey, who made those slides ... and made himself a copy of the film, which he then hid in a safe for years, at the same time. So, the poor copy Pamela is complaining about that Groden showed on the Geraldo show was made directly from the original. I never made any "claims" about Weitzman ... I never mentioned him. How silly that would have been. And pretty silly you both did. Barb :-) What in the world are you talking about? So what your saying is Groden worked at a film lab in New Jersey that made 3 copies and he made a copy for himself at the NJ lab that had nothing to do with Moe Weitzman? You are wrong Groden got the film from Weitzman who Groden worked for in New York not New Jersey What was the name of this New Jersey lab that Groden worked at and made a copy of the Z-film for himself? Your claiming that Groden had a Z-film in his safe that he made copies of in 1964 Time to show Barb she has no clue what she is talking about Groden told the ARRB that his first job that had to do with photography was in June of 1969 His first job in photography was with Moe Weitzman at EFX in New York Tell us Barb how was Groden who was 19 years old in 1964 was working at a photo lab in New Jersey when he was in the US Army? Do you want me to keep going? The funny part is that you talk to David and I like we are stupid, bottom line is that you dont know what you are talking about Edited January 14, 2010 by Dean Hagerman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Will Emaus Posted January 14, 2010 Share Posted January 14, 2010 You and David are SUCH cut ups! HAHA! Moe Weitzman?? The copy he made in 1967 would have done the WC a fat lot of good, now wouldn't it? And I thought the clues were so obvious ... sigh.LIFE (via Mr. Orth) brings the original film to D.C. to show the WC in February ... that was 1964, not 1967 :-) ... and they then send the film to a New Jersey lab, not to have bad salsa made, but to have 3 sets of first generation slides made. Robert Groden was the technician at that lab in New Jersey, who made those slides ... and made himself a copy of the film, which he then hid in a safe for years, at the same time. So, the poor copy Pamela is complaining about that Groden showed on the Geraldo show was made directly from the original. I never made any "claims" about Weitzman ... I never mentioned him. How silly that would have been. And pretty silly you both did. Barb :-) What in the world are you talking about? So what your saying is Groden worked at a film lab in New Jersey that made 3 copies and he made a copy for himself at the NJ lab that had nothing to do with Moe Weitzman? You are wrong Groden got the film from Weitzman who Groden worked for in New York not New Jersey What was the name of this New Jersey lab that Groden worked at and made a copy of the Z-film for himself? Your claiming that Groden had a Z-film in his safe that he made copies of in 1964 Time to show Barb she has no clue what she is talking about Groden told the ARRB that his first job that had to do with photography was in June of 1969 His first job in photography was with Moe Weitzman at EFX in New York Tell us Barb how was Groden who was 19 years old in 1964 was working at a photo lab in New Jersey when he was in the US Army? Do you want me to keep going? The funny part is that you talk to David and I like we are stupid, bottom line is that you dont know what you are talking about Some support for Dean's take on this... http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk...roden_0002a.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dean Hagerman Posted January 14, 2010 Share Posted January 14, 2010 You and David are SUCH cut ups! HAHA! Moe Weitzman?? The copy he made in 1967 would have done the WC a fat lot of good, now wouldn't it? And I thought the clues were so obvious ... sigh.LIFE (via Mr. Orth) brings the original film to D.C. to show the WC in February ... that was 1964, not 1967 :-) ... and they then send the film to a New Jersey lab, not to have bad salsa made, but to have 3 sets of first generation slides made. Robert Groden was the technician at that lab in New Jersey, who made those slides ... and made himself a copy of the film, which he then hid in a safe for years, at the same time. So, the poor copy Pamela is complaining about that Groden showed on the Geraldo show was made directly from the original. I never made any "claims" about Weitzman ... I never mentioned him. How silly that would have been. And pretty silly you both did. Barb :-) What in the world are you talking about? So what your saying is Groden worked at a film lab in New Jersey that made 3 copies and he made a copy for himself at the NJ lab that had nothing to do with Moe Weitzman? You are wrong Groden got the film from Weitzman who Groden worked for in New York not New Jersey What was the name of this New Jersey lab that Groden worked at and made a copy of the Z-film for himself? Your claiming that Groden had a Z-film in his safe that he made copies of in 1964 Time to show Barb she has no clue what she is talking about Groden told the ARRB that his first job that had to do with photography was in June of 1969 His first job in photography was with Moe Weitzman at EFX in New York Tell us Barb how was Groden who was 19 years old in 1964 was working at a photo lab in New Jersey when he was in the US Army? Do you want me to keep going? The funny part is that you talk to David and I like we are stupid, bottom line is that you dont know what you are talking about Some support for Dean's take on this... http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk...roden_0002a.htm Thanks Will Whats up Barb? Cat got your tongue? