Another JFK The Lost Bullet Enhanced Hughes Frame

[Guest Duncan MacRae]

Original frame taken from my copy of JFK The Lost Bullet DVD.

I enhanced the arrowed area. What do you see?

Gif Animation by Gerda Dunckel

Edited December 11, 2011 by Duncan MacRae

[Thomas Graves]

Original frame taken from my copy of JFK The Lost Bullet DVD.

I enhanced the arrowed area. What do you see?

Gif Animation by Gerda Dunckel

Great work, Duncan!

Regarding "I enhanced the arrowed area. What do you see?", I see two men standing near the window, the one on the right a bit farther back and wearing a white shirt or T-shirt. The one on the left looking down and wearing a tan jacket and possibly holding a rifle vertically in front of him from with the butt of the rifle about at his chest and going down from there. The head of the guy on the right is partially obscured by that brown thing on the left and he's looking down and pretty far to his left so that his head is almost "in profile" and he looks like he has a receding hairline and long sideburns. Only the top two-thirds (or less) of the face of the guy on the left is visible. He has a receding hairline as well and two "locks" or "shocks" (or whatever you call them) of hair from the top-front part of his head are falling onto his forehead because that hair's fairly long and he's looking down at a steep angle. That's what I see.

What do you see?

--Tommy

Edited December 12, 2011 by Thomas Graves

[Thomas Graves]

Original frame taken from my copy of JFK The Lost Bullet DVD.

I enhanced the arrowed area. What do you see?


Gif Animation by Gerda Dunckel

Great work, Duncan!

Regarding "I enhanced the arrowed area. What do you see?", I see two men standing near the window, the one on the right a bit farther back and wearing a white shirt or T-shirt. The one on the left looking down and wearing a tan jacket and possibly holding a rifle vertically in front of him from with the butt of the rifle about at his chest and going down from there. The head of the guy on the right is partially obscured by that brown thing on the left and he's looking down and pretty far to his left so that his head is almost "in profile" and he looks like he has a receding hairline and long sideburns. Only the top two-thirds (or less) of the face of the guy on the left is visible. He has a receding hairline as well and two "locks" or "shocks" (or whatever you call them) of hair from the top-front part of his head are falling onto his forehead because that hair's fairly long and he's looking down at a steep angle. That's what I see.

What do you see?

--Tommy

Based on the premise that we're allowed (perhaps even encouraged) to change our minds, I now see another possibility. The two faces I "saw" earlier are still "there", but this photo is like one of those optical illusions where, for example, you see a chalice in the middle when you look at it one way and when you look at it in a different way you instead see two human faces, one male and one female, facing each othe in-profile and the chalice has "disappeared", the two relatively small images of men I mentioned earlier "disappear" when you focus your eyes differently and "realize" that there is a much larger image of a man's head in the photo and that if this image represents reality, the two smaller heads couldn't, and vice versa. The single large head, which takes up about 80% of the photo, belongs to a man who is looking far to his right and therefore his face is in about "3/4 profile". He has dark hair which is long on top and cascades over his forehead a bit as though he's styled it that way to conceal a receding hairline. He has no sideburns. Anyway, that's what I "see" now. The two smaller men are still "there" in the "background" when you focus your eyes on them, kind of like those "two faces" in the optical illusion I mentioned above. The photo is different, however, from the "chalice/two faces optical illusion" in that in this case the "chalice" (the man's head that takes up 80% of the photo) is so large that it blocks our "view" of the "two faces" (the two smaller men in the "virtual background". The problem now is deciding which image represents reality. That's hard to do because both involve problems with the scale of the two smaller men in the photo's "background" as well as the scale of the one large man in the photo's "foreground": neither seem to be realistic. It seems that small men are too small and the large face is too large. Perhaps they are both illusions. Regarding the large head in the "virtual foreground, IMHO the guy's face resembles Oswald's or Tan Jacket Man's.

--Tommy

Edited January 13, 2016 by Thomas Graves

[Chris Davidson]

Same frame at 3 different sizes.

