The Law of Unintended Consequences

[Greg Burnham]

[snip]...

Your failures in this regard have reached epic proportions.

Now if you think the blur disparity is somehow suspect...MAKE YOUR CASE.

Or leave....

Craig,

You are trading in double talk. It is obvious. I haven't time for bafoons who masquerade as know-it-alls.

Let's see... where is that "IGNORE A MEMBER" option again? Oh yeah, there it is. Goodbye.

[Chris Davidson]

Hi Patrick,

Welcome aboard.

Thank you for your expert opinion on the Ztoon.

In case you haven't watched the new film "The Lost Bullet", here is another version of 317 for you.

This is the best I've been able to acquire.

http://24.152.179.96:8400/A524C/317.png

Fortunately, it sounds like you have something much nicer to work with.

chris

[Craig Lamson]

[snip]...

Your failures in this regard have reached epic proportions.

Now if you think the blur disparity is somehow suspect...MAKE YOUR CASE.

Or leave....

Craig,

You are trading in double talk. It is obvious. I haven't time for bafoons who masquerade as know-it-alls.

Let's see... where is that "IGNORE A MEMBER" option again? Oh yeah, there it is. Goodbye.

Translated from Burnhamspeak...I'm toast, I NEED to run away...FAST.

Nothing new here, you are in over your head.

[John Costella]

Hi Patrick,

Interesting post. Not inconsistent with what many have been saying for a long time (four decades?), but your source material has piqued my interest.

My "edit" was based solely on the images contained on the MPI DVD, and suffers from the very low quality of that source. The "zoomed" sequences on the DVD give good resolution, but only for the region of each frame around JFK, and only for a subset of all the frames. Hence my overall "edit" set is based on the set of images showing the full frame including the sprocket holes. (Plus the few that they managed to lose, plus the ones "damaged by LIFE", both categories reconstructed from old Groden VHS videos, digitised to MPEG ... yuk!)

Those MPI images were at best DVD quality to start with, and MPI screwed them around so much (see my final Appendix in the book The Great Zapruder Film Hoax) that they aren't even that. They're terrible.

I accidentally came across someone with the digital scans you mention when I was first looking for Zapruder frames back in 2001, but he clammed up when he realised I didn't have "official" status (i.e. I wasn't in the tent). I (naively) approached Gary Mack about it, who didn't seem to want to help me get hold of them. (Surprise, surprise! As I said, I was new to this back then.) I haven't revealed the gentleman's name over the years, but haven't forgotten the existence of those scans in his safe, either.

Patrick, I'd love to redo my "edit" with the original scans. If your Director friend will send them to me, I'll see what I can do. (Terabytes aren't as scary today as they were in 2001, and if you're right that one frame is 79 MB, then we're only talking around 40 GB anyway. A dozen DVD-Rs should do it.)

I guess what I'm saying is that you're extremely lucky to have had access to material that few have been given the chance to work with. Let's hope that the public will finally be given their "reference digitisation" that U.S. taxpayers paid $16 million for ...

John

Martin Hay has stated he would be interested in hearing my opinions on whether or not the Zapruder Film has been altered, and he has pointed me to this thread. I am new to the boards, and I think I should introduce myself as far as my "credentials" go for discussion on matters relating to old fashioned physical film.

I've mostly been involved with drawing and writing the "classic" Disney characters for the past 20 years. Donald Duck, Mickey Mouse, and their family members and antagonists. I work in pencil, pen and paint, all of it the non-computer, old school way.

I have collected animation/comic art for almost 30 years. I've owned background art, cels, drawings, multiplane setups from the whole history of traditional animation, from Gertie the Dinosaur up to The Little Mermaid. I've worked to restore some of the early Snow White material. I am intimately familiar with paint on celluloid.

I love movies, and early in my teens, I was torn between becoming a movie director or comic artist.

The illustrator in me eventually won out, but in my teens, and in college, I was constructing super 8 films with friends, editing them on my own equipment. In college, I got my hands on 16 mm equipment by taking film classes. I took film history classes, made short films and belonged to the college film program while also staffing the college newspaper as the official cartoonist.

