Jump to content

Is the "Other" film a hoax?


Guest Duncan MacRae
 Share

  

24 members have voted

  1. 1. Is the "Other" film a hoax?

    • Yes
      10
    • No
      14


Recommended Posts

Bill speaking only for myself, as far as those photo frames , the one of Sitzman being interviewed after,and those of her seen on the sidewalk in front of the tsbd after, were not available a few years ago,

I posted the Sitzman images to David Healy many years ago when he and I were going back and forth about him saying there was not any recognizable images of Zapruder or Sitzman even being in the plaza on the day of the assassination. The gif of her turning around and of her being interviewed - I posted at that time. It was a later date that I think Robin showed Sitzman in front of the TSBD when a discussion was going on about whether Sitzman wore heels that day or not.

Bill

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 163
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

154230_454646727971_727502971_5568379_410939_n.jpg

Dean ... posting crops at different depths from the camera and not accounting for their size changes leaves your illustrations open to a list of criticisms. In the B&W insert you did ... note the difference in size of the guys at the base of the steps compared to those at the top or near the dog leg and relate that to the distance from Zapruder's pedestal to the fence.

Bill

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because the so called "badgeman" image is nothing but an altertion of the Moorman polaroid created by Jack White. Your whole arguement reeks of desperation.

Hello Craig,

I could swear that I thought Gary Mack has mentioned to you that the Badge Man image was tested by taking Moorman's actual camera and shooting another photo of the knoll with a subject at the Badge Man location and they achieved as good of quality of this person as Jack obtained, if not better. This was done in TMWKK series even though it was edited out of the show and again on a Discovery show which I cannot recall at this moment.

I guess my question to you at this time is has not Mack told you this before? And if what Mack said is true, how do you account for Moorman's camera doing what you continue to claim is impossible?

Bill

Bill, we have been over this more than once. Crawley tested the Moorman camera, on a tripod using a different film. The resolution of a photo is the sum of all the parts, not just the lens. More to the point, and Gary is also aware of this, the resolution found in the Moorman images is the sum of this combination;the actual lens, the f-stop used( it was nearly fully stopped down inducing diffraction and destroying resolution), the shutter speed (1/100), the stability ( the camera was hand held and panning, the contrast ratio of the lighting in the subject area and finally the resolution of the film stock.

Can you please tell me or more importantly show me where a test combining all of these components was conducted and what were the results?

Edited by Craig Lamson
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's hysterical, Craig! Mack claims to have first isolated that figure and he found it without any enhancement. It has been pointed out to us in the polaroid without any enhancement beyond magnification. Even without enhancement its clarity rivals that of the man on the pedestal.

(bolding mine.)

Great, show us those "unaltered" images and back up your point. This should be interesting indeed.

BTW, while you are at it please show us...in detail...why the Moorman lens/film/fstop/shutterspeed/ stablilty combination HAD THE REQUIRED lp/mm resolution to record this "detail" you claim is present in the area of badgeman. Without this answer, all of your mutterings are just that...meanigless mutterings.

Your answers should prove to be quite illuminating as to your abilities in this regard.

Here's a better suggestion, Craig. Let's have MACK post the image THAT HE FIRST NOTICED behind the wall--BEFORE he had ever pointed it out to Jack White. Let's look at that image, Craig. I'm sure Gary still remembers exactly the location since he discovered it. That way, I don't misrepresent Gary's work inadvertently.

Why? This is YOUR claim, and YOUR burden of proof. Forget the shuck and jive, just answer the simple questions posed to you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The alleged Sitzman photo(s) and/or frame(s) are inconclusive, IMO. However, even assuming that they are pictures of her--still--she is NOT the person who FILMED THE ASSASSINATION. Abraham Zapruder allegedly did the filming. Except, we can not confirm the presence of the man through clear photographic records; we cannot confirm that the man who claims to have filmed the assassination was even there from the film record. Yet we are expected to accept the "film record that he allegedly shot" as authentic despite inconsistencies found therein. This is weird logic, to be sure.

The film record does not definitively establish that Zapruder was the photographer that day. Why?

