We also took motion pictures with Mr. Zapruder's camera

[Craig Lamson]

Also of note look at how when the camera is turned off and on we can see the picture fade into white, how come we dont see this in the Z-film when the camera was turned off during the limo turn?

Because it was taken out and Zappy never stopped filming

So Dean, you assume the flashes are from stop/start? Why not added in edit to show as a marker for each scene?

[Bernice Moore]

Also of note look at how when the camera is turned off and on we can see the picture fade into white, how come we dont see this in the Z-film when the camera was turned off during the limo turn?

Because it was taken out and Zappy never stopped filming

Dean,

What kind of film was the FBI using?

Todd

still posting from Wendy's eh, Todd? I expected better from you old chap -- this rates up there with you and .joihn shooting at overstuffed, non-moving sandbags at 50 yards then declaring: yep, old Oswald got off 3 shots under 8 seconds....

the question we should ALL be asking is why did the 6th Floor Museum deny Rollie Zavada use of Zapruder's B&H 414PD film camera for his ARRB tests? let's get serious, huh?

Todd did you record this earth shattering test with sandbags for us to watch?

The “test” that Dave alludes to was not a “test” at all – rather it was just an opportunity for some JFK researchers at an informal gathering to fire a Model 91/38 Mannlicher Carcano – nothing less, nothing more.

What you should find “earth shattering is that Dave falsely claims here that we fired at sandbags when we fired at a pumpkin or two left over from Halloween, that we fired at 50 yards when we fired at about 25, and , most importantly, that after the shooting I made some grand declaration about Oswald doing the shooting when in fact I did not.

Why would Dave say such things, Dean, when they are untrue?

And how does it feel to have been misled by Dave?

i have one todd did you all hit the pumpkins or just the sand bags..or neither .just wondering..??.b

[Bernice Moore]

Question...why would they only ??""and we also took motion pictures with Mr. Zapruder's camera

from Zapruder's position with the car in the fixed locations as they

were established with the car just stationary in those locations."" anyone any idea...??

thanks b..

any thoughts ?? I take the above to mean and i could be in error that mr.zapruder's camera was used to take photos of as it states ''and we also took motion pictures with Mr. Zapruder's camera

from Zapruder's position with the car in the fixed locations as they

were established with the car just stationary in those locations."" anyone any idea...??

what fixed locations ,with the car just stationary , the limo supposedly never stopped...????? thanks b

[Dean Hagerman]

Also of note look at how when the camera is turned off and on we can see the picture fade into white, how come we dont see this in the Z-film when the camera was turned off during the limo turn?

Because it was taken out and Zappy never stopped filming

Dean,

What kind of film was the FBI using?

Todd

Todd I dont know if these are the films that we are looking for that Shaneyfelt said he took with Zappys camera

They look to be the ones, but im not sure

Im going to try to look into it tonight when im off work

So now you don't know if it was the film taken with Zapruders camera.

I see.

But that didn't stop you from claiming that it proved the Zapruder film was altered.

So your saying the film type would make a difference when the camera was stopped and started back up again?

You have my attention Todd, please keep going

No, I’m not saying that at all.

A real forensic test of the Zapruder camera would require not only using the original camera but also the EXACT same type of film, among other things.

Certainly you know that different kinds of film gives you different types of results, correct?

For you to not know what type of film the FBI used, and to then make some grand claim that the white flashes between stops and starts prove that the Zapruder film was altered has me wondering.

What does it have you wondering Todd?

The fact that Zappy never stopped filming has been talked about for years, I never made a grand claim, if you would go back and read what I wrote (read slowly as you always seem to not catch the more important parts of my post) I said that I dont know if these are the FBI films taken by Shaneyfelt with Zappys camera, I just posted the link to the video to see if anyone else had either an opinion or if they knew for sure if those were the videos we are looking for.

I know that the same film has to be used to get the exact results, but all I was saying was to look for the fading in and out that happens when the camera is turned on and off, that is claimed to have happened in the Z-film but yet we dont see that fading

Now you have me making a grand claim about Z-film alteration because of my opinion on the video in the link I posted?