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pat Speer Posted January 14, 2010 Share Posted January 14, 2010 You and David are SUCH cut ups! HAHA! Moe Weitzman?? The copy he made in 1967 would have done the WC a fat lot of good, now wouldn't it? And I thought the clues were so obvious ... sigh.LIFE (via Mr. Orth) brings the original film to D.C. to show the WC in February ... that was 1964, not 1967 :-) ... and they then send the film to a New Jersey lab, not to have bad salsa made, but to have 3 sets of first generation slides made. Robert Groden was the technician at that lab in New Jersey, who made those slides ... and made himself a copy of the film, which he then hid in a safe for years, at the same time. So, the poor copy Pamela is complaining about that Groden showed on the Geraldo show was made directly from the original. I never made any "claims" about Weitzman ... I never mentioned him. How silly that would have been. And pretty silly you both did. Barb :-) ever since he was a lab technician at a NJ photo lab ... Moe Weitzman's lab was in New Jersey? Here all along I thought it was in New York. David you are correct Moe Weitzman ran EFX Laboratories in New York City nt New jersey as Barb claims It was at EFX that Moe went from 8mm to 35mm in one step Groden of course worked for Moe and from him got most of his early Z-film (s) I loved Liftons POAL chapter in TGZFH, the background of the researchers trying to get any type of copy of the Z-film, Marcus stealing Newcombs copy of the Z-film ( ) such a great history that Lifton was involved in, one of the reasons I look up to Lifton and the early reaserchers so much What in the world are you talking about? So what your saying is Groden worked at a film lab in New Jersey that made 3 copies and he made a copy for himself at the NJ lab that had nothing to do with Moe Weitzman? You are wrong Groden got the film from Weitzman who Groden worked for in New York not New Jersey What was the name of this New Jersey lab that Groden worked at and made a copy of the Z-film for himself? Your claiming that Groden had a Z-film in his safe that he made copies of in 1964 Time to show Barb she has no clue what she is talking about Groden told the ARRB that his first job that had to do with photography was in June of 1969 His first job in photography was with Moe Weitzman at EFX in New York Tell us Barb how was Groden who was 19 years old in 1964 was working at a photo lab in New Jersey when he was in the US Army? Do you want me to keep going? Barb, I think Dean is right. As I recall it, Groden made his copy when Weitzman was hired to copy the film for Garrison, not the WC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bernice Moore Posted January 14, 2010 Share Posted January 14, 2010 (edited) Barb see pages 46 and 47 of David Lifton's Pig on a Leash...and so on...B ''Nevertheless, I did learn that night just how he had obtained prints of such clarity: there was a lab in New York City where Life had sent the film for enlargement in the late 1960s, and he had some connection with that lab. He would not provide any details, but this lab (I now realized) was the source of the extraordinary Z film materials I had seen at Time Life’s Beverly Hills office in June 1970. This fellow “Robert” had worked there, obviously had access to an optical printer at that facility, clearly knew how to operate it; had “borrowed” a negative, and that was the source of his ultra-high quality prints. End of story, or at least, that’s about how much I learned that night. Either at this meeting or later—I learned what was special about this lab. Normally, optical printers are designed to work in professional format—i.e., either in 16mm or 35mm. But the owner (who it turned out was Moses (“Moe”) Weitzman, had made a special “shuttle” device, modifying his optical printer to accept 8 mm film. Consequently, around 1967, the 8mm original Z film (which LIFE purchased in November 1963) could be put into the standard optical printer, and then blown up, i.e., magnified, in one step, to 35mm. An important point needs to be made here. Weitzman had nothing whatever to do with the alteration of the original Zapruder film which occurred in November, 1963 in connection with its sale to LIFE—but Moe had everything to do (around 1967) with restoring the film to this “oversized” or “magnified” format, one crucial to collecting data on which all theories of film alteration are based because only in such enlarged format is crucial detail visible and measurable. Let me explain. To alter the Zapruder film, initially, it was probably necessary to “bump it up” to 16, and more likely 35. At that time, and after alterations were made, the edited film (i.e. altered in 16mm or 35 mm format) would have to be “reduced” back down to 8mm. So LIFE was sold an 8mm film—which arrived either as an 8mm film, but possibly as a 16mm film which had the assassination on “side 2”. [Pig on a Leash (2003); By David S. Lifton] 