In school I tested extremely highly in abstract reasoning and mechanical comprehension. I've always had the ability...the passion, really, for visualizing any three dimensional constructions in my head. This ability extends to written plans- I'm great with directions for putting that complicated toy together that frustrates everyone else. I have the knack for intuitively understanding what something on paper looks like when built. I have extremely good focus.

Most important to this thread, because of my long interest in the Kennedy Assassination, and my working in the industry that I do, I was offered the opportunity nearly two years ago to view the exposure-neutral HD scan of the individual frames of the 35mm dupe negative created from the forensic copy of the Zapruder Film from the National Archives and Records Administration.

I've compared frames from this new digital copy to frames from the Costella Edit, and also to the MPI Frames. Both of these older copies are inferior in that they apparently have been modified to make them more visually attractive and the details have been considerably muddied- they are much less crisp than in this new digital scan. I am frankly still amazed at the difference in visible detail, and I am quite surprised no other private researcher has not broken down and spent the money to have this done before in order to acquire the very best possible copy.

It should be pointed out that I am not one the "Hollywood Group" mentioned in Doug Horne's book. I am just an independent party who happens to love film and work for Disney who lucked into this opportunity as a casual researcher.

I spent many hours looking at the pertinent frames around 310-340 and after a lot of thought about it, I got permission from the owner of this splendid copy of the Zapruder Film to show frames from it in a casual setting to a friend of mine. This friend is the Director of what today is what is regarded as probably the finest special and visual effects film studio in the world. I've known him for ten years, and he is one of the most straightforward and sensible people I've ever met. I didn't ask him his opinion about the assassination. I gave him no background whatsoever about the medical witnesses and the hole on the rear of the President's head, or anything else. All I did was offer him a blind-look at a few frames of the new, digital copy of the Z film starting at frame 311 to see what he had to say as a neutral, but expert party.

His reaction was exactly the same as mine. He was horrified at the obviousness of the black painted-in artwork present on frame 317. He went from interested professional casually examining a colleagues curious request to a man who suddenly was faced with alteration to this vital evidence which sits in the National Archives of the United States of America.

He could see for himself that this jet black patch on the rear of the President's head still had straight edges. This artifact is present in the image that David Josephs has posted right here on this thread...it's just better defined, clearer and more obvious in the more recent neutrally scanned copy.

I don't expect anyone here on the boards to take my word on something they haven't seen with their own eyes, but the image posted here on this board ought to be enough for you to remain open minded on the subject until the new and clearer images are published.

Look at the image of 317. Look at Connally's head. Look at JFK in 312, before he is hit, and consider the fact that as he topples over to his left, into Jackie, that the entire right side of his face and head are falling into the light...not into shadow the way Jackie is, she is bent face down to the right and entirely in shadow. His entire head ought to be getting LIGHTER, not turn jet black inside of a geometric shape.

By all logic, more sunlight is hitting this blacked out area than before when the President was sitting upright. The image makes no sense at all...the "edges" are profound.

I've studied these new frames very closely. The "black patch" appears out of the blue, NOT on frame 313 or 314 as one would think it would, but in frame 315. Find a decent copy of the film and compare frames 314 and 315. The blackness simply appears magically in 315, it's extremely obvious in the new digital film. It doesn't take much imagination to know what you are looking at. It is artwork,-"painted effects", as my friend put it.

This following is strictly my opinion, my observations of these frames outside the context of the assassination itself.

It looks to me as if the painting in of the back of JFK's head starts at 315 and continues through most of the clearer fames that follow. Of those frames, there is an additional pass by a more artistic talent who blurs the edges of these blacked out areas so that they more closely blend in with the President's hair EXCEPT for frame 317. Frame 317 was neglected by the special effects man, and we are left with a strictly artificial, geometric edge all around this blacked out section. You are looking at the raw black patch, unretouched. It is obvious, and you dont have to be a film technician or artist to see it in the MPI film, though, it is much sharper in Wilkerson's new digitial scan, which isn't altered to be pleasingly colored. In other words, other copies of the Zapruder film available to researchers today have been altered to make them more "artistically pleasing" for an audience. This effectively muddys details.

The frame I handled of 317 was huge in information content. 72.9 MB of content in the single frame by itself.

