Craig Lamson Posted January 8, 2010 Share Posted January 8, 2010 (edited) Facts eh. Like that really pesky and quite large fold of fabric in Betzner.... Yes! The the fold that is left side up, right side down in Betzner 3: Left side up, right side down: \ Here's how you describe the fold and its shadow: Yes the bottom, left side of the shadow IS diagonal. So we have by your own analysis of Betzner a diagonal fold that is at the bottom left of the shadow. It is readily observed that the fold in Betzner is a left-side up, right-side down fold like this: \ Craig, there are four (4) ways you can put a left-end up diagonal fold ( \) in clothing fabric. That's a fold that goes like this: \ That's the fold you noticed in Betzner. 1) Pulling/stretching the fabric UP, in which case the \ will be on the right. 2) Pulling/stretching the fabric DOWN, in which case the \ will be on the left. 3) Bunching/easing the fabric UP and to the RIGHT. 4) Bunching/easing the fabric DOWN and to the LEFT. No one pulled on JFK's jacket. The fabric was not stretched in the limo. Just the opposite. His jacket eased as he casually sat and waved. So we can eliminate 1) and 2) in the case of JFK. As photo expert extrodinaire Craig Lamson has observed in the Betzner photo, emphasis added: Yes the bottom, left side of the shadow IS diagonal. That diagonal was created when JFK changed his posture circa Z173, turned his head to the right and started to wave his right hand. This posture shift pushed the fraction-of-an-inch horizontal fold we see in Croft into the "bottom, left" diagonal fold we see in Betzner. Thank you for your contribution, Craig. So Cliff, here is where you stand, which is exactly where you were months ago. You need to provide some experimental, empirical evidence shows us all ANY other form of fold other than the one I've shown that can create the shadow pattern as seen in Betzner. That's what rational people call proof. Simple and easy. Just show us how it can happen. You simply can't produce that shadow pattern given the angle of incidence of the light source. And that's the bottom line now Cliff. Can't wait to see your experimental, empirical evidence. You can use a caaera, can't you? Edited January 8, 2010 by Evan Burton Moderated tone of post Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dean Hagerman Posted January 8, 2010 Share Posted January 8, 2010 11/22 W.A.G. will obviously be a solo gig. Oh man! Come on Cliff why cant I join? I wanted so bad to be a member of W.A.G. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Varnell Posted January 8, 2010 Share Posted January 8, 2010 11/22 W.A.G. will obviously be a solo gig. Oh man! Come on Cliff why cant I join? I wanted so bad to be a member of W.A.G. You talk too much and say nothing. No chance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dean Hagerman Posted January 8, 2010 Share Posted January 8, 2010 11/22 W.A.G. will obviously be a solo gig. Oh man! Come on Cliff why cant I join? I wanted so bad to be a member of W.A.G. You talk too much and say nothing. No chance. Cliff nobody ever knows what you are talking about I think you should go back and read my serious posts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Varnell Posted January 8, 2010 Share Posted January 8, 2010 So Cliff, here is where you stand, which is exactly where you were months ago. No, we are very far from where I left off months ago. You weren't hip to the stretch/ease dichotomy months ago. I knew that was a nuance that would likely escape you. Months ago I made a statement to this effect: "There are two ways to bunch a left-side up diagonal fold in fabric -- ease it UP and to the RIGHT, or ease it DOWN and to the LEFT." But you don't know the difference between "pull" and "bunch," which most people don't think about, so why would you? As a result, you took a photo of a left-side-up diagonal and said you "PULLED directly up" on the fabric. Obviously you don't see the difference between pulling on fabric and pushing on fabric. No one pulled on JFK's jacket, Craig. Anyway, I wanted to wait until we had an audience to discuss this. You need to provide some experimental, empirical evidence shows us all ANY other form of fold other than the one I've shown that can create the shadow pattern as seen in Betzner. That's what rational people call proof. What you've demonstrated is how to create the left-side-up Betzner diagonal by pulling on fabric. Non sequitur. Nothing pulled on JFK's jacket. The fabric bunched on JFK's back, which is the opposite of what you did in your example. Simple and easy. Just show us how it can happen. Gentle reader, glance down upon your top clothing. Grab a pinch of shirt or blouse between your thumb and forefinger. Now slowly pull your garment in the direction of your chin, sliding the fabric lightly across your skin several inches. Observe the vertical/diagonal folds that form in the fabric. Now ease the fabric back down and observe horizontal/diagonal folds