Math Part 3

[Jack White]

Chris...you really seem to have it all figured out...but you are not doing very well telling us

what it all means. You have done all the numbers and math and to me it SEEMS to show

how certain things were done to the film...but you have not presented any CONCLUSIONS

that math dunces like me can understand. Please take a stab at telling us what it all means.

Jack

[David Josephs]

Mr. LIEBELER - I don't know how many feet it moved, but it moved quite a ways from the time the first shot was fired until the time the third shot was fired. I'm having trouble on this Exhibit No. 203 (severly cropped ALTGENS 6) understanding how you could have been within 30 feet of the President's car when you took Commission Exhibit No. 203 and within 15 feet of the car when he was hit with the last shot in the head without having moved yourself. Now, you have previously indicated that you were right beside the President's car when he was hit in the head.

Mr. ALTGENS - Well, I was about 15 feet from it.

Mr. LIEBELER - But it was almost directly in front of you as it went down the street; isn't that right?

Mr. ALTGENS - Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER - Am I wrong, or isn't it correct that under that testimony the car couldn't have moved very far down Elm Street between the time you took Exhibit No. 203, which you took when the first shot was fired, and the time that you saw his head being hit, which was the time the last shot was fired?

DJ: Even Liebeler is not buying it !!

Mr. ALTGENS - Well, I have to take into consideration the law governing photographic materials and the use of optics in cameras--lenses--and while my camera may have been set on a distance of 30 feet, there is a plus or minus, area in which the focus still is maintained. I figure that this is approximately 30 feet because that's what I have measured on my camera.

Mr. LIEBELER - And you say Exhibit No. 203 was taken about 30 feet away?

Mr. ALTGENS - But it might be 40 feet, but I couldn't say that that's exactly the distance because while it may be in focus at 40 feet, my camera has it in focus 30 feet. It's the same thing--if I focus at 15 feet, my focus might extend 20 feet and it might also be reduced to 10 feet, but my focusing was in that general area of 30 feet. I believe, if you will let me say something further here about this picture----

Mr. LIEBELER - Go ahead.

Mr. ALTGENS - Possibly I could step this off myself from this position, this approximate position where I was standing and step off the distance, using as a guidepost the marker on this post here or some marker that I can find in the area and I can probably step it off or measure it off and get the exact footage. I was just going by the markings on my camera.

Mr. LIEBELER - The important thing is--it's not all that important as to how far you were away from the car at the time you took the picture--the thing that I want to establish is that you are absolutely sure that you took Exhibit No. 203 at about the time the first shot was fired and that you are quite sure also in your own mind, that there were no shots fired after you saw the President hit in the head.

Mr. ALTGENS - That is correct; in both cases.

Mr. LIEBELER - So, it is clear from your testimony that the third shot--the last shot, rather--hit the President?

Mr. ALTGENS - Well, off and on we have been referring to the third shot and the fourth shot; but actually, it was the last shot, the shot did strike the President and there was no other sound like a shot that was made after that. I was just going to make a conclusion here, but that's not my place to do that, so I'll just forget it--what I was going to say.

Mr. LIEBELER - Well, what were you going to suggest--go ahead.

Mr. ALTGENS - Well, it seems obvious now, when you think back on it--of course, at the time you don't reason these things out in a state of shock, but it seemed obvious to me afterwards that there wouldn't be another shot if the sniper saw what damage he did. He did enough damage to create enough attention to the fact that everybody knew he was firing a gun. Another shot would have truly given him away, because everybody was looking for him, but as I say, that's an obvious conclusion on my part, but there was not another shot fired after the President was struck in the head. {yeah, thanks for toting the company line Mr. A}

Chris... please tell me if what you are presenting supports this conclusion:

Distance from 313 to 341, 28 frames, is about 22 feet.

Distance from 255 to 313, 58 frames, is about 45 feet

45 + 22 = 67 feet

Altgens is at MAX 40 feet from his z255 image which he says is the first shot but we know this not to be the case - which in itself is a case for at least 4 shots.

Move the entire scene 30 feet to the west and Mr. Altgens is telling the truth yet is in direct conflict with Nix, Zapruder and Muchmoore...

In an alteration we can have all the extra frames at 24 fps used to push the limo east 30 feet ????

I am just having a difficult time visualizing how that is done on the Z film. and more importantly, when and where is the 24fps movie shot from?