Zappy apologists would have us believe that it is because of the "lack of reliability" of the film stock, camera quality, skill of the photographers, distance from target (Zappy) etc., that obscures Zapruder's presence. We should therefore IGNORE the lack of evidence and instead we should embrace the official story: Zapruder was there. But, Mary Moorman took her polaroid within an acceptable proximity of the subject. In fact, Gary Mack claims that he located Badgeman in the Moorman polaroid! Tell me this, Gary: Why is it that even though Badgeman is obscured by foliage, by shadow, and is tiny behind the wall -- by comparison -- to the man claiming to be Zapruder who is standing on the pedestal, who is not hiding behind a wall, who's not in shadows, who's in BROAD DAYLIGHT, and he's elevated on top of a PERCH--yet, the detail in Badgeman's image is much higher than the detail in the alleged image of Zapruder! If we can discern Badgeman's detail, Gary, certainly we should be able to discern Zapruder's detail, right? C'mon, admit it... It's beyond obvious.

Yet, these same people fail to apply the same standard to the Zapruder film itself!

Greg,

If one's position has shifted from Sitzman and Zapruder not being photographed in clear enough detail to ID them ... to now going with just Zapruder not being seen clear enough to ID, then we are back at the scenario where numerous spectators who saw Zapruder and Sitzman have for some odd reason entered into a conspiracy to cover for some alleged stand-in for Zapruder. As I said before, these people all knew one another and isn't it funny that not a single witness who did see these people whether they knew them personally or not has never came out and said that the images of Zapruder was not the man they saw in the Plaza.

Also to answer your question about Zapruder not being clear in sunlight .... Moorman took his photo upon hearing a loud gunshot ... the man had vertigo which is one reason his film is so shaky ... at we see him in Moorman at the moment a gunshot has just been fired 3/18ths of a second earlier, thus he could have been in motion from being startled by the shot.

One more observation ... Badge Man being in shade may be the reason his features are better seen than someone like Sitzman who is in bright sunlight. Sunlight can wash details out to some extent. I have seen this effect on film in regular every day pictures. And of course Zapruder had his hands and camera up to his eye, thus can one really expect to see any details of the man's face.

I'll also add that I, like others, knew Jean Hill and I heard Jean mentioning seeing Zapruder on the pedestal on many occasions ... she certainly had seen images of him on TV and in books and she always referred to him being on the pedestal.

This is just my opinion, but anyone who uses the idea that Zapruder was someone else who then somehow passed off the camera with the Zapruder film inside to Zapruder so to take it back to his office so to later that day have copies made from it .... well that's really throwing dung at a wall at best, especially when their position is that 'the other film' was sharper and clearer. It gets even more ludicrous when one starts involving other people who would have known better and said nothing ... like the Hesters who met up with Sitzman and Zapruder in the shelter immediately post shooting.

Bill

Edited by Bill Miller
Link to comment
Share on other sites

About photos being hoarded by Gary Mack ...

Mack doesn't own the collection at the Museum. What people might not know is offered in a response I obtained from Gary concerning research materials at the Musuem ....

Bill,

The Museum's collection has always been accessible to the public. The

Reading Room, which opened earlier this year, is on the ground floor of

the old TSBD and can accommodate several researchers by appointment:

http://jfk.org/go/reading-room Several well-known researchers have

already visited or have made appointments to do so.

Those who would like copies of Museum collection items for their

personal study simply need to fill out the form, which is also on the

Museum's website: http://jfk.org/go/collections/rights-request

Others at the Museum respond to such requests, not me. And as you know,

the Museum is not a tax-funded operation like the National Archives. It

is a private, non-profit, 501©(3) organization which owns the items in

its collections; they are not in the public domain.

Any fees for these services support the Museum and its work, which

includes preservation and safe storage for the artifacts.

Gary Mack

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I put this together sometime ago.

Placing the Towner's in relation to the Elm.St intersection.

Used the circular curb as a registration point.

Pretty close,more than likely.

But, since Dorman shot from a different location than the recreation, how close is anyone's guess.

Same idea with the limo arc path.

chris

Towner-2.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's hysterical, Craig! Mack claims to have first isolated that figure and he found it without any enhancement. It has been pointed out to us in the polaroid without any enhancement beyond magnification. Even without enhancement its clarity rivals that of the man on the pedestal.

(bolding mine.)

Great, show us those "unaltered" images and back up your point. This should be interesting indeed.