The only explanations I have for the lack of polish on frame 317 is that it was accidentaly skipped over by the technicians working on the film, or, it was intentionally left in by someone who didn't care for the activity they were engage in, and wanted it discovered.

The way the frames were constructed this way- a pass to add black patches where there was a big hole in JFK's head, and then, a second pass to fuzzy up straight and unnatural edges, suggests a team of film professionals working in an assembly line sort of fashion. Probably the lesser technician blackened in the frames, and a more talented hand did the final finish work.

Earlier in this thread, respected author and long time researcher Josiah Thompson, (his book was the third I ever read on the assassination), describes a recent visiting of the 6th floor museum and examining the MPI 4" by 5" transparencies. These images certainly ought to come close or even surpass the clarity of these new digital frames. They ought to be a generation closer to the original film. If the "black edges" on frame 317 are not present in these images at the Sixth Floor Museum, a close comparison of the two pieces of evidence should certainly be possible in the future.

If the MPI transparencies and the forensic copy of the film do not match exactly, it is evidence of additional alteration having taken place.

Which frankly, wouldn't surprise me in the least, since the visual evidence in the case throughout the years has proven tamper-prone, starting with the 26 volumes blatant switching around of Zapruder frames to make the President appear to fall forward.

I mean, how many times can brains be lost, autopsy reports go missing? How can sizable occipital bone from the back of the President's head evaporate into thin air? Tissue slides be vaporized? Just where does a mauser with a variable scope attached to it disappear to?

In the course of this case, President Kennedy's rear entrance bullet wound to his skull traveled some four inches over the course of a few years, according to the official investigations that followed the death of the President.

Oswald managed shots at a moving target under a specific, narrow time frame that the FBI and the America's very best riflemen could not duplicate on a still target with bench rests and all the time in the world for their first shot, using the exact same rifle with a scope that was adjusted by shimming to make it more accurate than when Oswald used it.

Is evidence of a black patch on the rear of President Kennedy's head extant in Zapruder REALLY that hard to believe in, when it's visible to your own eyes?

I suspect that the difficulties that long time researchers have with even contemplating this scenario is mostly psychological. We've studied these images for so long, and have come to base so many conclusions on them, that we have come to trust them like one trusts John Wayne in the movies.

The covered up hole on 317 is just as much movie magic as the characters Mr. Wayne played. It's not the actual state of the back of the President's head.

I don't need more evidence than these blacked out frames to come to a conclusion about this film. They stand there as evidence themselves, and are what they are. The more you know about film, the more likely you will recognize these images for what they are- but you don't have to be an expert to see it.

And it's more blatant in the crisper digital frames, which surely will be published eventually.

Further proof, that rather resoundingly buttresses the evidence of alteration are all the witnesses who saw the orange sized exit wound on the back of the President's head. Scores of witnesses saw it....most of them medical professionals.

For a number of years the HSCA tried to hide the truth about the Bethesda witnesses, fibbing right in their report that the withheld testimony disagreed with the Parkland doctors about the wounds.

The heads of the HSCA then sealed the records of these key witnesses until a point where a lot of us would be dead.

Lo and behold, when the ARRB opened these Christmas packages early, these Bethesda witnesses mention the hole existing as well....which means, beyond a reasonable doubt by anyone's standards anywhere, that the HSCA lied to the American people to hide the truth about the wounds on the rear of the President's skull.

Yet, here we are, in this thread, with the smoking gun of Zapruder alteration right in front of us, and many here argue that there is no black paint on the rear of the President's head.

The Emperor wears no clothes.

Long live the stealthy new kings, living in the wings of the Republic.

[David G. Healy]

[snip]...

Your failures in this regard have reached epic proportions.

Now if you think the blur disparity is somehow suspect...MAKE YOUR CASE.

Or leave....

Craig,

You are trading in double talk. It is obvious. I haven't time for bafoons who masquerade as know-it-alls.

Let's see... where is that "IGNORE A MEMBER" option again? Oh yeah, there it is. Goodbye.

Translated from Burnhamspeak...I'm toast, I NEED to run away...FAST.

Nothing new here, you are in over your head.

I see you're still living in fantasy-land, eh? LMAO!