As this collage illustrates - a camera anywhere but in Zapruder's hands would have to move a huge distance to maintain camera angle integrity. I keep thinking that maybe the Zap film was actually 24fps, claimed at 18.3 fps and a single film has more than enough frames to remove as needed to result in the claimed 18.3fps version we now see.

If you can somehow convert the math into real concerns on the extant Zfilm, as I am attempting above, and get it right - which of course I am not sure of in my case - I think it will allow us to find more and more places where this type of alteration occurs...

Would an overly wound B&H camera run at 24fps for a shot (short - freudian slip?? ) period of time?

DJ

Edited March 3, 2011 by David Josephs

[Ian Kingsbury]

Mr. LIEBELER - I don't know how many feet it moved, but it moved quite a ways from the time the first shot was fired until the time the third shot was fired. I'm having trouble on this Exhibit No. 203 (severly cropped ALTGENS 6) understanding how you could have been within 30 feet of the President's car when you took Commission Exhibit No. 203 and within 15 feet of the car when he was hit with the last shot in the head without having moved yourself. Now, you have previously indicated that you were right beside the President's car when he was hit in the head.

Mr. ALTGENS - Well, I was about 15 feet from it.

Mr. LIEBELER - But it was almost directly in front of you as it went down the street; isn't that right?

Mr. ALTGENS - Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER - Am I wrong, or isn't it correct that under that testimony the car couldn't have moved very far down Elm Street between the time you took Exhibit No. 203, which you took when the first shot was fired, and the time that you saw his head being hit, which was the time the last shot was fired?

DJ: Even Liebeler is not buying it !!

Mr. ALTGENS - Well, I have to take into consideration the law governing photographic materials and the use of optics in cameras--lenses--and while my camera may have been set on a distance of 30 feet, there is a plus or minus, area in which the focus still is maintained. I figure that this is approximately 30 feet because that's what I have measured on my camera.

Mr. LIEBELER - And you say Exhibit No. 203 was taken about 30 feet away?

Mr. ALTGENS - But it might be 40 feet, but I couldn't say that that's exactly the distance because while it may be in focus at 40 feet, my camera has it in focus 30 feet. It's the same thing--if I focus at 15 feet, my focus might extend 20 feet and it might also be reduced to 10 feet, but my focusing was in that general area of 30 feet. I believe, if you will let me say something further here about this picture----

Mr. LIEBELER - Go ahead.

Mr. ALTGENS - Possibly I could step this off myself from this position, this approximate position where I was standing and step off the distance, using as a guidepost the marker on this post here or some marker that I can find in the area and I can probably step it off or measure it off and get the exact footage. I was just going by the markings on my camera.

Mr. LIEBELER - The important thing is--it's not all that important as to how far you were away from the car at the time you took the picture--the thing that I want to establish is that you are absolutely sure that you took Exhibit No. 203 at about the time the first shot was fired and that you are quite sure also in your own mind, that there were no shots fired after you saw the President hit in the head.

Mr. ALTGENS - That is correct; in both cases.

Mr. LIEBELER - So, it is clear from your testimony that the third shot--the last shot, rather--hit the President?

Mr. ALTGENS - Well, off and on we have been referring to the third shot and the fourth shot; but actually, it was the last shot, the shot did strike the President and there was no other sound like a shot that was made after that. I was just going to make a conclusion here, but that's not my place to do that, so I'll just forget it--what I was going to say.

Mr. LIEBELER - Well, what were you going to suggest--go ahead.

Mr. ALTGENS - Well, it seems obvious now, when you think back on it--of course, at the time you don't reason these things out in a state of shock, but it seemed obvious to me afterwards that there wouldn't be another shot if the sniper saw what damage he did. He did enough damage to create enough attention to the fact that everybody knew he was firing a gun. Another shot would have truly given him away, because everybody was looking for him, but as I say, that's an obvious conclusion on my part, but there was not another shot fired after the President was struck in the head. {yeah, thanks for toting the company line Mr. A}

Chris... please tell me if what you are presenting supports this conclusion:

Distance from 313 to 341, 28 frames, is about 22 feet.

Distance from 255 to 313, 58 frames, is about 45 feet

45 + 22 = 67 feet

Altgens is at MAX 40 feet from his z255 image which he says is the first shot but we know this not to be the case - which in itself is a case for at least 4 shots.

