Don Jeffries Posted February 2, 2010 Share Posted February 2, 2010 Craig, I appreciate the reply, but you didn't answer my primary question. Exactly what are your qualifications in this field? As I've said, I'm certainly no photographic expert, but imho everyone on this forum-including you-is doing nothing more than expressing their opinion about what they see in a particular film or photo. I also appreciate Barb's reply, but again wonder why Craig's opinion is trotted out as if it means something more than Jack's, or David Healy's, or anyone else's who works in the field. You may believe his observations are especially astute, or that he has interpreted a photo the way you interpret it, but what is his expertise? Considering that he disparages other alleged experts in this area, I assume he has an impressive background on the subject. While Craig sneered at the Hollywood experts cited by Doug Horne, and Barb intimated that perhaps they weren't real experts, Jim Fetzer followed up by listing their names and qualifications. They certainly seem impressive to me. But then again, I'm no expert.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerry Logan Posted February 2, 2010 Share Posted February 2, 2010 I think Barb's point is that it would be nice to ah...actually see a report. We've heard many accounts of what we're supposed to believe they've found...but, as yet, not a peep from a single one. Remember, the people who are telling you all about the experts findings are the same folks who thought it wasn't important to share the Janowitz test film with the public or even share with their own friends. The people who are telling you all about the experts findings are also the people who refuse to post any of the Zapruder scans which supposedly support their conclusions. And wouldn't it be nice to hear from some other experts who might not be working on a movie/TV special? So, to coin a phrase, I think Barb and I would like to avoid a rush to judgment. Jerry ......While Craig sneered at the Hollywood experts cited by Doug Horne, and Barb intimated that perhaps they weren't real experts, Jim Fetzer followed up by listing their names and qualifications. They certainly seem impressive to me. But then again, I'm no expert.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Lamson Posted February 2, 2010 Share Posted February 2, 2010 (edited) Craig,I appreciate the reply, but you didn't answer my primary question. Exactly what are your qualifications in this field? As I've said, I'm certainly no photographic expert, but imho everyone on this forum-including you-is doing nothing more than expressing their opinion about what they see in a particular film or photo. I also appreciate Barb's reply, but again wonder why Craig's opinion is trotted out as if it means something more than Jack's, or David Healy's, or anyone else's who works in the field. You may believe his observations are especially astute, or that he has interpreted a photo the way you interpret it, but what is his expertise? Considering that he disparages other alleged experts in this area, I assume he has an impressive background on the subject. While Craig sneered at the Hollywood experts cited by Doug Horne, and Barb intimated that perhaps they weren't real experts, Jim Fetzer followed up by listing their names and qualifications. They certainly seem impressive to me. But then again, I'm no expert.... I've made no secret of my qualifications Don, I've been involved in all aspects of advertising photography for 30+ years. Samples of my work can be seen here: www.craiglamson.com BTW, I do much more than express opnions Don. I offer up detailed proof of concept data to support my work and better yet try and give the readers the tools to check for themself. I look forward to seeing what the Hollywood guys come up with and the data they use io back their claims. I'm not really impressed with the sign edge advice they gave Horne, and even less impressed that Horne himself would fail at such a minor level subject. Edited February 2, 2010 by Craig Lamson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David G. Healy Posted February 2, 2010 Share Posted February 2, 2010 Craig,I appreciate the reply, but you didn't answer my primary question. Exactly what are your qualifications in this field? As I've said, I'm certainly no photographic expert, but imho everyone on this forum-including you-is doing nothing more than expressing their opinion about what they see in a particular film or photo. I also appreciate Barb's reply, but again wonder why Craig's opinion is trotted out as if it means something more than Jack's, or David Healy's, or anyone else's who works in the field. You may believe his observations are especially astute, or that he has interpreted a photo the way you interpret it, but what is his expertise? Considering that he disparages other alleged experts in this area, I assume he has an impressive background on the subject. While Craig sneered at the Hollywood experts cited by Doug Horne, and Barb intimated that perhaps they weren't real experts, Jim Fetzer followed up by listing their names and qualifications. They