Oversharpened and then blurred a bit.

I do not know if this is the frame Duncan used.

Hopefully, it is not.

Click to view at full size.

chris

Edited December 13, 2011 by Chris Davidson

[Chris Davidson]

I believe that is Norman standing next to Williams per Williams testimony.

chris

[Thomas Graves]

Same frame at 3 different sizes.

Oversharpened and then blurred a bit.

I do not know if this is the frame Duncan used.

Hopefully, it is not.

Click to view at full size.

chris

Hi Chris,

This is the frame I used.

bump

[Ian Kingsbury]

I believe that is Norman standing next to Williams per Williams testimony.

chris

Duncan and Chris

Top Notch

I can see 2 faces in the upper window A dark skinned face on the left and a lighter skinned face on the right, with a carton between/slightly behind them or do I need to go to specsavers ?.

[Ian Kingsbury]

Original frame taken from my copy of JFK The Lost Bullet DVD.

I enhanced the arrowed area. What do you see?

Gif Animation by Gerda Dunckel

Great work, Duncan!

Regarding "I enhanced the arrowed area. What do you see?", I see two men standing near the window, the one on the right a bit farther back and wearing a white shirt or T-shirt. The one on the left looking down and wearing a tan jacket and possibly holding a rifle vertically in front of him from with the butt of the rifle about at his chest and going down from there. The head of the guy on the right is partially obscured by that brown thing on the left and he's looking down and pretty far to his left so that his head is almost "in profile" and he looks like he has a receding hairline and long sideburns. Only the top two-thirds (or less) of the face of the guy on the left is visible. He has a receding hairline as well and two "locks" or "shocks" (or whatever you call them) of hair from the top-front part of his head are falling onto his forehead because that hair's fairly long and he's looking down at a steep angle. That's what I see.

What do you see?

--Tommy

Based on the premise that we're allowed (perhaps even encouraged) to change our minds, I now see another possibility. The two faces I "saw" earlier are still "there", but this photo is like one of those optical illusions where, for example, you see a chalice in the middle when you look at it one way and when you look at it in a different way you instead see two human faces, one male and one female, facing each othe in-profile and the chalice has "disappeared", the two relatively small images of men I mentioned earlier "disappear" when you focus your eyes differently and "realize" that there is a much larger image of a man's head in the photo and that if this image represents reality, the two smaller heads couldn't, and vice versa. The single large head, which takes up about 80% of the photo, belongs to a man who is looking far to his right and therefore his face is in about "3/4 profile". He has dark hair which is long on top and cascades over his forehead a bit as though he's styled it that way to conceal a receding hairline. He has no sideburns. Anyway, that's what I "see" now. The two smaller men are still "there" in the "background" when you focus your eyes on them, kind of like those "two faces" in the optical illusion I mentioned above. The photo is different, however, from the "chalice/two faces optical illusion" in that in this case the "chalice" (the man's head that takes up 80% of the photo) is so large that it blocks our "view" of the "two faces" (the two smaller men in the "virtual background". The problem now is deciding which image represents reality. That's hard to do because both involve problems with the scale of the two smaller men in the photo's "background" as well as the scale of the one large man in the photo's "foreground": neither seem to be realistic. It seems that small men are too small and the large face is too large. Perhaps they are both illusions.

I see other things in the photo, as well, but I hesitate to describe these other things to you. I'd much rather go take another hit of LSD. JUST KIDDING ABOUT THAT. LOL

--Tommy

P.S. Re: The large head in the "virtual foreground". The guy's face resembles LHO or Tan Jacket Man (IMHO).

Tommy

Ya Gotta lay off the Lysergic chasers bro ,It Frags the optics!.

Ian

[Thomas Graves]

Original frame taken from my copy of JFK The Lost Bullet DVD.

I enhanced the arrowed area. What do you see?

Gif Animation by Gerda Dunckel

Great work, Duncan!