Move the entire scene 30 feet to the west and Mr. Altgens is telling the truth yet is in direct conflict with Nix, Zapruder and Muchmoore...

In an alteration we can have all the extra frames at 24 fps used to push the limo east 30 feet ????

I am just having a difficult time visualizing how that is done on the Z film. and more importantly, when and where is the 24fps movie shot from?

As this collage illustrates - a camera anywhere but in Zapruder's hands would have to move a huge distance to maintain camera angle integrity. I keep thinking that maybe the Zap film was actually 24fps, claimed at 18.3 fps and a single film has more than enough frames to remove as needed to result in the claimed 18.3fps version we now see.

If you can somehow convert the math into real concerns on the extant Zfilm, as I am attempting above, and get it right - which of course I am not sure of in my case - I think it will allow us to find more and more places where this type of alteration occurs...

Would an overly wound B&H camera run at 24fps for a shot (short - freudian slip?? ) period of time?

DJ

David

This never used to make sense either

Charles F.Brehm

When the President's automobile was very close to him and he could see the President's face very well, the President was seated, but was leaning forward when he stiffened perceptibly at the same instant what appeared to be a rifle shot sounded. According to BREHM, the President seemed do to stiffen and come to a pause when another shot sounded and the President appeared to be badly hit in the head. BREHM said when the President was hit by the second shot, he could notice the President's hair fly up, and then roll over to his side, as Mrs. KENNEDY was apparently pulling him in that direction.

BREHM said that a third shot followed and that all three shots were relatively close together. BREHM stated that he was in military service and he has had experience with bolt-action rifles, and he expressed the opinion that the three shots were fired just about as quickly as an individual can maneuver a bolt-action rifle, take aim, and fire three shots.

I Now read it without the paragraph split I believe this ties in with Altgens mess of a sentence.

Ian

[Chris Davidson]

Chris... please tell me if what you are presenting supports this conclusion:

Distance from 313 to 341, 28 frames, is about 22 feet.

Distance from 255 to 313, 58 frames, is about 45 feet

45 + 22 = 67 feet

Altgens is at MAX 40 feet from his z255 image which he says is the first shot but we know this not to be the case - which in itself is a case for at least 4 shots.

Move the entire scene 30 feet to the west and Mr. Altgens is telling the truth yet is in direct conflict with Nix, Zapruder and Muchmoore...

In an alteration we can have all the extra frames at 24 fps used to push the limo east 30 feet ????

I am just having a difficult time visualizing how that is done on the Z film. and more importantly, when and where is the 24fps movie shot from?

As this collage illustrates - a camera anywhere but in Zapruder's hands would have to move a huge distance to maintain camera angle integrity. I keep thinking that maybe the Zap film was actually 24fps, claimed at 18.3 fps and a single film has more than enough frames to remove as needed to result in the claimed 18.3fps version we now see.

If you can somehow convert the math into real concerns on the extant Zfilm, as I am attempting above, and get it right - which of course I am not sure of in my case - I think it will allow us to find more and more places where this type of alteration occurs...

Would an overly wound B&H camera run at 24fps for a shot (short - freudian slip?? ) period of time?

DJ

David,

This is the formula you have given me.

Frame 255-341=86 total frames=67 ft.

Run two different scenario's on it and compare the results such as:

First scenario:

86frames/24.3 FPS=3.53sec.

67ft/3.53sec=18.98ft per sec/1.47(1mph)=12.91mph

Second scenario:

86frames/18.3 FPS=4.69sec

67ft/4.69sec=14.28ft per sec/1.47(1mph)=9.71mph

Comparison between 9.71mph/12.91mph=.752=3/4

Looks Good!!!

chris

[Chris Davidson]

David,

You can break it down into a total frame span difference too.

For example:

86frames/24.3 FPS=3.53sec.

3.53sec x 18.3FPS=64frames

and

86frames/18.3 FPS=4.69sec

4.69sec x 24.3 FPS=114 frames

Frame span between the two scenarios is 50 frames.

Z157(splice) -Z207(splice)=50 frames

Also,

18.3 x 8.57sec=157frames

24.3 x 8.57sec=208frames

Difference of 51 frames

chris

[Greg Burnham]

Chris...you really seem to have it all figured out...but you are not doing very well telling us

what it all means. You have done all the numbers and math and to me it SEEMS to show

how certain things were done to the film...but you have not presented any CONCLUSIONS

that math dunces like me can understand. Please take a stab at telling us what it all means.