Here is a grand claim, You are WRONG Todd, the Z-film is altered

[Dean Hagerman]

Why would Dave say such things, Dean, when they are untrue?

And how does it feel to have been misled by Dave?

He mistook sandbags for pumpkins and your saying he is misleading me?

I trust Davids research and stand behind him on his theories and his conclusions in TGZFH

[Jack White]

Question...why would they only ??""and we also took motion pictures with Mr. Zapruder's camera

from Zapruder's position with the car in the fixed locations as they

were established with the car just stationary in those locations."" anyone any idea...??

thanks b..

any thoughts ?? I take the above to mean and i could be in error that mr.zapruder's camera was used to take photos of as it states ''and we also took motion pictures with Mr. Zapruder's camera

from Zapruder's position with the car in the fixed locations as they

were established with the car just stationary in those locations."" anyone any idea...??

what fixed locations ,with the car just stationary , the limo supposedly never stopped...????? thanks b

The car was not shot in motion. Surveyors established the car locations based on Zapruder photos and

Shaneyfelt photographed the stationary cars at those locations. The WC even provides the surveyor

elevation figures based on the limo position as it turned from Houston onto Elm. Shaneyfelt used

a 4x5 Speed Graphic from the pedestal. If they took any photos using the Zapruder camera, the

films are not in any record.

Jack

[Bernice Moore]

Question...why would they only ??""and we also took motion pictures with Mr. Zapruder's camera

from Zapruder's position with the car in the fixed locations as they

were established with the car just stationary in those locations."" anyone any idea...??

thanks b..

any thoughts ?? I take the above to mean and i could be in error that mr.zapruder's camera was used to take photos of as it states ''and we also took motion pictures with Mr. Zapruder's camera

from Zapruder's position with the car in the fixed locations as they

were established with the car just stationary in those locations."" anyone any idea...??

what fixed locations ,with the car just stationary , the limo supposedly never stopped...????? thanks b

The car was not shot in motion. Surveyors established the car locations based on Zapruder photos and

Shaneyfelt photographed the stationary cars at those locations. The WC even provides the surveyor

elevation figures based on the limo position as it turned from Houston onto Elm. Shaneyfelt used

a 4x5 Speed Graphic from the pedestal. If they took any photos using the Zapruder camera, the

films are not in any record.

Jack

thankyou Jack that clarifys that for moi and all...appreciated...no they were not in the mary ferrell photo records that i looked at...thanks best b..

[Todd W. Vaughan]

Also of note look at how when the camera is turned off and on we can see the picture fade into white, how come we dont see this in the Z-film when the camera was turned off during the limo turn?

Because it was taken out and Zappy never stopped filming

Dean,

What kind of film was the FBI using?

Todd

still posting from Wendy's eh, Todd? I expected better from you old chap -- this rates up there with you and .joihn shooting at overstuffed, non-moving sandbags at 50 yards then declaring: yep, old Oswald got off 3 shots under 8 seconds....

the question we should ALL be asking is why did the 6th Floor Museum deny Rollie Zavada use of Zapruder's B&H 414PD film camera for his ARRB tests? let's get serious, huh?

Todd did you record this earth shattering test with sandbags for us to watch?

The “test” that Dave alludes to was not a “test” at all – rather it was just an opportunity for some JFK researchers at an informal gathering to fire a Model 91/38 Mannlicher Carcano – nothing less, nothing more.

What you should find “earth shattering is that Dave falsely claims here that we fired at sandbags when we fired at a pumpkin or two left over from Halloween, that we fired at 50 yards when we fired at about 25, and , most importantly, that after the shooting I made some grand declaration about Oswald doing the shooting when in fact I did not.

Why would Dave say such things, Dean, when they are untrue?

And how does it feel to have been misled by Dave?

i have one todd did you all hit the pumpkins or just the sand bags..or neither .just wondering..??.b

As I stated before, there were no sandbags, just pumpkins.

As I recall there were varying degrees of marksmanship. It was a very cold, windy, blustery day and we were all firing offhand (no support). Also, we all used both the scope and the iron sights, which are both set for 100 yards, to fire at targets only 25 yards away. As a result a lot of shots went high. When I've used a makeshift rest and fired at human silhouette targets at 100 yards I've for the most part been right on target. The Carcano is quite accurate.