[Craig Lamson]

Martin Hay has stated he would be interested in hearing my opinions on whether or not the Zapruder Film has been altered, and he has pointed me to this thread. I am new to the boards, and I think I should introduce myself as far as my "credentials" go for discussion on matters relating to old fashioned physical film.

I've mostly been involved with drawing and writing the "classic" Disney characters for the past 20 years. Donald Duck, Mickey Mouse, and their family members and antagonists. I work in pencil, pen and paint, all of it the non-computer, old school way.

I have collected animation/comic art for almost 30 years. I've owned background art, cels, drawings, multiplane setups from the whole history of traditional animation, from Gertie the Dinosaur up to The Little Mermaid. I've worked to restore some of the early Snow White material. I am intimately familiar with paint on celluloid.

I love movies, and early in my teens, I was torn between becoming a movie director or comic artist.

The illustrator in me eventually won out, but in my teens, and in college, I was constructing super 8 films with friends, editing them on my own equipment. In college, I got my hands on 16 mm equipment by taking film classes. I took film history classes, made short films and belonged to the college film program while also staffing the college newspaper as the official cartoonist.

In school I tested extremely highly in abstract reasoning and mechanical comprehension. I've always had the ability...the passion, really, for visualizing any three dimensional constructions in my head. This ability extends to written plans- I'm great with directions for putting that complicated toy together that frustrates everyone else. I have the knack for intuitively understanding what something on paper looks like when built. I have extremely good focus.

Most important to this thread, because of my long interest in the Kennedy Assassination, and my working in the industry that I do, I was offered the opportunity nearly two years ago to view the exposure-neutral HD scan of the individual frames of the 35mm dupe negative created from the forensic copy of the Zapruder Film from the National Archives and Records Administration.

I've compared frames from this new digital copy to frames from the Costella Edit, and also to the MPI Frames. Both of these older copies are inferior in that they apparently have been modified to make them more visually attractive and the details have been considerably muddied- they are much less crisp than in this new digital scan. I am frankly still amazed at the difference in visible detail, and I am quite surprised no other private researcher has not broken down and spent the money to have this done before in order to acquire the very best possible copy.

It should be pointed out that I am not one the "Hollywood Group" mentioned in Doug Horne's book. I am just an independent party who happens to love film and work for Disney who lucked into this opportunity as a casual researcher.

I spent many hours looking at the pertinent frames around 310-340 and after a lot of thought about it, I got permission from the owner of this splendid copy of the Zapruder Film to show frames from it in a casual setting to a friend of mine. This friend is the Director of what today is what is regarded as probably the finest special and visual effects film studio in the world. I've known him for ten years, and he is one of the most straightforward and sensible people I've ever met. I didn't ask him his opinion about the assassination. I gave him no background whatsoever about the medical witnesses and the hole on the rear of the President's head, or anything else. All I did was offer him a blind-look at a few frames of the new, digital copy of the Z film starting at frame 311 to see what he had to say as a neutral, but expert party.

His reaction was exactly the same as mine. He was horrified at the obviousness of the black painted-in artwork present on frame 317. He went from interested professional casually examining a colleagues curious request to a man who suddenly was faced with alteration to this vital evidence which sits in the National Archives of the United States of America.

He could see for himself that this jet black patch on the rear of the President's head still had straight edges. This artifact is present in the image that David Josephs has posted right here on this thread...it's just better defined, clearer and more obvious in the more recent neutrally scanned copy.

I don't expect anyone here on the boards to take my word on something they haven't seen with their own eyes, but the image posted here on this board ought to be enough for you to remain open minded on the subject until the new and clearer images are published.

Look at the image of 317. Look at Connally's head. Look at JFK in 312, before he is hit, and consider the fact that as he topples over to his left, into Jackie, that the entire right side of his face and head are falling into the light...not into shadow the way Jackie is, she is bent face down to the right and entirely in shadow. His entire head ought to be getting LIGHTER, not turn jet black inside of a geometric shape.

By all logic, more sunlight is hitting this blacked out area than before when the President was sitting upright. The image makes no sense at all...the "edges" are profound.