47 For all practical purposes, once the film was slit (and then in 8mm format), it was impossible to study with precision. The images were just too small. If I may introduce another analogy: a forger blows up a check, works on fabricating a signature in some enlarged format, then reduces the check back down to ordinary size. Years later, in connection with forensic investigation, it becomes useful to take the forgery and re-magnify it, to “blow it back up” to an oversized state. Why? Because various anomalies are most easily studied in that oversized format. That would be akin to what happened when LIFE sent its “original” to Moe Weitzman in 1967. He had nothing to do with the original (November 1963) alteration; but everything to do with creating an enlarged version crucial for future study. And Robert Groden ended up with negatives and prints from that endeavor. While it is true that Groden did some additional work on the film, the essential clarity of the film comes from Moe Weitzman’s ingenuity, when he went from “8 to 35” in one step, and not anything Groden did. It was as if Weitzman had climbed 90 percent of the way up Everest; Groden went the last 10 percent. Because of Weitzman’s ingenuity, the jump from 8mm to 35mm had been made optically, in one step. And once a 35mm optical negative had been created, the rest was standard operating procedure: creating 35mm prints; 16mm “reduction” prints, etc.12 From this first meeting, it was clear that Groden was connected with the lab to which LIFE had sent the original (around 1967), and which created the materials I had seen in June 1970. But just who was he? And what were his credentials? Who is Robert Groden'' Edited January 14, 2010 by Bernice Moore Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barb Junkkarinen Posted January 14, 2010 Share Posted January 14, 2010 Barb see pages 46 and 47 of David Lifton's Pig on a Leash...and so on...B Thanks for bringing up Pig on a Leash, Bernice! I just started wading thru these replies. Geesh, I didn't know this scenario was little known, and it, indeed, may be a mixed bag of 2 February's being mixed up (1964 and 1968) but! First to Pig on a Leash.... See page 356 of the Great Z Film Hoax. David Lifton relates that Groden dropped out of high school in the 11th grade to join the Army. [Groden turned 17 on November 22, 1962.] Lifton goes on to relate that Groden was discharged on a medical less than a year later, that he then returned to the New York area, and that he worked for a record distributor AND .... "and, at some point, went to work as an optical technician (i.e., someone who made 35mm slides from pictures)." Lifton then jumps ahead noting that he knows Groden worked for EFX for an extended period and gets into the whole Mo Weitzman deal. Weitzman was the lead optical technician at a New Jersey lab called Manhattan Effects in 1967 when LIFE sent the Z film there for a 16mm copy .... and in 1968, they wanted a 35mm copy. LATER, in 1968, Weitzman set up his own shop ... EFX, and in 1969, Groden was hired to work there. I do not know if Weitzman was with Manhattan Effects in 1964. In 1967, Life magazine hired a New Jersey film lab, Manhattan Effects, to make a 16 mm film copy of the original Zapruder film. Pleased with the results, they asked for a 35 mm internegative to be made. Mo Weitzman made several internegatives in 1968, giving the best to Life and retaining the test copies. Weitzman set up his own optical house and motion picture postproduction facility later that year. Employee and assassination buff Robert Groden, hired in 1969, used one of Weitzman's copies and an optical printer to make versions of the Zapruder film using close-ups and minimizing the camera's shakiness. http://www.dockersunion.com/phpbb/viewtopi...&view=print LIFE had slides made in Feb 1964. LIFE ordered a 16mm made in 1967, a 35 mm made in Feb 1968. Groden, according to Lifton, worked as an optical tech at a lab in the NY area after returning from less than a year in the Army ... which would have been sometime in 1963 according to his birthdate. Manhattan Effects was in New Jersey. Weitzman worked there before opening his own place, EFX, in 1968 ... and hiring Groden in 1969. Trask writes this in POTP, pg 118: Robert J. Groden, a young optics technician working for a New Jersey photo lab had come upon a copy of the Zapruder film. Though Groden was uncommunicative about the circumstances of his obtaining the film, several sources say Groden acquired it in 1968 when LIFE had sent the original out to the New Jersey lab for copying and copy slides. Groden says his copy was made directly off the original, and though he contends he did nothing wrong obtaining an unauthorized copy of this copyrighted film, he is careful not to mention who, if anyone, assisted him. Groden recalls, "When I saw it I was too afraid to do anything with it. I threw it in a bank vault." Over the next 10 years, he not only began studying it, but also enhanced it by reframing.... But LIFE sent the film to have slides made in Feb 1964 after Orth projected the original film for the WC. That's where they got the 1st generation slides we have today. And by the time Groden was hired to work at EFX by Weitzman in 1969, Weitzman no longer had the original there. He made the 35mm for LIFE in 1968. "Over