Jump to content
The Education Forum

Where in Altgens6 is LBJ?


Recommended Posts

Chris & Robin,

yes, thats it. Good eye.

I am pleased to see that some fellow researchers have understood where LBJ was in A6. I feel the same as Martin previously posted.

To the rest who only see LBJ as blob, I can only ask once again that they research the archives either on this site or Lancer's for the Thompson print of A6 for it is the best I have ever seen. Josiah's print was so sharp the the fine black and white lines that border the red and white plaid design on Lovelady's shirt were discernible ... what has been shown in this thread for study does not offer the highest quality despite what some of said about it. I could see LBJ on this A6 print because I had studied Josiah's print for years and knew where to look.

It has been said that photo interpretation is not something that is taught, but rather a gift that some folks just have. However, one's interpretation of an image can only be as good as the source being viewed. It might be worth some folks time to try and get a copy of Josiah's print for study either by searching on the site's Josiah has used or by contacting him directly.

Good luck!

Bill Miller

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 103
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

The photos seem to have different aspect ratios. Quite possibly that of the newspaper scan is the correct ratio ie the data in it has not been 'smudged' by any 'stretching' and / or compression.

edit add:

Edited by John Dolva
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I looked at this thread and what each person said concerning how they read the picture ... 'LBJ had already ducked' ... 'LBJ ducked down 40 seconds before the shooting' ... 'the photo has been retouched' ... 'the dark face is LBJ' ... all I was waiting for next was that the head I pointed out was too small to be human. (smile)

While there appears to have been a conspiracy, too much has been attributed to conspiracy because of mis-interpretation in reading the image. I'm glad that at least this matter was resolved.

Bill

Bill,

Wow- your views really are evolving, it appears. You sound like you're now not entirely certain there was a conspiracy. I apologize if I'm mistaken about that, but you're leaving that impression.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bill,

Wow- your views really are evolving, it appears. You sound like you're now not entirely certain there was a conspiracy. I apologize if I'm mistaken about that, but you're leaving that impression.

Hi Don ... not sure why you think I I'd not be certain if there was a conspiracy when I have posted on the belief in Gordon Arnold, Badge Man, the man in the west most 6th floor window in Dillard, the Hat Man from which the smoke drifted out from under the trees, the fake Secret Service Man in the RR yard, the wounding of JFK and Connally coming in less that 1.5 seconds, etc., etc...... I merely said that in some things that come up like cut window blind cords, LBJ being ducked down in Altgens, and so on that some folks seem to embrace a conspiracy allegation before actually really looking at all the evidence.

Bill

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks Duncan,

Does anyone know why Thompson's print isn't capable of holding the detail in the flag, as this newspaper print does?

Or, what generation of print his might be?

chris

Altgens-2.png

Chris,

Like with the Moorman photo ... have you checked with Josiah to see if he has more than one Altgens 6 print source ... I want to say that I recall that he does. I am also reminded that like with the various UPI scan prints ... some were better than others even though they were using the same source.

BTW, the newspaper image has been retouched.

Bill

Edited by Bill Miller
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bill,

It's been 47 years since the photo was taken.

I've never seen another copy which includes this detail on the flag?

I surely don't believe this was "touched up". (Adding detail to the flag)

Whatever the original source of the newspaper reproduction is, it doesn't appear that any other copies, supplied by all, be it newspaper or digital, have come from that source.

It would be nice to see an original or something near it.

It's a simple observation.

chris

PS. Another version printed the next day. No flag detail.

AltgensNewspaper1.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bill,

It's been 47 years since the photo was taken.

I've never seen another copy which includes this detail on the flag?

I surely don't believe this was "touched up". (Adding detail to the flag)

Whatever the original source of the newspaper reproduction is, it doesn't appear that any other copies, supplied by all, be it newspaper or digital, have come from that source.

It would be nice to see an original or something near it.

It's a simple observation.

chris

PS. Another version printed the next day. No flag detail.

AltgensNewspaper1.png

Hello Chris!

I'm puzzled. Exactly what detail do you see in the newspaper print that is not present in the Thompson/Corbis images?

Best to you,

Jerry

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Jerry,

Not the photo from the Pennsylvania paper, but my posting previous to that one.

It was from the San Francisco Chronicle I believe.

chris

Chris,

I didn't mean the Pennsylvania photo. I was unclear - I'm asking what you see in the SF Chronicle photo that you don't see in Thompson/Corbis.

Best to you,

Jerry

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jerry,

The part I circled in the Chronicle version.

Here's a comparison between the two papers.

chris

Altgens1.gif

Thanks Chris. I guess that's what has me puzzled. I don't see anything in the paper to paper comparison that can't be accounted for by losses in the reproduction process. And I really don't see anything in the SF Chronicle that's not in Thompson/Corbis - except for a tiny circle_ish object that's a defect or contamination on the printing medium. What I see in your circled area looks all the same to me - can you be more specific?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jerry,

The part of the outline indicated by the red arrows.

I can understand the difference between the 2 newspapers.

But the original Altgen's photo has this detail in it. This was not added as part of a "touch up" to the photo.

The Corbis and Thompson prints do not include this detail.

Is there another version besides the SF Chronicle that does?

If so, I have not seen it.

Therefore, how do we know what generational reproductions the others are.

Just curious.

chris

flag-1.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jerry,

The part of the outline indicated by the red arrows.

I can understand the difference between the 2 newspapers.

But the original Altgen's photo has this detail in it. This was not added as part of a "touch up" to the photo.

The Corbis and Thompson prints do not include this detail.

Is there another version besides the SF Chronicle that does?

If so, I have not seen it.

Therefore, how do we know what generational reproductions the others are.

Just curious.

chris

flag-1.png

OK! Thanks Chris - now I see what you mean. That's interesting.

Best to you,

Jerry

Link to comment
Share on other sites

del for continuance to next

Edited by John Dolva
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...