[David G. Healy]

Also of note look at how when the camera is turned off and on we can see the picture fade into white, how come we dont see this in the Z-film when the camera was turned off during the limo turn?

Because it was taken out and Zappy never stopped filming

Dean,

What kind of film was the FBI using?

Todd

still posting from Wendy's eh, Todd? I expected better from you old chap -- this rates up there with you and .joihn shooting at overstuffed, non-moving sandbags at 50 yards then declaring: yep, old Oswald got off 3 shots under 8 seconds....

the question we should ALL be asking is why did the 6th Floor Museum deny Rollie Zavada use of Zapruder's B&H 414PD film camera for his ARRB tests? let's get serious, huh?

Ah, Turtle…I’ve kind of missed responding to your empty posts, devoid of facts or any type of thought or analysis about the case. Yep, I see you’re still posting much about nothing here, there, everywhere, Dave, using your pseudo-hipster style. Ah well, to each their own I guess.

Me and .John shooting at sandbags at 50 yards and then making grand declarations on LHO’s guilt? I see you still can’t get even the simplest of facts correct. Why is that I wonder?

The real question we should be asking, as it relates to this thread, is how can we get this film that was shot through Zapruders camera so that we can take a look at it. Will you be calling NARA II tomorrow?

that never happened sonny. If it did it's incumbent on you to deliver same, but then we know how DVP and his merry band trolls work... now why did the 6th floor not allow Rollie Zavada to use Abe Zapruder's Bell & Howell 414 PD double 8mm camera again... you seem to have glossed over that little gem.... must be the grease in those Wendy's fries, eh kiddo?

Old Doug Horne and his missives have got the nutters running far and wide these day's.... grab your socks and mittens, kittens -- 2010, it's just beginning...

Edited January 4, 2010 by David G. Healy

[Todd W. Vaughan]

Why would Dave say such things, Dean, when they are untrue?

And how does it feel to have been misled by Dave?

He mistook sandbags for pumpkins and your saying he is misleading me?

I trust Davids research and stand behind him on his theories and his conclusions in TGZFH

Yes, Dean, he is misleading you (and any other reader) by making claims that are not true.

Tell me Dean, in your reply why do you isolate (and thereby minimize to only one) only one of the things he said that I identified as misleading, and why do you ignore what I identified as his most important misleading claim, i.e. that after the shooting I made some grand declaration about Oswald doing the shooting when in fact I did not?

I’ll ask you again Dean, why would Dave say such things, Dean, when they are untrue?

Edited January 4, 2010 by Todd W. Vaughan

[Todd W. Vaughan]

Also of note look at how when the camera is turned off and on we can see the picture fade into white, how come we dont see this in the Z-film when the camera was turned off during the limo turn?

Because it was taken out and Zappy never stopped filming

Dean,

What kind of film was the FBI using?

Todd

Todd I dont know if these are the films that we are looking for that Shaneyfelt said he took with Zappys camera

They look to be the ones, but im not sure

Im going to try to look into it tonight when im off work

So now you don't know if it was the film taken with Zapruders camera.

I see.

But that didn't stop you from claiming that it proved the Zapruder film was altered.

So your saying the film type would make a difference when the camera was stopped and started back up again?

You have my attention Todd, please keep going

No, I’m not saying that at all.

A real forensic test of the Zapruder camera would require not only using the original camera but also the EXACT same type of film, among other things.

Certainly you know that different kinds of film gives you different types of results, correct?

For you to not know what type of film the FBI used, and to then make some grand claim that the white flashes between stops and starts prove that the Zapruder film was altered has me wondering.

What does it have you wondering Todd?

The fact that Zappy never stopped filming has been talked about for years, I never made a grand claim, if you would go back and read what I wrote (read slowly as you always seem to not catch the more important parts of my post) I said that I dont know if these are the FBI films taken by Shaneyfelt with Zappys camera, I just posted the link to the video to see if anyone else had either an opinion or if they knew for sure if those were the videos we are looking for.