the next 10 years" does not comport with the Geraldo airing in 1975. It does comport with 1964 when the slides were made for the WC. The 6th floor reports in their Z-film timeline: February 1968 Life hired a New Jersey film lab, Technical Animations, to make a 35mm film copy of the original 8mm Zapruder film. Vice President and General Manager Moses Weitzman made several copies, gave the best one to Life and kept the rejects. Perhaps Gary Mack can comment on this. Different lab named, but again, that was the 35mm copy .... and no slides as in 1964. A non-JFK assassination site, FAMOUS PICTURES: THE MAGAZINE at http://www.famouspictures.org/mag/index.ph...e=Zapruder_Film says in its Zfilm history: In government circles copies of the film circulated often copies of copies sometimes many generations old. When the Warren Commission studied the film the next year they had difficulties with the quality and clarity of the prints. In Feb 1964, LIFE lab assistant Herbert Orth brought the original film to a meeting of government officials and volunteered to make slides of all the frames. The original was sent out to a New Jersey photo lab where photo lab technician Robert Groden made a bootleg copy. He also was able remove the amateur shakiness of the original by re-framing it. This improved version was far superior to the copies the government held but he placed it in a bank vault out of fear he would be arrested for making a bootleg copy. Perhaps as with all things in this arena, it seems, there is some haziness to who or what went where when. Apparently the thought that Groden was the technician at the NJ lab in 1964 when life sent the film to have slides made is not as widely known ... or at least not accepted ... as I thought, or as it seems to be to some people I have spoken to/who have mentioned it to me. The first time I heard this was while in D.C. for a COPA conference, so that would have been either '94 or '95. I'm thinking it was '95 because I recall it first being mentioned to me sometime after Doug DeSalles and I had a very late night dinner ... about 1am ... with Groden, his son and someone else (can't remember who) at a diner we all laughed about later... and that was in '95. And, as I have posted, that is exactly what is noted in some accounts ... and Lifton notes Groden working in a photo lab making slides after he got home from his less-than-a-year long Army career which fits that time frame, as well. I do know that over dinner that night in the wacky diner, Robert told us he had been working on the assassination since 1964. Hope this answers everyone's questions about what I meant/where I got this. I in no way mean to malign Robert Groden or cause him any grief. Heck, as someone posted here the other day, he's pretty much considered a hero in this arena by some for copying that film ... whenever and wherever that may have happened. I am truly surprised that this scenario is completely unknown, at least by those who replied here. It really makes no difference to me, or at all, I suppose ... and only Robert know which scenario is correct. Bests, Barb :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dean Hagerman Posted January 14, 2010 Share Posted January 14, 2010 Barb see pages 46 and 47 of David Lifton's Pig on a Leash...and so on...B Thanks for bringing up Pig on a Leash, Bernice! I just started wading thru these replies. Geesh, I didn't know this scenario was little known, and it, indeed, may be a mixed bag of 2 February's being mixed up (1964 and 1968) but! First to Pig on a Leash.... See page 356 of the Great Z Film Hoax. David Lifton relates that Groden dropped out of high school in the 11th grade to join the Army. [Groden turned 17 on November 22, 1962.] Lifton goes on to relate that Groden was discharged on a medical less than a year later, that he then returned to the New York area, and that he worked for a record distributor AND .... "and, at some point, went to work as an optical technician (i.e., someone who made 35mm slides from pictures)." Lifton then jumps ahead noting that he knows Groden worked for EFX for an extended period and gets into the whole Mo Weitzman deal. Weitzman was the lead optical technician at a New Jersey lab called Manhattan Effects in 1967 when LIFE sent the Z film there for a 16mm copy .... and in 1968, they wanted a 35mm copy. LATER, in 1968, Weitzman set up his own shop ... EFX, and in 1969, Groden was hired to work there. I do not know if Weitzman was with Manhattan Effects in 1964. In 1967, Life magazine hired a New Jersey film lab, Manhattan Effects, to make a 16 mm film copy of the original Zapruder film. Pleased with the results, they asked for a 35 mm internegative to be made. Mo Weitzman made several internegatives in 1968, giving the best to Life and retaining the test copies. Weitzman set up his own optical house and motion picture postproduction facility later that year. Employee and assassination buff Robert Groden, hired in 1969, used one of Weitzman's copies and an optical printer to make versions of the Zapruder film using close-ups and minimizing the camera's shakiness. http://www.dockersunion.com/phpbb/viewtopi...