certainly seem impressive to me. But then again, I'm no expert.... I've made no secret of my qualifications Don, I've been involved in all aspects of advertising photography for 30+ years. Samples of my work can be seen here: www.craiglamson.com BTW, I do much more than express opnions Don. I offer up detailed proof of concept data to support my work and better yet try and give the readers the tools to check for themself. I look forward to seeing what the Hollywood guys come up with and the data they use io back their claims. I'm not really impressed with the sign edge advice they gave Horne, and even less impressed that Horne himself would fail at such a minor level subject. of course you aren't impressed.... and of course you need to besmirch Doug Horne... In fact, your simply nervous... 46 years of illusion hang in the balance, you have doubts.... and to think you haven't addressed the medical evidence yet..... how do YOU spell conspiracy Sherlock? Get out that opinion booklet... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David G. Healy Posted February 2, 2010 Share Posted February 2, 2010 (edited) son, its quite simple, you can even understand, no one, or body has verified the Zapruder film content as original, you're simply throwing your support behind unverified film. Of course, that's fine by me, whatever toots your lone nut horn. You certainly waste no time of mine, nor anyone elses time that I know.... what you have provided for me and others, is a certain kind of entertainment-humor. How? By building excuses out of nonsense, then framing it as argument -- LMAO... So please keep on trucking...Throwing bricks? hell Craig, I've thrown nothing yet, simply post and published my *informed* opinions.... The Zapruder film trolls have been fumbling around for near on 10 years dealing with an article I wrote once upon a time. As to proving you wrong? Hell son, ya can't verify the images you speak to here, so there's absolutely nothing to prove.... others may be impressed with your (and others) film/photo nonsense here, I'm not. Simple as that! Frankly, to quote a Broadway term, "Much Ado about Nothing" But your right about one thing, for a change I've never mastered shooting a row of metal chairs or boats! Somehow that kind of photo project (shooting for catalogs?) slipped my mind while down at Montorey doing those Ansel Adams interviews.... Shame I never got around to asking him about that kind of project, perhaps I should give an Ansel's 20 year print guru a call and ask for his insight, eh? Hi Todd..... LMFAO Come on David I THINK you are smarter than this..or maybe not. I'm not supporting the film , I checking the claims that people use to SAY is altered. What exactly was it you wrote? Oh yes...That Hollywood does special effects! Wow! Thats important news! I'm sure there was not a single soul who would have ever consider that. AS far as phots go, I can verify the ones in this study, and I tell you how to do them yourself so you don't need to take anyones word for it.. Empirical as all get out. Plenty of very solid proof...care to knock it down...if you can? www.craiglamson.com/costella.htm I'm not suprised you never mastered the fine art of creative lighting..not that much need for it shooting corp training videos or the 6 OClock news or the local rodeo. But I'm happy you found your life's work fullfilling. I know I mine has been and I have no regrets. I know a bit about the Carmel area. My in-laws have property there. Perhaps you have heard of a guy by the name of Edward Weston? He spent some time with Ansel...good friends they were. He shot a lot of very cool stuff at Point Lobos...he was one of my early heros and I have shot there many times myself.. Anyways his granddaughter is my brothers wife...have an original Weston right over my head..and Lamson's hang next to Weston's at a very nice private gallery....but I digress. Maybe you should have asked Adams about commercial work, you see he was a very fine commercial and portrait photographer..thats how he paid his bills...kind of...and if you had asked him (or prepared properly for the interview) you might not have stuck your foot deep in your mouth... Recognition, however, did not alleviate Adams's financial pressures. In a letter dated 6 August 1935 he wrote Weston, "I have been busy, but broke. Can't seem to climb over the financial fence." Adams was compelled to spend much of his time as a commercial photographer. Clients ran the gamut, including the Yosemite concessionaire, the National Park Service, Kodak, Zeiss, IBM, AT&T, a small women's college, a dried fruit company, and Life, Fortune, and Arizona Highways magazines — in short, everything from portraits to catalogues to Coloramas. On 2 July 1938 he wrote to friend David McAlpin, "I have to do something in the relatively near future to regain the right track in photography. I am literally swamped with "commercial" work — necessary for practical reasons, but very restraining to my creative work." Although Adams became an unusually skilled commercial photographer, the work was intermittent, and he constantly worried about paying the next month's bills. His