form. When fabric bunches up or down it creates folds that are more horizontal. When fabric is stretched up or down it creates folds that are more vertical. The Betzner fold was created by the fabric being pushed down and to the left by JFK's posture change where he turned to the right, an obvious clock-wise torque. You simply can't produce that shadow pattern given the angle of incidence of the light source. Non-sequitur. Craig Lamson has observed the light/shadow pattern in Betzner and identified a left-side-up diagonal fold to the "bottom left" of a diagonal shadow. And that's the bottom line now Cliff. You said it, brother! QUOTE (Craig Lamson @ Jul 20 2009, 08:06 AM) *Yes the bottom, left side of the shadow IS diagonal. Can't wait to see your experimental, empirical evidence. You can use a caaera, can't you? No way. Not at all. I'm superstitious about cameras. They steal your soul. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Varnell Posted January 8, 2010 Share Posted January 8, 2010 11/22 W.A.G. will obviously be a solo gig. Oh man! Come on Cliff why cant I join? I wanted so bad to be a member of W.A.G. You talk too much and say nothing. No chance. Cliff nobody ever knows what you are talking about I think you should go back and read my serious posts Sure, sure. You can't fool me, Dean. I know your game, pal. I invented it. You're trying to become a Super Member of the Ed Forum as fast as possible. Why? To impress chicks. Man up and admit it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Lamson Posted January 8, 2010 Share Posted January 8, 2010 (edited) So Cliff, here is where you stand, which is exactly where you were months ago. No, we are very far from where I left off months ago. No we are in the very exact same place. The argument is simple, show us a fold or bunch or whatever that can create the shadowline as see in Betzner. You say a certain kind of fold is what is seen in Betzner. So get to it, show us. Experimental, empirical proof Cliff, not handwaving. Luckiy for us we are talking about photography and the great thing about photography arguments is that you can use proof of concept photos to prove prove point. So do just that Cliff, your continued wordy reples are just a waste of bandwith. Produce the photo Cliff. I've done just that and identified the fold that creates the shadowline as see in Betzner. My study has also shown there is no other fold that can create this shadowline given the angles of incidence of the sun and JFK, body position. Now, if you want to try and disprove this, you have only one choice...show us a fold that is different than the one I have identifed and prove it works via experimental, emipirical evience. That means take a picture Cliff. If you can't, you lose. Simple as that. Your continued handwaving counts for nothing. Time for real proof Cliff, Post that photo, or fail, your choice. Edited January 8, 2010 by Craig Lamson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dean Hagerman Posted January 8, 2010 Share Posted January 8, 2010 11/22 W.A.G. will obviously be a solo gig. Oh man! Come on Cliff why cant I join? I wanted so bad to be a member of W.A.G. You talk too much and say nothing. No chance. Cliff nobody ever knows what you are talking about I think you should go back and read my serious posts Sure, sure. You can't fool me, Dean. I know your game, pal. I invented it. You're trying to become a Super Member of the Ed Forum as fast as possible. Why? To impress chicks. Man up and admit it! Dang! Cliff has figured me out, I better slow down and post less Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dean Hagerman Posted January 8, 2010 Share Posted January 8, 2010 Facts eh. Like that really pesky and quite large fold of fabric in Betzner.... Yes! The the fold that is left side up, right side down in Betzner 3: Left side up, right side down: \ Here's how you describe the fold and its shadow: Yes the bottom, left side of the shadow IS diagonal. So we have by your own analysis of Betzner a diagonal fold that is at the bottom left of the shadow. It is readily observed that the fold in Betzner is a left-side up, right-side down fold like this: \ Craig, there are four (4) ways you can put a left-end up diagonal fold ( \) in clothing fabric. That's a fold that goes like this: \ That's the fold you noticed in Betzner. 1) Pulling/stretching the fabric UP, in which case the \ will be on the right. 2) Pulling/stretching the fabric DOWN, in which case the \ will be on the left. 3) Bunching/easing the fabric UP and to the RIGHT. 