Regarding "I enhanced the arrowed area. What do you see?", I see two men standing near the window, the one on the right a bit farther back and wearing a white shirt or T-shirt. The one on the left looking down and wearing a tan jacket and possibly holding a rifle vertically in front of him from with the butt of the rifle about at his chest and going down from there. The head of the guy on the right is partially obscured by that brown thing on the left and he's looking down and pretty far to his left so that his head is almost "in profile" and he looks like he has a receding hairline and long sideburns. Only the top two-thirds (or less) of the face of the guy on the left is visible. He has a receding hairline as well and two "locks" or "shocks" (or whatever you call them) of hair from the top-front part of his head are falling onto his forehead because that hair's fairly long and he's looking down at a steep angle. That's what I see.

What do you see?

--Tommy

Based on the premise that we're allowed (perhaps even encouraged) to change our minds, I now see another possibility. The two faces I "saw" earlier are still "there", but this photo is like one of those optical illusions where, for example, you see a chalice in the middle when you look at it one way and when you look at it in a different way you instead see two human faces, one male and one female, facing each othe in-profile and the chalice has "disappeared", the two relatively small images of men I mentioned earlier "disappear" when you focus your eyes differently and "realize" that there is a much larger image of a man's head in the photo and that if this image represents reality, the two smaller heads couldn't, and vice versa. The single large head, which takes up about 80% of the photo, belongs to a man who is looking far to his right and therefore his face is in about "3/4 profile". He has dark hair which is long on top and cascades over his forehead a bit as though he's styled it that way to conceal a receding hairline. He has no sideburns. Anyway, that's what I "see" now. The two smaller men are still "there" in the "background" when you focus your eyes on them, kind of like those "two faces" in the optical illusion I mentioned above. The photo is different, however, from the "chalice/two faces optical illusion" in that in this case the "chalice" (the man's head that takes up 80% of the photo) is so large that it blocks our "view" of the "two faces" (the two smaller men in the "virtual background". The problem now is deciding which image represents reality. That's hard to do because both involve problems with the scale of the two smaller men in the photo's "background" as well as the scale of the one large man in the photo's "foreground": neither seem to be realistic. It seems that small men are too small and the large face is too large. Perhaps they are both illusions.

I see other things in the photo, as well, but I hesitate to describe these other things to you. I'd much rather go take another hit of LSD. JUST KIDDING ABOUT THAT. LOL

--Tommy

P.S. Re: The large head in the "virtual foreground". The guy's face resembles LHO or Tan Jacket Man (IMHO).

Tommy

Ya Gotta lay off the Lysergic chasers bro ,It Frags the optics!.

Ian

Never used it, never will.

[Ian Kingsbury]

Original frame taken from my copy of JFK The Lost Bullet DVD.

I enhanced the arrowed area. What do you see?

Gif Animation by Gerda Dunckel

Great work, Duncan!

Regarding "I enhanced the arrowed area. What do you see?", I see two men standing near the window, the one on the right a bit farther back and wearing a white shirt or T-shirt. The one on the left looking down and wearing a tan jacket and possibly holding a rifle vertically in front of him from with the butt of the rifle about at his chest and going down from there. The head of the guy on the right is partially obscured by that brown thing on the left and he's looking down and pretty far to his left so that his head is almost "in profile" and he looks like he has a receding hairline and long sideburns. Only the top two-thirds (or less) of the face of the guy on the left is visible. He has a receding hairline as well and two "locks" or "shocks" (or whatever you call them) of hair from the top-front part of his head are falling onto his forehead because that hair's fairly long and he's looking down at a steep angle. That's what I see.

What do you see?