financial situation remained precarious and a source of considerable stress until late in life. LMFAO.... ya don't hold a candle to Ansel son..... I doubt you've seen 5.6fs in a while..... but I'm sure Ansel'd be interested in seeing your non-existent client list, too.... after all, we in the film-photo biz do rely on one thing, our work selling client product and services -- gets us more clients through easy referrals..... we simply love to tell how successful we are... so a lifes work doing un-publilshed catalog work is one thing, dealing with Fortune 100 companies now THAT is another ball game altogether... So is Dr. Light speaking of creative lighting here? LMFAO... What ya need to impress me and others hereabouts is a client list there Craigster, who cares about a $100 website, where's the beef-a-roni, son? Of course you can prove to my satisfaction you're telling the truth about Ansel's family, yes? You can tell me who the EMMY winning cameraman was on all those video interviews, yes? Edited February 2, 2010 by David G. Healy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Lamson Posted February 2, 2010 Share Posted February 2, 2010 of course you aren't impressed.... and of course you need to besmirch Doug Horne... In fact, your simply nervous... 46 years of illusion hang in the balance, you have doubts.... and to think you haven't addressed the medical evidence yet..... how do YOU spell conspiracy Sherlock? Get out that opinion booklet... You are right, I'm not impressed, when they blow something as simple as standard motion blur. Not a very impressive start. And Horne...nervous? Not in the least. He can't figure his way out of a paper bag..photographically. He's great at concocting tall tales and calling them fact...Superb at that actually. And I'll not be addressing the medical evidence, not my thing. But hey knock yourself out. I hear fixing video recorders and running a video camera are superb credentials for an in depth study of the medical evidence.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Lamson Posted February 2, 2010 Share Posted February 2, 2010 (edited) You are right, I don't hold a candle to Adams. And I have no need to impress you or anyone else. Quite frankly I could care less what you think of me. It's not me you have to deal with David..its the data, and that of course is why all you can do is throw bricks...you can't defeat the data. What David, you can't see my clients with all of their work splashed all over my website? Oh come on. Can you see it?... Surely you can. You got eyes...right? BTW, where is YOUR reel? Can't wait to see your film based composities. Gotta be better than the digital you have posted...or at least I hope so, for your sake. BTW, you forgot to give us your valued opinion of this: Help the poor man out... www.craiglamson.com/costella.htm Edited February 2, 2010 by Craig Lamson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Lamson Posted February 2, 2010 Share Posted February 2, 2010 Of course you can prove to my satisfaction you're telling the truth about Ansel's family, yes? You can tell me who the EMMY winning cameraman was on all those video interviews, yes? Ansels family? I've said nothing about his family. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David G. Healy Posted February 2, 2010 Share Posted February 2, 2010 You are right, I don't hold a candle to Adams. And I have no need to impress you or anyone else. Quite frankly I could care less what you think of me. It's not me you have to deal with David..its the data, and that of course is why all you can do is throw bricks...you can't defeat the data. What David, you can't see my clients with all of their work splashed all over my website? Oh come on. Can you see it?... Surely you can. You got eyes...right? BTW, where is YOUR reel? Can't wait to see your film based composities. Gotta be better than the digital you have posted...or at least I hope so, for your sake. BTW, you forgot to give us your valued opinion of this: Help the poor man out... www.craiglamson.com/costella.htm frankly son, I see nothing on your site that a 2nd year graphics arts student couldn't crank out. Little stock photo imagery, Photoshop, and a couple weeks.... some text editing, image replacement, all tucked away in a $60-$120 website template and you're good to go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Lamson Posted February 2, 2010 Share Posted February 2, 2010 (edited) frankly son, I see nothing on your site that a 2nd year graphics arts student couldn't crank out. Little stock photo imagery, Photoshop, and a couple weeks.... some text editing, image replacement, all tucked away in a $60-$120 website template and you're good to go. My My, you have it all figured out now don't you? And how does it compare to your website? Here, let me order youdup another hod of bricks, you seem a bit low. Edited February 2, 2010 by Craig Lamson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David G. Healy Posted February 2, 2010 Share Posted February 2, 2010 (edited) frankly son, I see nothing on your site that a 2nd year graphics arts student couldn't crank out. Little stock