4) Bunching/easing the fabric DOWN and to the LEFT. No one pulled on JFK's jacket. The fabric was not stretched in the limo. Just the opposite. His jacket eased as he casually sat and waved. So we can eliminate 1) and 2) in the case of JFK. As photo expert extrodinaire Craig Lamson has observed in the Betzner photo, emphasis added: Yes the bottom, left side of the shadow IS diagonal. That diagonal was created when JFK changed his posture circa Z173, turned his head to the right and started to wave his right hand. This posture shift pushed the fraction-of-an-inch horizontal fold we see in Croft into the "bottom, left" diagonal fold we see in Betzner. Thank you for your contribution, Craig. So Cliff, here is where you stand, which is exactly where you were months ago. You need to provide some experimental, empirical evidence shows us all ANY other form of fold other than the one I've shown that can create the shadow pattern as seen in Betzner. That's what rational people call proof. Simple and easy. Just show us how it can happen. You simply can't produce that shadow pattern given the angle of incidence of the light source. And that's the bottom line now Cliff. Can't wait to see your experimental, empirical evidence. You can use a caaera, can't you? Craig do you still have the drum scan on a CD? Would you be able to email it to me or is the file to big? I want to take a close look at the gap Any way you could provide me the image would be very much appreciated Thanks, Dean Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Varnell Posted January 8, 2010 Share Posted January 8, 2010 (edited) So Cliff, here is where you stand, which is exactly where you were months ago. No, we are very far from where I left off months ago. No we are in the very exact same place. The argument is simple, show us a fold or bunch or whatever that can create the shadowline as see in Betzner. You say a certain kind of fold is what is seen in Betzner. No, Craig, YOU say a certain kind of fold is seen in Betzner. The characterization is yours. I agree with it. There is no dispute. Yours is an accurate description of what can be readily observed. The fold is Betzner is a bottom-left diagonal which, any pre-schooler might demonstrate, could only have been caused by the fabric being bunched down and to the left. So get to it, show us. Experimental, empirical proof Cliff, not handwaving. You already have shown us, Craig. Your have accurately described what anyone can see for themselves. Again: Luckiy for us we are talking about photography and the great thing about photography arguments is that you can use proof of concept photos to prove prove point. So do just that Cliff, your continued wordy reples are just a waste of bandwith. Nothing trumps Betzner. What don't you understand about fabric folds? No one pulled on JFK's jacket. The diagonal fold is left side up. Are you denying these basic facts? Don't you know that "to push" is the opposite of "to pull"? A 5 year old could successfully explain this to a 3 year old. Produce the photo Cliff.I've done just that and identified the fold that creates the shadowline as see in Betzner. No, you created your fold by "pulling" up on the fabric. That isn't a replication of what happened with JFK. No one "pulled up" on JFK's jacket. My study has also shown there is no other fold that can create this shadowline given the angles of incidence of the sun and JFK, body position. No, your study involved stretched fabric. Do you not grasp the difference between stretching fabric and easing fabric? If you cannot wrap your mind around this simple dichotomy, well, there's nothing I can do for you, Craig. Thank you for describing the "bottom, left" bunch in Betzner. Now, if you want to try and disprove this, you have only one choice... You've disproven yourself. You admitted that you created the fold by "PULLING directly up" (YOUR emphasis). Pulling is the exact opposite of bunching. Is this too complicated? Doesn't seem like it to me. Edited January 8, 2010 by Cliff Varnell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Lamson Posted January 8, 2010 Share Posted January 8, 2010 (edited) The fold is Betzner is a bottom-left diagonal which, any pre-schooler mightdemonstrate, could only have been caused by the fabric being bunched down and to the left. Since any "preschooler" can demonstate this fold, you should have no problem producing your proof of concept, experimental, empirical evidence that shows your "left side up" fabric placement can produce the shadowline as seen in Betzner? Nothing trumps Betzner. Great, then simply show us your proof of concept, experimental, empirical evidence that shows your "left side up" fabric placement can produce the shadowline as seen in Betzner? The diagonal fold is left side up. Are you denying these basic facts? Gee I've not seen your proof of concept, experimental, empirical evidence that shows your "left side up" fabric placement can produce the shadowline as seen in Betzner? When can we expect it? That isn't a replication of what happened with JFK. I don't do replication ot recreations, those are for suckers. I did a proof of concept experiment. You should learn the difference since you need to do the same. So when can we expect your proof of concept, experimental, empirical evidence that shows your "left side up" fabric placement can produce the shadowline as seen in Betzner? No one "pulled up" on