I've studied these new frames very closely. The "black patch" appears out of the blue, NOT on frame 313 or 314 as one would think it would, but in frame 315. Find a decent copy of the film and compare frames 314 and 315. The blackness simply appears magically in 315, it's extremely obvious in the new digital film. It doesn't take much imagination to know what you are looking at. It is artwork,-"painted effects", as my friend put it.

This following is strictly my opinion, my observations of these frames outside the context of the assassination itself.

It looks to me as if the painting in of the back of JFK's head starts at 315 and continues through most of the clearer fames that follow. Of those frames, there is an additional pass by a more artistic talent who blurs the edges of these blacked out areas so that they more closely blend in with the President's hair EXCEPT for frame 317. Frame 317 was neglected by the special effects man, and we are left with a strictly artificial, geometric edge all around this blacked out section. You are looking at the raw black patch, unretouched. It is obvious, and you dont have to be a film technician or artist to see it in the MPI film, though, it is much sharper in Wilkerson's new digitial scan, which isn't altered to be pleasingly colored. In other words, other copies of the Zapruder film available to researchers today have been altered to make them more "artistically pleasing" for an audience. This effectively muddys details.

The frame I handled of 317 was huge in information content. 72.9 MB of content in the single frame by itself.

The only explanations I have for the lack of polish on frame 317 is that it was accidentaly skipped over by the technicians working on the film, or, it was intentionally left in by someone who didn't care for the activity they were engage in, and wanted it discovered.

The way the frames were constructed this way- a pass to add black patches where there was a big hole in JFK's head, and then, a second pass to fuzzy up straight and unnatural edges, suggests a team of film professionals working in an assembly line sort of fashion. Probably the lesser technician blackened in the frames, and a more talented hand did the final finish work.

Earlier in this thread, respected author and long time researcher Josiah Thompson, (his book was the third I ever read on the assassination), describes a recent visiting of the 6th floor museum and examining the MPI 4" by 5" transparencies. These images certainly ought to come close or even surpass the clarity of these new digital frames. They ought to be a generation closer to the original film. If the "black edges" on frame 317 are not present in these images at the Sixth Floor Museum, a close comparison of the two pieces of evidence should certainly be possible in the future.

If the MPI transparencies and the forensic copy of the film do not match exactly, it is evidence of additional alteration having taken place.

Which frankly, wouldn't surprise me in the least, since the visual evidence in the case throughout the years has proven tamper-prone, starting with the 26 volumes blatant switching around of Zapruder frames to make the President appear to fall forward.

I mean, how many times can brains be lost, autopsy reports go missing? How can sizable occipital bone from the back of the President's head evaporate into thin air? Tissue slides be vaporized? Just where does a mauser with a variable scope attached to it disappear to?

In the course of this case, President Kennedy's rear entrance bullet wound to his skull traveled some four inches over the course of a few years, according to the official investigations that followed the death of the President.

Oswald managed shots at a moving target under a specific, narrow time frame that the FBI and the America's very best riflemen could not duplicate on a still target with bench rests and all the time in the world for their first shot, using the exact same rifle with a scope that was adjusted by shimming to make it more accurate than when Oswald used it.

Is evidence of a black patch on the rear of President Kennedy's head extant in Zapruder REALLY that hard to believe in, when it's visible to your own eyes?

I suspect that the difficulties that long time researchers have with even contemplating this scenario is mostly psychological. We've studied these images for so long, and have come to base so many conclusions on them, that we have come to trust them like one trusts John Wayne in the movies.

The covered up hole on 317 is just as much movie magic as the characters Mr. Wayne played. It's not the actual state of the back of the President's head.

I don't need more evidence than these blacked out frames to come to a conclusion about this film. They stand there as evidence themselves, and are what they are. The more you know about film, the more likely you will recognize these images for what they are- but you don't have to be an expert to see it.

And it's more blatant in the crisper digital frames, which surely will be published eventually.

Further proof, that rather resoundingly buttresses the evidence of alteration are all the witnesses who saw the orange sized exit wound on the back of the President's head. Scores of witnesses saw it....most of them medical professionals.

For a number of years the HSCA tried to hide the truth about the Bethesda witnesses, fibbing right in their report that the withheld testimony disagreed with the Parkland doctors about the wounds.

