History Lost: Test of Zapruder fakery doomed

[Craig Lamson]

LOL! sure it is.... Kinda like last night when you thought you had "checkmate" and then got your head handed to you in a basket.

You really don't have the first clue. but you are quite the easy mark. PLEASE keep it up. It's like shooting fish in a barrel.

Why take this so personally, Craig? I didn't say "Craig Lamson failed..." -- I said, IMO, the ARRB failed, a pity. You're still "talking way past the close."

What am I taking personally? I'm just having a ball chopping you off at the knees. The entertainment value of watching you blunder along is simply priceless.

PLEASE keep it up!

Even IF the ARRB had tested the camera you would have dismissed it out of hand. The evil government still had it's hands in the soup. And who is to say the tests would have been to your liking or specs...whatever that really is? The CT's would still find a way to bitch.

The reality of the matter is that film shot with the camera exists, and you dismiss it out of hand...imagine that.

Edited August 3, 2010 by Craig Lamson

[Greg Burnham]

Even IF the ARRB had tested the camera you would have dismissed it out of hand.

Well, that's just not true, Craig. You don't know what I would have done, and neither do I. It would all depend on the testing itself. But, at the very least, if the test was designed to "solve for" Zapruder film authentication, it would be a good start.

The evil government still had it's hands in the soup.

Well, that's not true either, Craig. I don't think anything of the sort. I don't think a government "of, by, and for, WE THE PEOPLE" is evil at all. I just would like to see it remain that way.

And who is to say the tests would have been to your liking or specs...whatever that really is?

Well, the failure of the ARRB makes that impossible to know, which is the point of this thread.

The CT's would still find a way to bitch.

Again, that statement is simply untrue, as it is unknowable by you or anyone.

The reality of the matter is that film shot with the camera exists, and you dismiss it out of hand...imagine that.

I am not dismissing it out of hand. I am identifying it for "what it is" -- and it was not shot to "solve for" Zapruder film authentication.

Edited August 3, 2010 by Greg Burnham

[Craig Lamson]

Even IF the ARRB had tested the camera you would have dismissed it out of hand.

Well, that's just not true, Craig. You don't know what I would have done, and neither do I. It would all depend on the testing itself. But, at the very least, if the test was designed to "solve for" Zapruder film authentication, it would be a good start.

[

Why don't we start right here and see it your premise actually has merit or if it is simply more silly musings from you.

At the beginning of this thread you state that the demise of Kodachrome will end the opportunity to test the Zapruder camera properly.

You want to "solve" for Zapruder film authentication. Exactly what tests would be needed and why is Kodachrome required?

Edited August 3, 2010 by Craig Lamson

[Greg Burnham]

Why don't we start right here and see it your premise actually has merit or if it is simply more silly musings from you.

At the beginning of this thread you state that the demise of Kodachrome will end the opportunity to test the Zapruder camera properly.

You want to "solve" for Zapruder film authentication. Exactly what tests would be needed and why is Kodachrome required?

Great questions.

First: The reason the actual Zapruder camera (not the same model) needed to be used is that either side of the debate could argue that the test was inadequate on the grounds that the results were tainted by the differences between the test camera and Zapruder's. Right or wrong, such an argument would be advanced by the side of the debate whose position was disproved. Since the ARRB failed to acquire the camera, strike one.

Second: Regarding Kodachrome film...it is far and away a unique product, as you well know. However, even if substitute film was actually adequate to test the Zapruder camera for the purposes stated, (and Ektachrome may well be), the same problems could and, no doubt, WOULD be argued regarding the "substitute film" being different, and therefore inadequate to the task. My point isn't to say that these arguments would or would not be legitimate (by either side), just that these arguments would be advanced in such a case making resolution of the debate no closer than it is today. Strike 2.