JFK's jacket. I've never claim that they did. Do you not grasp the difference between stretching fabric and easing fabric? Then we shall expect your proof of concept, experimental, empirical evidence that shows your "left side up" fabric placement can produce the shadowline as seen in Betzner? Thank you for describing the "bottom, left" bunch in Betzner. We all look forward to your proof of concept, experimental, empirical evidence that shows your "left side up" fabric placement can produce the shadowline as seen in Betzner? You've disproven yourself. You admitted that you created the fold by"PULLING directly up" (YOUR emphasis). Pulling is the exact opposite of bunching. We look forward to you proving that with your proof of concept, experimental, empirical evidence that shows your "left side up" fabric placement can produce the shadowline as seen in Betzner? Is this too complicated? Funny thats the question I keep asking you when it comes to you providing your proof of concept, experimental, empirical evidence that shows your "left side up" fabric placement can produce the shadowline as seen in Betzner? Get back to us when you have it. Edited January 8, 2010 by Craig Lamson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Varnell Posted January 8, 2010 Share Posted January 8, 2010 (edited) Since any "preschooler" can demonstate this fold, you should have no problem producing your proof of concept, experimental, empirical evidence that shows your "left side up" fabric placement can produce the shadowline as seen in Betzner? The left-side up shadow line IS in Betzner! Are you denying that the diagonal you identified as "bottom, left" is a left-side-up, right -side-down diagonal in the manner of a back slash ... \ Craig, you keep wanting to make this about me. It isn't about me. It's about YOU and YOUR expert analyses of two photos YOU have put into evidence, the Betzner photo above and the Towner film taken on the corner of Elm and Houston: You admitted "there's not much to see" in Towner by ways of bunched fabric, or words to that effect. You observe a "bottom, left" diagonal in Betzner. What part of "not much" and "bottom, left" don't you grasp, Craig? Edited January 8, 2010 by Cliff Varnell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Lamson Posted January 8, 2010 Share Posted January 8, 2010 (edited) Cliff, I opened your post expecting to see your experimental, empirical evidence that proves your point, but once again all we get is bloavation. I've submiited the unimpeachable empirical evidence of how the fabric on JFK's jacket must be arrainged to create the shadowline as seen in Betzner. And yes it is now about two photos, Betzner and my proof of concept image. As you say, it is about me. My proof of concept evidence stands unimpeached. Thanks for agreeing that you got it wrong. Edited January 9, 2010 by Craig Lamson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Lamson Posted January 8, 2010 Share Posted January 8, 2010 Cliff wants the world top believe his left side up/right side down fabric bunch can produce the shadowline as seen in Betzner. Lets not forget this shadow line obscures the jacket collar. Cliff whats the world to believe that fabric arraingement like this can obscure the jacket collar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Varnell Posted January 9, 2010 Share Posted January 9, 2010 Cliff, I opened your post expecting to see your experimental, empirical evidence that proves your point, but once again all we get is bloavation. You have provided the empirical evidence, Craig. You have put two photos into evidence, and you/ have made statements of empirical fact regarding those photos. In the case of the Towner you noted that there's "not much" in the way of bunching. In Betzner you have observed a diagonal fold that was "bottom, left" which could only be bunched down and to the left. You seem to be struggling with your own observations. I've submiited the unimpeachable empirical evidence of how the fabric on JFK's jacket must be arrainged to create the shadowline as seen in Betzner. No, JFK's jacket was NOT arranged by "PULLING directly up" on the fabric. No one pulled on JFK's jacket, Craig. And yes it is now about two photos, Betzner and my proof of concept image. As you say, it is about me. My proof of concept evidence stands unimpeached. Thanks for agreeing that you got it wrong. No, I am agreeing with you on two of the 3 points. 1) Towner photo shows "not much" bunch. Check. 2) Betzner photo shows a "bottom, left" diagonal. Check. 3) In your model you PULLED up on the fabric, Craig. Why you think this pertains to JFK is a mystery. A five year old could demonstrate how to bunch a left-side up bottom left diagonal fold to a 3 yeard old, and in turn that 3 year old could show it to a two year old who then shares their new information with a twin. All on their blankey. Why are you having trouble with this, Craig? 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