The heads of the HSCA then sealed the records of these key witnesses until a point where a lot of us would be dead.

Lo and behold, when the ARRB opened these Christmas packages early, these Bethesda witnesses mention the hole existing as well....which means, beyond a reasonable doubt by anyone's standards anywhere, that the HSCA lied to the American people to hide the truth about the wounds on the rear of the President's skull.

Yet, here we are, in this thread, with the smoking gun of Zapruder alteration right in front of us, and many here argue that there is no black paint on the rear of the President's head.

The Emperor wears no clothes.

Long live the stealthy new kings, living in the wings of the Republic.

Interesting post, but of course I don't share you views.

Just a few questions.

When will these frames be released?

There is an IMPORTANT change in the side of JFK's head from 315 to 317. The side of his head was blown open. The only area in 317 that has a sharp edge shadow transition is direct above the ear, exactly where the portion of his skull is missing. So how does your claim reconcile this??

Finally are you aware that a 3d model has been created to check the shadow location on the back of JFK's head at 317 to locate the size and shadow of expected shadow and has found it to be correct?

[Craig Lamson]

[snip]...

Your failures in this regard have reached epic proportions.

Now if you think the blur disparity is somehow suspect...MAKE YOUR CASE.

Or leave....

Craig,

You are trading in double talk. It is obvious. I haven't time for bafoons who masquerade as know-it-alls.

Let's see... where is that "IGNORE A MEMBER" option again? Oh yeah, there it is. Goodbye.

Translated from Burnhamspeak...I'm toast, I NEED to run away...FAST.

Nothing new here, you are in over your head.

I see you're still living in fantasy-land, eh? LMAO!

You just knew someone would open the cage and them it out....

Lots of interesting stuff on the table, will you or Costella actually step up to the plate?

Edited January 9, 2012 by Craig Lamson

[David G. Healy]

Hi Patrick,

Welcome aboard.

Thank you for your expert opinion on the Ztoon.

In case you haven't watched the new film "The Lost Bullet", here is another version of 317 for you.

This is the best I've been able to acquire.

http://24.152.179.96:8400/A524C/317.png

Fortunately, it sounds like you have something much nicer to work with.

chris

And here's a close up taken directly from the DVD, saved in BMP and the crop saved in PNG format.

No painted in patch at the back of the head.

get a grip son.... the contrast in this image is so far out of whack its pathetic..... what is the lineage your posted image? how many generations is it from the alleged NARA held, in-camera Z-film?

[David G. Healy]

Martin Hay has stated he would be interested in hearing my opinions on whether or not the Zapruder Film has been altered, and he has pointed me to this thread. I am new to the boards, and I think I should introduce myself as far as my "credentials" go for discussion on matters relating to old fashioned physical film.

I've mostly been involved with drawing and writing the "classic" Disney characters for the past 20 years. Donald Duck, Mickey Mouse, and their family members and antagonists. I work in pencil, pen and paint, all of it the non-computer, old school way.

I have collected animation/comic art for almost 30 years. I've owned background art, cels, drawings, multiplane setups from the whole history of traditional animation, from Gertie the Dinosaur up to The Little Mermaid. I've worked to restore some of the early Snow White material. I am intimately familiar with paint on celluloid.

I love movies, and early in my teens, I was torn between becoming a movie director or comic artist.

The illustrator in me eventually won out, but in my teens, and in college, I was constructing super 8 films with friends, editing them on my own equipment. In college, I got my hands on 16 mm equipment by taking film classes. I took film history classes, made short films and belonged to the college film program while also staffing the college newspaper as the official cartoonist.

In school I tested extremely highly in abstract reasoning and mechanical comprehension. I've always had the ability...the passion, really, for visualizing any three dimensional constructions in my head. This ability extends to written plans- I'm great with directions for putting that complicated toy together that frustrates everyone else. I have the knack for intuitively understanding what something on paper looks like when built. I have extremely good focus.

Most important to this thread, because of my long interest in the Kennedy Assassination, and my working in the industry that I do, I was offered the opportunity nearly two years ago to view the exposure-neutral HD scan of the individual frames of the 35mm dupe negative created from the forensic copy of the Zapruder Film from the National Archives and Records Administration.