As to "what tests" are needed. That's not the point of this thread, but you can read IARRB for starters. The point of this thread (since I started it, I know what it is) was already stated several times. The ARRB blew an opportunity to conduct tests that potentially could have laid the debate to rest as long as they did the tests in a manner that eliminates, as much as possible, obvious objections to the results, such as, "It was not the actual Zappy camera" -- or -- "Not the right film" -- or "Not shot in similar conditions, i.e., incorrect day of year, incorrect time of day, incorrect weather conditions, etc." -- Since the Zapruder camera could potentially be made available in the future (or not, but maybe) the tests could have been possible--except that Kodachrome processing will be unavailable.

Strike 3 for the ARRB.

Edited August 3, 2010 by Greg Burnham

[Michael Hogan]

De Niro, Brooklyn, India on last Kodachrome roll

By BEN DOBBIN (AP)

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jukxInq-nTx6Wl7Ecdm8iWv4tVxgD9HBJQLO0

[Greg Burnham]

De Niro, Brooklyn, India on last Kodachrome roll

By BEN DOBBIN (AP)

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jukxInq-nTx6Wl7Ecdm8iWv4tVxgD9HBJQLO0

I purchased a Bell & Howell camera just like Zapruder's that is in perfect condition. I also have a source for Kodachrome film that has been stored (frozen) as proscribed by Kodak and is also in perfect condition. However, it is highly unlikely that I will be able to get to Dallas and film this year. Beyond this year processing the film will be impossible, so it's not going to happen by me. Even if I could get there it would not be a very good test--especially on the pertinent date and time, 12:30pm, November 22nd of this year--because there would be too many people either blocking the shot or crowding the pedestal due to the anniversary. I suppose a day or two before or after might be adequate (similar solar position?) and there would be fewer people in the way. I also am not claiming to have enough knowledge to perform the proper tests, however, I have friends who do. Still, the ARRB had the ability to properly conduct tests long ago--minus the Stemmons Sign--and failed to acquire the camera.

[Michael Hogan]

From vanityfair.com

The Last Roll of Kodachrome—Frame by Frame!

A celebrated photographer makes a passage to India—and marks the end of an era.

By David Friend; Photographs by Steve McCurry

WEB EXCLUSIVE

February 9, 2011

http://www.vanityfair.com/culture/features/2011/02/last-kodachrome-slide-show-201102#intro

[Michael Hogan]

From vanityfair.com

The Last Roll of Kodachrome—Frame by Frame!

A celebrated photographer makes a passage to India—and marks the end of an era.

By David Friend; Photographs by Steve McCurry

WEB EXCLUSIVE

February 9, 2011

http://www.vanityfair.com/culture/features/2011/02/last-kodachrome-slide-show-201102#intro

[Greg Burnham]

Well, I did the first stage of something that Craig Lamson has demanded others do, but was unwilling to do

himself. Namely, I put my money, time, and effort where my mouth is and conducted experiments in Dealey

Plaza this past fall.

It is likely that the first time a Bell & Howell Director's Model camera was used to expose KODACHROME film

from the pedestal in Dealey Plaza was on November 22, 1963 at approximately 12:30 in the afternoon.

This past November 22, 2010 it is certain that I shot the very LAST footage from that same location at that

precise time with that same model equipment using the same film stock that will ever be shot from there and

able to be processed! I shot 6 rolls of KODACHROME over a 2.5 hour interval starting at 11:45am and continuing

nearly non-stop, except for changing film rolls, until just before 2:00pm, including of course during the time of

the original event. I shot at both regular speed and in slow motion.

The majority of the footage came out usable. I am uncertain as to exactly what I will learn from it that might be

useful, if anything.

But, I at least seized that last opportunity to get the footage.

Below shooting from pedestal with Scott Myers (back to camera)

Edited February 10, 2011 by Greg Burnham

[Craig Lamson]

The majority of the footage came out usable. I am uncertain as to exactly what I will learn from it that might be

useful, if anything.

But, I at least seized that last opportunity to get the footage.

Below shooting from pedestal with Scott Myers (back to camera)

What a shame the opportuntiy was spoiled by improper execution....

[Nick Bartetzko]

Well, I did the first stage of something that Craig Lamson has demanded others do, but was unwilling to do

himself. Namely, I put my money, time, and effort where my mouth is and conducted experiments in Dealey

Plaza this past fall.