--Tommy

Based on the premise that we're allowed (perhaps even encouraged) to change our minds, I now see another possibility. The two faces I "saw" earlier are still "there", but this photo is like one of those optical illusions where, for example, you see a chalice in the middle when you look at it one way and when you look at it in a different way you instead see two human faces, one male and one female, facing each othe in-profile and the chalice has "disappeared", the two relatively small images of men I mentioned earlier "disappear" when you focus your eyes differently and "realize" that there is a much larger image of a man's head in the photo and that if this image represents reality, the two smaller heads couldn't, and vice versa. The single large head, which takes up about 80% of the photo, belongs to a man who is looking far to his right and therefore his face is in about "3/4 profile". He has dark hair which is long on top and cascades over his forehead a bit as though he's styled it that way to conceal a receding hairline. He has no sideburns. Anyway, that's what I "see" now. The two smaller men are still "there" in the "background" when you focus your eyes on them, kind of like those "two faces" in the optical illusion I mentioned above. The photo is different, however, from the "chalice/two faces optical illusion" in that in this case the "chalice" (the man's head that takes up 80% of the photo) is so large that it blocks our "view" of the "two faces" (the two smaller men in the "virtual background". The problem now is deciding which image represents reality. That's hard to do because both involve problems with the scale of the two smaller men in the photo's "background" as well as the scale of the one large man in the photo's "foreground": neither seem to be realistic. It seems that small men are too small and the large face is too large. Perhaps they are both illusions.

I see other things in the photo, as well, but I hesitate to describe these other things to you. I'd much rather go take another hit of LSD. JUST KIDDING ABOUT THAT. LOL

--Tommy

P.S. Re: The large head in the "virtual foreground". The guy's face resembles LHO or Tan Jacket Man (IMHO).

Tommy

Ya Gotta lay off the Lysergic chasers bro ,It Frags the optics!.

Ian

Never used it, never will.

Never thought you did Tommy

Sorry no offence meant.

My comedic license just got stamped ...Learner

Ian.

[Thomas Graves]

Great work, Duncan!

Regarding "I enhanced the arrowed area. What do you see?", I see two men standing near the window, the one on the right a bit farther back and wearing a white shirt or T-shirt. The one on the left looking down and wearing a tan jacket and possibly holding a rifle vertically in front of him from with the butt of the rifle about at his chest and going down from there. The head of the guy on the right is partially obscured by that brown thing on the left and he's looking down and pretty far to his left so that his head is almost "in profile" and he looks like he has a receding hairline and long sideburns. Only the top two-thirds (or less) of the face of the guy on the left is visible. He has a receding hairline as well and two "locks" or "shocks" (or whatever you call them) of hair from the top-front part of his head are falling onto his forehead because that hair's fairly long and he's looking down at a steep angle. That's what I see.

What do you see?

--Tommy

Based on the premise that we're allowed (perhaps even encouraged) to change our minds, I now see another possibility. The two faces I "saw" earlier are still "there", but this photo is like one of those optical illusions where, for example, you see a chalice in the middle when you look at it one way and when you look at it in a different way you instead see two human faces, one male and one female, facing each othe in-profile and the chalice has "disappeared", the two relatively small images of men I mentioned earlier "disappear" when you focus your eyes differently and "realize" that there is a much larger image of a man's head in the photo and that if this image represents reality, the two smaller heads couldn't, and vice versa. The single large head, which takes up about 80% of the photo, belongs to a man who is looking far to his right and therefore his face is in about "3/4 profile". He has dark hair which is long on top and cascades over his forehead a bit as though he's styled it that way to conceal a receding hairline. He has no sideburns. Anyway, that's what I "see" now. The two smaller men are still "there" in the "background" when you focus your eyes on them, kind of like those "two faces" in the optical illusion I mentioned above. The photo is different, however, from the "chalice/two faces optical illusion" in that in this case the "chalice" (the man's head that takes up 80% of the photo) is so large that it blocks our "view" of the "two faces" (the two smaller men in the "virtual background". The problem now is deciding which image represents reality. That's hard to do because both involve problems with the scale of the two smaller men in the photo's "background" as well as the scale of the one large man in the photo's "foreground": neither seem to be realistic. It seems that small men are too small and the large face is too large. Perhaps they are both illusions.