I know that the same film has to be used to get the exact results, but all I was saying was to look for the fading in and out that happens when the camera is turned on and off, that is claimed to have happened in the Z-film but yet we dont see that fading

Now you have me making a grand claim about Z-film alteration because of my opinion on the video in the link I posted?

Here is a grand claim, You are WRONG Todd, the Z-film is altered

You made the grand claim “Because it was taken out and Zappy never stopped filming”, in a follow up answer to your question that “Also of note look at how when the camera is turned off and on we can see the picture fade into white, how come we dont see this in the Z-film when the camera was turned off during the limo turn?”

Thus, your grand claim “Because it was taken out and Zappy never stopped filming”, was quite obviously based on your observations of the FBI film you posted the link for.

And yet you've admitted that you don't have all the facts regarding that FBI film.

And let's be clear, it was only in a separate, follow-up post that you noted “I dont know if these are the films that we are looking for that Shaneyfelt said he took with Zappys camera”.

So I'm wondering why you would make a grand claim regarding what the FBI film supposedly proves when you admittedly don’t have all the facts regarding the FBI film.

[Todd W. Vaughan]

Also of note look at how when the camera is turned off and on we can see the picture fade into white, how come we dont see this in the Z-film when the camera was turned off during the limo turn?

Because it was taken out and Zappy never stopped filming

Dean,

What kind of film was the FBI using?

Todd

still posting from Wendy's eh, Todd? I expected better from you old chap -- this rates up there with you and .joihn shooting at overstuffed, non-moving sandbags at 50 yards then declaring: yep, old Oswald got off 3 shots under 8 seconds....

the question we should ALL be asking is why did the 6th Floor Museum deny Rollie Zavada use of Zapruder's B&H 414PD film camera for his ARRB tests? let's get serious, huh?

Ah, Turtle…I’ve kind of missed responding to your empty posts, devoid of facts or any type of thought or analysis about the case. Yep, I see you’re still posting much about nothing here, there, everywhere, Dave, using your pseudo-hipster style. Ah well, to each their own I guess.

Me and .John shooting at sandbags at 50 yards and then making grand declarations on LHO’s guilt? I see you still can’t get even the simplest of facts correct. Why is that I wonder?

The real question we should be asking, as it relates to this thread, is how can we get this film that was shot through Zapruders camera so that we can take a look at it. Will you be calling NARA II tomorrow?

that never happened sonny. If it did it's incumbent on you to deliver same, but then we know how DVP and his merry band trolls work... now why did the 6th floor not allow Rollie Zavada to use Abe Zapruder's Bell & Howell 414 PD double 8mm camera again... you seem to have glossed over that little gem.... must be the grease in those Wendy's fries, eh kiddo?

Old Doug Horne and his missives have got the nutters running far and wide these day's.... grab your socks and mittens, kittens -- 2010, it's just beginning...

What is the world are you talking about, Dave?

What “never happened”?

As for your question, I don’t know why the 6th floor not allow Rollie Zavada to use Abe Zapruder's – why don’t you ask Zavada.

[Todd W. Vaughan]

Question...why would they only ??""and we also took motion pictures with Mr. Zapruder's camera

from Zapruder's position with the car in the fixed locations as they

were established with the car just stationary in those locations."" anyone any idea...??

thanks b..

any thoughts ?? I take the above to mean and i could be in error that mr.zapruder's camera was used to take photos of as it states ''and we also took motion pictures with Mr. Zapruder's camera

from Zapruder's position with the car in the fixed locations as they

were established with the car just stationary in those locations."" anyone any idea...??

what fixed locations ,with the car just stationary , the limo supposedly never stopped...????? thanks b

The car was not shot in motion. Surveyors established the car locations based on Zapruder photos and

Shaneyfelt photographed the stationary cars at those locations. The WC even provides the surveyor

elevation figures based on the limo position as it turned from Houston onto Elm. Shaneyfelt used

a 4x5 Speed Graphic from the pedestal. If they took any photos using the Zapruder camera, the

films are not in any record.

Jack

Nonsense, Jack.

Did you even bother to READ Shaneyfelt's testimony?