It is likely that the first time a Bell & Howell Director's Model camera was used to expose KODACHROME film

from the pedestal in Dealey Plaza was on November 22, 1963 at approximately 12:30 in the afternoon.

This past November 22, 2010 it is certain that I shot the very LAST footage from that same location at that

precise time with that same model equipment using the same film stock that will ever be shot from there and

able to be processed! I shot 6 rolls of KODACHROME over a 2.5 hour interval starting at 11:45am and continuing

nearly non-stop, except for changing film rolls, until just before 2:00pm, including of course during the time of

the original event. I shot at both regular speed and in slow motion.

The majority of the footage came out usable. I am uncertain as to exactly what I will learn from it that might be

useful, if anything.

But, I at least seized that last opportunity to get the footage.

Below shooting from pedestal with Scott Myers (back to camera)

A few years ago, I sent Rich DellaRosa an unopened Kodachrome that had been stored in my garage for years. It was from a dear friend who was a photography buff. I am hoping you were able to use that film and, if not, might have access to it through Rich's wife or children should you need it in the future.

[Greg Burnham]

I was unaware of it, Nick. Unfortunately, KODAK has ceased processing any and all Kodachrome film in the future. December of 2010 was the last month that

it could still be processed. So, if that film was never exposed and processed by now, it will never be able to be processed/developed in the future.

But many thanks for the offer.

[Greg Burnham]

The majority of the footage came out usable. I am uncertain as to exactly what I will learn from it that might be

useful, if anything.

But, I at least seized that last opportunity to get the footage.

Below shooting from pedestal with Scott Myers (back to camera)

What a shame the opportuntiy was spoiled by improper execution....

Oh? How so? Is it worse than not making the attempt at all, Craig? How do you know what the "proper execution"

might be? How do you know that such "proper execution" was not employed? Me thinks Jack is correct, perhaps

I should just ignore your posts in the future.

[Craig Lamson]

Oh? How so? Is it worse than not making the attempt at all, Craig? How do you know what the "proper execution"

might be? How do you know that such "proper execution" was not employed? Me thinks Jack is correct, perhaps

I should just ignore your posts in the future.

If you failed to bring back usable images it was improper execution. And since you did not bring back useful images you might as well have stayed home. Your work was worthless.

This was, in your words, the last chance to shoot Kodachrome in a BH414. SO did you have a camera expert run a complete CLA on your vintage camera? Did you do multiple test shoots PRIOR to heading to Dallas for this last chance opportunity? Did you run tests of the Kodachrome film stock you had to assure it was still viable prior? Heck did you even shoot any Ektachrome stock while in Dallas as a backup so at least you had images of some sort?

If you want to ignore my posts be my guest. Given you directed your original post in this matter TO ME, however, tells a completely different story.

Again what a WASTED opportunity.

Edited February 12, 2011 by Kathy Beckett

[David Josephs]

Greg -

you got it... "ignore" is about the only thing he seems to understand on this forum - not that he gets the hint, and if you've noticed, his posts describe the fun and entertainment he derives from showing off his ignorance and causing nothing but disruption with each and every post.... but enough time on the old man

Having just watched the Costella youtube video when he explains some of his thoughts on zapruder he mentions a ghost image that does not seem to fit.

I've enlarged that area and it dawns on me that it looks like th front of the TSBD....

I did not hear if he spoke of light leaking in in that manner... if this is the TSBD it would make some sense since it disappears as Zapruder pans to his right.... could this be a normal function of the camera?

Would be interested in other's interpretation. This is from frame 180 btw

The other comment that bothers me is the insistance that the people on the sidewalk do not move or turn toward the limo and this is just not true... in the few seconds we see them and the limo actually passes them, they clap, move their heads, the scarf and coats move in the wind, etc... I took the time to stabilize/align the frames within Photoshop so the people remain in the same location... it becomes very apparent that they are live, there and watching the parade.... imo.