&view=print LIFE had slides made in Feb 1964. LIFE ordered a 16mm made in 1967, a 35 mm made in Feb 1968. Groden, according to Lifton, worked as an optical tech at a lab in the NY area after returning from less than a year in the Army ... which would have been sometime in 1963 according to his birthdate. Manhattan Effects was in New Jersey. Weitzman worked there before opening his own place, EFX, in 1968 ... and hiring Groden in 1969. Trask writes this in POTP, pg 118: Robert J. Groden, a young optics technician working for a New Jersey photo lab had come upon a copy of the Zapruder film. Though Groden was uncommunicative about the circumstances of his obtaining the film, several sources say Groden acquired it in 1968 when LIFE had sent the original out to the New Jersey lab for copying and copy slides. Groden says his copy was made directly off the original, and though he contends he did nothing wrong obtaining an unauthorized copy of this copyrighted film, he is careful not to mention who, if anyone, assisted him. Groden recalls, "When I saw it I was too afraid to do anything with it. I threw it in a bank vault." Over the next 10 years, he not only began studying it, but also enhanced it by reframing.... But LIFE sent the film to have slides made in Feb 1964 after Orth projected the original film for the WC. That's where they got the 1st generation slides we have today. And by the time Groden was hired to work at EFX by Weitzman in 1969, Weitzman no longer had the original there. He made the 35mm for LIFE in 1968. "Over the next 10 years" does not comport with the Geraldo airing in 1975. It does comport with 1964 when the slides were made for the WC. The 6th floor reports in their Z-film timeline: February 1968 Life hired a New Jersey film lab, Technical Animations, to make a 35mm film copy of the original 8mm Zapruder film. Vice President and General Manager Moses Weitzman made several copies, gave the best one to Life and kept the rejects. Perhaps Gary Mack can comment on this. Different lab named, but again, that was the 35mm copy .... and no slides as in 1964. A non-JFK assassination site, FAMOUS PICTURES: THE MAGAZINE at http://www.famouspictures.org/mag/index.ph...e=Zapruder_Film says in its Zfilm history: In government circles copies of the film circulated often copies of copies sometimes many generations old. When the Warren Commission studied the film the next year they had difficulties with the quality and clarity of the prints. In Feb 1964, LIFE lab assistant Herbert Orth brought the original film to a meeting of government officials and volunteered to make slides of all the frames. The original was sent out to a New Jersey photo lab where photo lab technician Robert Groden made a bootleg copy. He also was able remove the amateur shakiness of the original by re-framing it. This improved version was far superior to the copies the government held but he placed it in a bank vault out of fear he would be arrested for making a bootleg copy. Perhaps as with all things in this arena, it seems, there is some haziness to who or what went where when. Apparently the thought that Groden was the technician at the NJ lab in 1964 when life sent the film to have slides made is not as widely known ... or at least not accepted ... as I thought, or as it seems to be to some people I have spoken to/who have mentioned it to me. The first time I heard this was while in D.C. for a COPA conference, so that would have been either '94 or '95. I'm thinking it was '95 because I recall it first being mentioned to me sometime after Doug DeSalles and I had a very late night dinner ... about 1am ... with Groden, his son and someone else (can't remember who) at a diner we all laughed about later... and that was in '95. And, as I have posted, that is exactly what is noted in some accounts ... and Lifton notes Groden working in a photo lab making slides after he got home from his less-than-a-year long Army career which fits that time frame, as well. I do know that over dinner that night in the wacky diner, Robert told us he had been working on the assassination since 1964. Hope this answers everyone's questions about what I meant/where I got this. I in no way mean to malign Robert Groden or cause him any grief. Heck, as someone posted here the other day, he's pretty much considered a hero in this arena by some for copying that film ... whenever and wherever that may have happened. I am truly surprised that this scenario is completely unknown, at least by those who replied here. It really makes no difference to me, or at all, I suppose ... and only Robert know which scenario is correct. Bests, Barb :-) Maybe you missed this important part June of 1969 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dean Hagerman Posted January 14, 2010 Share Posted January 14, 2010 Ok, I knew I had read Grodens own account of how and when he came upon the Z-film I went through all of Grodens books until I came to the Introduction in "The Killing Of A President" I scanned it for Barb and others On the page before this one Groden says that he started to study the case soon after Nov 22 1963 But he never had any Z-film or frames or had never seen the Z-film before he met Weitzman in 1969, in fact Weitzman didnt show Groden the Z-film until months after they first met Barb if you dont know the facts and history of the Z-film, how can we trust your diatribes against Fetzer, White and others? 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