Jack

Jack,

Just for info, I spoke with Chris last week on the phone for quite a while. I agree with you: IMHO he

really is on to something here. It was easier to get my head around it over the phone. Sometimes

the spoken exchange is preferable to the written--or perhaps a combination of both.

[David Josephs]

David,

You can break it down into a total frame span difference too.

For example:

86frames/24.3 FPS=3.53sec.

3.53sec x 18.3FPS=64frames

and

86frames/18.3 FPS=4.69sec

4.69sec x 24.3 FPS=114 frames

Frame span between the two scenarios is 50 frames.

Z157(splice) -Z207(splice)=50 frames

Also,

18.3 x 8.57sec=157frames

24.3 x 8.57sec=208frames

Difference of 51 frames

chris

Okay...now that we have a concrete example of the difference in the 2 film speeds and location:

Altgens claims to have been 15 feet from JFK at the head shot... after being AT MOST 40 feet from JFK when he took his photo equating to z255.

are you suggesting that starting at 157 the motorcade is proceeding along in one time and space while the foreground & background have been spliced in so everything lines up?

I still have a tough time with the Moorman photo then... it lines up the limo with its background... if the fatal shot was further down the road Moorman's photo would not look like it does...

or are you saying that Moorman is in the right place but it was actually a different frame number?

PLEASE help me understand this... You seem to be 100% correct... yet you still have not told us where this 24.3fps camera was.

I mentioned this in a previous post... How wo you suppose a 2nd camera filmed the scene whereby it could even be spliced into the Z film??? that's my biggest hurdle here.

Thanks Chris... really great stuff.

[Ian Kingsbury]

Chris... please tell me if what you are presenting supports this conclusion:

Distance from 313 to 341, 28 frames, is about 22 feet.

Distance from 255 to 313, 58 frames, is about 45 feet

45 + 22 = 67 feet

Altgens is at MAX 40 feet from his z255 image which he says is the first shot but we know this not to be the case - which in itself is a case for at least 4 shots.

Move the entire scene 30 feet to the west and Mr. Altgens is telling the truth yet is in direct conflict with Nix, Zapruder and Muchmoore...

In an alteration we can have all the extra frames at 24 fps used to push the limo east 30 feet ????

I am just having a difficult time visualizing how that is done on the Z film. and more importantly, when and where is the 24fps movie shot from?

As this collage illustrates - a camera anywhere but in Zapruder's hands would have to move a huge distance to maintain camera angle integrity. I keep thinking that maybe the Zap film was actually 24fps, claimed at 18.3 fps and a single film has more than enough frames to remove as needed to result in the claimed 18.3fps version we now see.

If you can somehow convert the math into real concerns on the extant Zfilm, as I am attempting above, and get it right - which of course I am not sure of in my case - I think it will allow us to find more and more places where this type of alteration occurs...

Would an overly wound B&H camera run at 24fps for a shot (short - freudian slip?? ) period of time?

DJ

David,

This is the formula you have given me.

Frame 255-341=86 total frames=67 ft.

Run two different scenario's on it and compare the results such as:

First scenario:

86frames/24.3 FPS=3.53sec.

67ft/3.53sec=18.98ft per sec/1.47(1mph)=12.91mph

Second scenario:

86frames/18.3 FPS=4.69sec

67ft/4.69sec=14.28ft per sec/1.47(1mph)=9.71mph

Comparison between 9.71mph/12.91mph=.752=3/4

Looks Good!!!

chris

Chris

I am sure you have this :-

Would an overly wound B&H camera run at 24fps for a shot (short - freudian slip?? ) period of time?

:-Camera Specifications

Camera Maker: Bell & Howell.

Model: 414PD Director Series

Film Type: Double 8mm - 25ft or 50ft film roll

Film Speeds: ASA 10 to ASA 40

Running Speed: Single frame, 16fps and 48fps (slow motion.)

Lens: Bell & Howell Varamat f1.8 / 9-27mm - Power Zoom

Mechanism: Spring Motor

Lightmeter: Built-in Dual Electric-Eye.

Non-reflex viewfinder (parallax corrected and coupled with zoom.)

Additional Parts: Removable Pistol Gr

my math is improving 48/16=.75 .

cheers ian