I've compared frames from this new digital copy to frames from the Costella Edit, and also to the MPI Frames. Both of these older copies are inferior in that they apparently have been modified to make them more visually attractive and the details have been considerably muddied- they are much less crisp than in this new digital scan. I am frankly still amazed at the difference in visible detail, and I am quite surprised no other private researcher has not broken down and spent the money to have this done before in order to acquire the very best possible copy.

It should be pointed out that I am not one the "Hollywood Group" mentioned in Doug Horne's book. I am just an independent party who happens to love film and work for Disney who lucked into this opportunity as a casual researcher.

I spent many hours looking at the pertinent frames around 310-340 and after a lot of thought about it, I got permission from the owner of this splendid copy of the Zapruder Film to show frames from it in a casual setting to a friend of mine. This friend is the Director of what today is what is regarded as probably the finest special and visual effects film studio in the world. I've known him for ten years, and he is one of the most straightforward and sensible people I've ever met. I didn't ask him his opinion about the assassination. I gave him no background whatsoever about the medical witnesses and the hole on the rear of the President's head, or anything else. All I did was offer him a blind-look at a few frames of the new, digital copy of the Z film starting at frame 311 to see what he had to say as a neutral, but expert party.

His reaction was exactly the same as mine. He was horrified at the obviousness of the black painted-in artwork present on frame 317. He went from interested professional casually examining a colleagues curious request to a man who suddenly was faced with alteration to this vital evidence which sits in the National Archives of the United States of America.

He could see for himself that this jet black patch on the rear of the President's head still had straight edges. This artifact is present in the image that David Josephs has posted right here on this thread...it's just better defined, clearer and more obvious in the more recent neutrally scanned copy.

I don't expect anyone here on the boards to take my word on something they haven't seen with their own eyes, but the image posted here on this board ought to be enough for you to remain open minded on the subject until the new and clearer images are published.

Look at the image of 317. Look at Connally's head. Look at JFK in 312, before he is hit, and consider the fact that as he topples over to his left, into Jackie, that the entire right side of his face and head are falling into the light...not into shadow the way Jackie is, she is bent face down to the right and entirely in shadow. His entire head ought to be getting LIGHTER, not turn jet black inside of a geometric shape.

By all logic, more sunlight is hitting this blacked out area than before when the President was sitting upright. The image makes no sense at all...the "edges" are profound.

I've studied these new frames very closely. The "black patch" appears out of the blue, NOT on frame 313 or 314 as one would think it would, but in frame 315. Find a decent copy of the film and compare frames 314 and 315. The blackness simply appears magically in 315, it's extremely obvious in the new digital film. It doesn't take much imagination to know what you are looking at. It is artwork,-"painted effects", as my friend put it.

This following is strictly my opinion, my observations of these frames outside the context of the assassination itself.

It looks to me as if the painting in of the back of JFK's head starts at 315 and continues through most of the clearer fames that follow. Of those frames, there is an additional pass by a more artistic talent who blurs the edges of these blacked out areas so that they more closely blend in with the President's hair EXCEPT for frame 317. Frame 317 was neglected by the special effects man, and we are left with a strictly artificial, geometric edge all around this blacked out section. You are looking at the raw black patch, unretouched. It is obvious, and you dont have to be a film technician or artist to see it in the MPI film, though, it is much sharper in Wilkerson's new digitial scan, which isn't altered to be pleasingly colored. In other words, other copies of the Zapruder film available to researchers today have been altered to make them more "artistically pleasing" for an audience. This effectively muddys details.

The frame I handled of 317 was huge in information content. 72.9 MB of content in the single frame by itself.

The only explanations I have for the lack of polish on frame 317 is that it was accidentaly skipped over by the technicians working on the film, or, it was intentionally left in by someone who didn't care for the activity they were engage in, and wanted it discovered.

The way the frames were constructed this way- a pass to add black patches where there was a big hole in JFK's head, and then, a second pass to fuzzy up straight and unnatural edges, suggests a team of film professionals working in an assembly line sort of fashion. Probably the lesser technician blackened in the frames, and a more talented hand did the final finish work.