LYNDAL L. SHANEYFELT -- "During the reenactment the black-and-white

photographs were made from Zapruder's position with a Speedgraphic

camera and we also took motion pictures with Mr. Zapruder's camera

from Zapruder's position with the car in the fixed locations as they

were established with the car just stationary in those locations.

After establishing all those points and making these film records of

it, we then had the car proceed along that Elm Street route at

approximately 11 miles per hour, and filmed it with Mr. Zapruder's

camera loaded with color film from Mr. Zapruder's position and

simultaneously photographed it with Mr. Nix's camera from Mr. Nix's

position, and Mrs. Muchmore's camera from Mrs. Muchmore's position,

and this was done twice."

The reconstruction film, which can be seen here...

...clearly shows that not only did they film the car stopped at fixed points as Shaeyfelt stated but that they also filmed the car in motion as Shaneyfelt stated.

Why would you claim otherwise?

Edited January 4, 2010 by Todd W. Vaughan

[Dean Hagerman]

Test Films

www.youtube.com/watch?v=JK1HeKmE3jE

Here we go, are these the films with the camera starting and stoping like the testimony said? Also is the Nix and Muchmore positions

Todd you say "And let's be clear, it was only in a separate, follow-up post that you noted “I dont know if these are the films that we are looking for that Shaneyfelt said he took with Zappys camera”.

Well there is my first post, read it again real slow and tell me what you missed

You might miss it again so I will give you a hint, it ends with a question mark

You know what im going to post my question for you tro read again so you dont miss it

are these the films with the camera starting and stoping like the testimony said?

Just like I said, I was asking others if these were the films we were looking for or something else that was filmed?

I await your apology

Edited January 4, 2010 by Dean Hagerman

[David G. Healy]

Question...why would they only ??""and we also took motion pictures with Mr. Zapruder's camera

from Zapruder's position with the car in the fixed locations as they

were established with the car just stationary in those locations."" anyone any idea...??

thanks b..

any thoughts ?? I take the above to mean and i could be in error that mr.zapruder's camera was used to take photos of as it states ''and we also took motion pictures with Mr. Zapruder's camera

from Zapruder's position with the car in the fixed locations as they

were established with the car just stationary in those locations."" anyone any idea...??

what fixed locations ,with the car just stationary , the limo supposedly never stopped...????? thanks b

The car was not shot in motion. Surveyors established the car locations based on Zapruder photos and

Shaneyfelt photographed the stationary cars at those locations. The WC even provides the surveyor

elevation figures based on the limo position as it turned from Houston onto Elm. Shaneyfelt used

a 4x5 Speed Graphic from the pedestal. If they took any photos using the Zapruder camera, the

films are not in any record.

Jack

Nonsense, Jack.

Did you even bother to READ Shaneyfelt's testimony?

LYNDAL L. SHANEYFELT -- "During the reenactment the black-and-white

photographs were made from Zapruder's position with a Speedgraphic

camera and we also took motion pictures with Mr. Zapruder's camera

from Zapruder's position with the car in the fixed locations as they

were established with the car just stationary in those locations.

After establishing all those points and making these film records of

it, we then had the car proceed along that Elm Street route at

approximately 11 miles per hour, and filmed it with Mr. Zapruder's

camera loaded with color film from Mr. Zapruder's position and

simultaneously photographed it with Mr. Nix's camera from Mr. Nix's

position, and Mrs. Muchmore's camera from Mrs. Muchmore's position,

and this was done twice."

The reconstruction film, which can be seen here...

...clearly shows that not only did they film the car stopped at fixed points as Shaeyfelt stated but that they also filmed the car in motion as Shaneyfelt stated.

Why would you claim otherwise?

where are the film slates (you know what those are? If not, tell'em Gary), Sherlock.... surely someone, ANYONE with a modicum of film knowledge KNOWS you slate: film type-speed and camera type, cameraman, date and time. How do we know these are Shaneyfelt films? Hell, he can't even tell us when he numbered the Z-frames, nor can you or the Pope of Dealey Plaza...

No cigar chum!

Edited January 4, 2010 by David G. Healy