I see other things in the photo, as well, but I hesitate to describe these other things to you. I'd much rather go take another hit of LSD. JUST KIDDING ABOUT THAT. LOL

--Tommy

P.S. Re: The large head in the "virtual foreground". The guy's face resembles LHO or Tan Jacket Man (IMHO).

Tommy

Ya Gotta lay off the Lysergic chasers bro ,It Frags the optics!.

Ian

Never used it, never will.

Never thought you did Tommy

Sorry no offence meant.

My comedic license just got stamped ...Learner

Ian.

Ian,

None taken.

--Tommy

P.S. Never needed LSD after them MK-ULTRA / FBN gals turned me on to yage at one of them safe houses in NYC. Best damn party I ever been to, but my behavior's been a little robotic ever since...

Edited January 13, 2016 by Thomas Graves

[Thomas Graves]

Original frame taken from my copy of JFK The Lost Bullet DVD.

I enhanced the arrowed area. What do you see?

Gif Animation by Gerda Dunckel

Great work, Duncan!

Regarding "I enhanced the arrowed area. What do you see?", I see two men standing near the window, the one on the right a bit farther back and wearing a white shirt or T-shirt. The one on the left looking down and wearing a tan jacket and possibly holding a rifle vertically in front of him from with the butt of the rifle about at his chest and going down from there. The head of the guy on the right is partially obscured by that brown thing on the left and he's looking down and pretty far to his left so that his head is almost "in profile" and he looks like he has a receding hairline and long sideburns. Only the top two-thirds (or less) of the face of the guy on the left is visible. He has a receding hairline as well and two "locks" or "shocks" (or whatever you call them) of hair from the top-front part of his head are falling onto his forehead because that hair's fairly long and he's looking down at a steep angle. That's what I see.

What do you see?

--Tommy

Based on the premise that we're allowed here (perhaps even encouraged) to have an open mind, I now see another possibility. The two faces I "saw" earlier are still "there", but this photo is like one of those optical illusions where, for example, you see a chalice in the middle when you look at it one way and when you look at it in a different way you instead see two human faces, one male and one female, facing each othe in-profile and the chalice has "disappeared", the two relatively small images of men I mentioned earlier "disappear" when you focus your eyes differently and "realize" that there is a much larger image of a man's head in the photo and that if this image represents reality, the two smaller heads couldn't, and vice versa. The single large head, which takes up about 80% of the photo, belongs to a man who is looking far to his right and therefore his face is in about "3/4 profile". He has dark hair which is long on top and cascades over his forehead a bit as though he's styled it that way to conceal a receding hairline. He has no sideburns. Anyway, that's what I "see" now. The two smaller men are still "there" in the "background" when you focus your eyes on them, kind of like those "two faces" in the optical illusion I mentioned above. The photo is different, however, from the "chalice/two faces optical illusion" in that in this case the "chalice" (the man's head that takes up 80% of the photo) is so large that it blocks our "view" of the "two faces" (the two smaller men in the "virtual background". The problem now is deciding which image represents reality. That's hard to do because both involve problems with the scale of the two smaller men in the photo's "background" as well as the scale of the one large man in the photo's "foreground": Neither seem to be realistic. It seems that small faces are too small and the large face is too large. Perhaps they are both illusions.

As for the large head in the "virtual foreground, IMHO the guy's face resembles Oswald's or Tan Jacket Man's.

--Tommy

I stumbled upon this old thread a few minutes ago.

The more I look at that photo, the more faces (and even little men) I see, depending on how I focus my eyes and what I look at. It's kinda like a hologram. I must be up to six or seven different faces now...

Edited January 13, 2016 by Thomas Graves

[Thomas Graves]

Original frame taken from my copy of JFK The Lost Bullet DVD.

I enhanced the arrowed area. What do you see?

Gif Animation by Gerda Dunckel

Great work, Duncan!