BTW, while you are at it please show us...in detail...why the Moorman lens/film/fstop/shutterspeed/ stablilty combination HAD THE REQUIRED lp/mm resolution to record this "detail" you claim is present in the area of badgeman. Without this answer, all of your mutterings are just that...meanigless mutterings.

Your answers should prove to be quite illuminating as to your abilities in this regard.

Here's a better suggestion, Craig. Let's have MACK post the image THAT HE FIRST NOTICED behind the wall--BEFORE he had ever pointed it out to Jack White. Let's look at that image, Craig. I'm sure Gary still remembers exactly the location since he discovered it. That way, I don't misrepresent Gary's work inadvertently.

Gary did not have the capability to do darkroom work. I did. I did ALL of the photo

work generally credited to Gary and me or either of us. Gary first SAW the Badgeman

image. I did all of the photo work for the both of us.

Jack

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I put this together sometime ago.

Placing the Towner's in relation to the Elm.St intersection.

Used the circular curb as a registration point.

Pretty close,more than likely.

But, since Dorman shot from a different location than the recreation, how close is anyone's guess.

Same idea with the limo arc path.

chris

The Towner film shows the people lined along the north side of the street and at no time do I see the limo vary in distance from Tina's camera to the crowd across the street.. I also do not see where anyone standing along the north side of Elm had moved back from the curb which makes me think Truly was just mistaken about the car coming within an inch of the curb. In fact, Truly's testimony makes it sound as though there were indeed people between he and the street as he probably didn't have a clear view of it..

Bill

Edited by Bill Miller
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Robin,

Even though the white line you refer to is an important marker, from that point on, it does not give us an arc path for the limo.

Here's what I mean.

chris

ElmStTurnpng.png

Hi Chris

Earlier in the thread Martin posted the Towner frame below showing the white line on elm st, the limo inside the white line, and the follow up car "at what appears to be a slight angle", right up against the limo's rear bumper.

Martin mentioned that he believed the front wheel appeared to be turned ( not straight ) ?

I think it may be possible that the follow up car is still in the process of completing the turn as the Limo has only JUST straightened up.

townerqueenmary.jpg

Myers.

Edited by Robin Unger
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Chris

What i had in mind is something similar to the GIF i posted with the Doorman frame overlaid on the 1968 Dealey Plaza image.

but profesionally done.

My effort was somewhat rushed so as to give an example of where i was coming from.

In Dorman we see the motorcycle almost sitting on the white lane marker ( that white lane marker should be visible from another perspective )

as it is in the 1968 image.

the other Dorman frame gives us a good indication of the distance from the curb to the first motorcycle, second motorcycle, and from that we should be able to pinpoint the approx positions of the limo and follow up car by cross referencing the two Dorman frames i provided.

I think the white road stripe is the key.

Hi Robin,

i don't know if thats it was in your mind but i had no better idea to work it out.... at first.

At first i tried to overlay several key frames from Dorman in a footage frame from "Murder in Dealey Plaza".

This frame from the DVD provides to my knowledge the only camera take from exactly this window on the fourth floor where

Elsie Dorman was filming from. Gary Mack and the son (?) of Elsie Dorman simulated her activities in 2002-2003.

In the end i was not very satiesfied cause it shows not the turn, just fractions but nevertheless for fun i did that

composition. Who knows for what this might be good for in the future.

dormancomposition.jpg

Please click on the image cause it's reduced to 40%. Just the 100% view reveal all details.

Whats by far better and accurate is a composition i've created in my DP Map via CAD. It's for scale and above all,

i've reworked the street stripes on ELM with the configuration of 1963. I have a good source (sorry i'am not allowed to tell) and i've verfied it with various photographs from 1963 and to be honest, i'am happy with it.

It includes the SS-100-X (presidential limousine), the SS-679-X (SS Follow Up Car) and the motorcycles of Martin and Hargis

and their relevant locations on Houston and Elm based upon our fix points (which we already worked out together) in the Elsie Dorman and the Tina Towner film.

Sorry, i have no way of knowing how the positions of Police motorcyclists Jackson and Chaney were, cause they were not recorded in that moment of time.

Here it is:

ss100xss679xhoustonelmt.jpg

Please click on the image to enlarge it.

best to you

Martin

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...