photo imagery, Photoshop, and a couple weeks.... some text editing, image replacement, all tucked away in a $60-$120 website template and you're good to go. My My, you have it all figured out now don't you? And how does it compare to your website? Here, let me order youdup another hod of bricks, you seem a bit low. figured out? Everyone who comments on Dealey Plaza film-photo record is suspect, don't get paranoid on me... where you been for the past 10 years? I don't have nor need no stink'in website... word of mouth, that's how its down in the big leagues... even those little old national TV networks.... we really should do a few hours on camera, you and I, on the same set. We could match client lists, talk about film composing, optical film printing, the history all that kind of stuff.... Maybe even compare client testimonials.... even do a little fact checking... you up for something like that? We're stealing this thread ya know... I apologize to the thread starter..... Edited February 2, 2010 by David G. Healy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Lamson Posted February 2, 2010 Share Posted February 2, 2010 figured out? Everyone who comments on Dealey Plaza film-photo record is suspect, don't get paranoid on me... where you been for the past 10 years? I don't have nor need no stink'in website... word of mouth, that's how its down in the big leagues... even those little old national TV networks....we really should do a few hours on camera, you and I, on the same set. We could match client lists, talk about film composing, optical film printing, the history all that kind of stuff.... Maybe even compare client testimonials.... even do a little fact checking... you up for something like that? We're stealing this thread ya know... I apologize to the thread starter..... Word of mouth eh? Well you do have plenty of mouth, too bad the words are void of substance. Heck you can't even commit to a simple answer on a forum and stick your neck out. Why should we expect you to offer anything of value on tape? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dean Hagerman Posted February 2, 2010 Share Posted February 2, 2010 Why should we expect you to offer anything of value on tape? David Healy Z-film You must have missed this Craig Make sure you pay attention Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Lamson Posted February 2, 2010 Share Posted February 2, 2010 Why should we expect you to offer anything of value on tape? David Healy Z-film You must have missed this Craig Make sure you pay attention Yea I've seen that and read it too...pretty shocking stuff don't you think, why he exposed the fact that Hollywood does special effects! I would never have known? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barb Junkkarinen Posted February 2, 2010 Share Posted February 2, 2010 Another fake poster here is this woman, who has no idea what she is talking about. That several Hollywood experts involved in the study of the film--Roderick Ryan, who received the Academy Award for his contributions to special effects cinema in 2000; Sydney Wilkinson, an accomplished professional in film and video post-production in Hollywood; Paul R. Rutan, Jr., the President and chief technician for Triage Motion Picture Services; and Ned Price, an accomplished fim restoration expert with 24 years of experience--have been named does not matter to her! She doesn't care if Horne has found five features that distinguish the current copy from the original! She doesn't care that the chain of custody was broken and a second film brought to the NPIC on Sunday! She doesn't care if there are inconsistencies between the Zapruder and other Dealey Plaza films! She doesn't care if there are inconsistencies between different frames of the film itself! The facts simply do not matter to her. And since she doesn't care about any of this, why in God's name should any of us care about her opinions on any of this? The answer: there is no reason on God's green earth to care the least about Barb Junkkarinen! NOT A ONE! Why the fili-fluster, Fetzer? Gee, my response to Don that one cannot evaluate something that has not yet been produced for review was more than you could handle, eh, Jim - professor of critical thinking and logic. HAHA! I didn't say I don't care about any of the things you mention. What does it say about you making these things up? You seem in such a desperate swivet these days. Calm down, it's not nice watching you sweat all over the forum floor. But thank you ... nice to have some solidly stated names. So is it the Hollywood 4 now? When will they be releasing their report? I can only speak for myself, Don, but I find it impossible to be impressed by findings that, from what we keep hearing, have not been completed or released yet by experts not yet named, whose expertise is not yet known. All we have so far are a lot of airy claims about what they are going to find, or what Doug Horne (or Jack White or Fetzer or Healy) says they are going to find. One cannot evaluate something that has not yet been produced for review. Bests, Barb :-) 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