Regarding "I enhanced the arrowed area. What do you see?", I see two men standing near the window, the one on the right is very far back and he's wearing a white shirt or T-shirt and his arms are like he's on a cross. The one on the left looking down and wearing a tan jacket and possibly holding a rifle vertically in front of him from with the butt of the rifle about at his chest and going down from there. The head of the guy on the right is partially obscured by that brown thing on the left and he's looking down and pretty far to his left so that his head is almost "in profile" and he looks like he has a receding hairline and long sideburns. Only the top two-thirds (or less) of the face of the guy on the left is visible. He has a receding hairline as well and two "locks" or "shocks" (or whatever you call them) of hair from the top-front part of his head are falling onto his forehead because that hair's fairly long and he's looking down at a steep angle. That's what I see.

What do you see?

--Tommy

Based on the premise that we're allowed here (perhaps even encouraged) to have an open mind, I now see another possibility. The two faces I "saw" earlier are still "there", but this photo is like one of those optical illusions where, for example, you see a chalice in the middle when you look at it one way and when you look at it in a different way you instead see two human faces, one male and one female, facing each other in-profile and the chalice has "disappeared", the two relatively small images of men I mentioned earlier "disappear" when you focus your eyes differently and "realize" that there is a much larger image of a man's head in the photo and that if this image represents reality, the two smaller heads couldn't, and vice versa. The single large head, which takes up about 80% of the photo, belongs to a man who is looking far to his right and therefore his face is in about "3/4 profile". He has dark hair which is long on top and cascades over his forehead a bit as though he's styled it that way to conceal a receding hairline. He has no sideburns. Anyway, that's what I "see" now. The two smaller men are still "there" in the "background" when you focus your eyes on them, kind of like those "two faces" in the optical illusion I mentioned above. The photo is different, however, from the "chalice/two faces optical illusion" in that in this case the "chalice" (the man's head that takes up 80% of the photo) is so large that it blocks our "view" of the "two faces" (the two smaller men in the "virtual background". The problem now is deciding which image represents reality. That's hard to do because both involve problems with the scale of the two smaller men in the photo's "background" as well as the scale of the one large man in the photo's "foreground": Neither seem to be realistic. It seems that small faces are too small and the large face is too large. Perhaps they are both illusions.

As for the large head in the "virtual foreground, IMHO the guy's face resembles Oswald's or Tan Jacket Man's.

--Tommy

I stumbled upon this old thread a few minutes ago.

The more I look at that photo, the more faces (and even little men) I see, depending on how I focus my eyes and what I look at. It's kinda like a hologram. I must be up to six or seven different faces now...

My preemptive answer to the question you probably want to ask me now: No, I'm not drunk and I'm not on drugs. LOL

Edited January 13, 2016 by Thomas Graves

[Sandy Larsen]

The raw image is very blurry. Which means that, when zoomed in to the point you can easily make out the pixels, you'll be looking at nothing but blur.

De-blurring of photos is possible using two-dimensional "deconvolution." (BTW,I studied digital signal processing in college.) Sharpening tools in today's photo editors use "unsharp masking" to sharpen the image. Unsharp masking is far inferior to deconvolution. It can noticeably reverse the affect of only minimal blurring. In contrast, deconvolution can actually recover data that appears to be lost. The way it works is by reversing the process that caused the blurring in the first place. Because of that, it needs to be designed on a case-by-case basis to achieve optimal results.

Just thought you'd like to know.

Edited January 13, 2016 by Sandy Larsen

[Sandy Larsen]

Here's an example of what "blind" deconvolution can do.

"Blind" means that the de-blurring algorithm is general purpose and not designed for a particular image distortion. Blind deconvolution is typically used only in cases where the blurring effect is identical in every direction. For example, if the camera lens wasn't in focus.

When in college I saw examples of deconvolution that were far more impressive than the above. Consider the following, where the photos on the far left have a second image due to a reflection (presumably off a window):

Digital signal processing (DSP) was used to separate the two images. The three images to the right of each double-image are each the result of a different, competing, algorithm. I post this just to show that DSP can accomplish seemingly impossible things. In this image separation example, I believe that statistical differences between the two images was exploited to separate them.