Earlier in this thread, respected author and long time researcher Josiah Thompson, (his book was the third I ever read on the assassination), describes a recent visiting of the 6th floor museum and examining the MPI 4" by 5" transparencies. These images certainly ought to come close or even surpass the clarity of these new digital frames. They ought to be a generation closer to the original film. If the "black edges" on frame 317 are not present in these images at the Sixth Floor Museum, a close comparison of the two pieces of evidence should certainly be possible in the future.

If the MPI transparencies and the forensic copy of the film do not match exactly, it is evidence of additional alteration having taken place.

Which frankly, wouldn't surprise me in the least, since the visual evidence in the case throughout the years has proven tamper-prone, starting with the 26 volumes blatant switching around of Zapruder frames to make the President appear to fall forward.

I mean, how many times can brains be lost, autopsy reports go missing? How can sizable occipital bone from the back of the President's head evaporate into thin air? Tissue slides be vaporized? Just where does a mauser with a variable scope attached to it disappear to?

In the course of this case, President Kennedy's rear entrance bullet wound to his skull traveled some four inches over the course of a few years, according to the official investigations that followed the death of the President.

Oswald managed shots at a moving target under a specific, narrow time frame that the FBI and the America's very best riflemen could not duplicate on a still target with bench rests and all the time in the world for their first shot, using the exact same rifle with a scope that was adjusted by shimming to make it more accurate than when Oswald used it.

Is evidence of a black patch on the rear of President Kennedy's head extant in Zapruder REALLY that hard to believe in, when it's visible to your own eyes?

I suspect that the difficulties that long time researchers have with even contemplating this scenario is mostly psychological. We've studied these images for so long, and have come to base so many conclusions on them, that we have come to trust them like one trusts John Wayne in the movies.

The covered up hole on 317 is just as much movie magic as the characters Mr. Wayne played. It's not the actual state of the back of the President's head.

I don't need more evidence than these blacked out frames to come to a conclusion about this film. They stand there as evidence themselves, and are what they are. The more you know about film, the more likely you will recognize these images for what they are- but you don't have to be an expert to see it.

And it's more blatant in the crisper digital frames, which surely will be published eventually.

Further proof, that rather resoundingly buttresses the evidence of alteration are all the witnesses who saw the orange sized exit wound on the back of the President's head. Scores of witnesses saw it....most of them medical professionals.

For a number of years the HSCA tried to hide the truth about the Bethesda witnesses, fibbing right in their report that the withheld testimony disagreed with the Parkland doctors about the wounds.

The heads of the HSCA then sealed the records of these key witnesses until a point where a lot of us would be dead.

Lo and behold, when the ARRB opened these Christmas packages early, these Bethesda witnesses mention the hole existing as well....which means, beyond a reasonable doubt by anyone's standards anywhere, that the HSCA lied to the American people to hide the truth about the wounds on the rear of the President's skull.

Yet, here we are, in this thread, with the smoking gun of Zapruder alteration right in front of us, and many here argue that there is no black paint on the rear of the President's head.

The Emperor wears no clothes.

Long live the stealthy new kings, living in the wings of the Republic.

Interesting post, but of course I don't share you views.

Just a few questions.

When will these frames be released?

There is an IMPORTANT change in the side of JFK's head from 315 to 317. The side of his head was blown open. The only area in 317 that has a sharp edge shadow transition is direct above the ear, exactly where the portion of his skull is missing. So how does your claim reconcile this??

Finally are you aware that a 3d model has been created to check the shadow location on the back of JFK's head at 317 to locate the size and shadow of expected shadow and has found it to be correct?

lmao.... 3D model to determine shadow location? Is this turning into the Dale *see my emmy* Myers school of photo interpretation? Come on craigster, LMAO!

There's a few others here that I suspect have seen these frames, some, the entire 35mm *in-motion* film.

[Craig Lamson]

lmao.... 3D model to determine shadow location? Is this turning into the Dale *see my emmy* Myers school of photo interpretation? Come on craigster, LMAO!

There's a few others here that I suspect have seen these frames, some, the entire 35mm *in-motion* film.

You got a problem with Farid? And yes you might be surprised to know who has seen what...

So step up the the plate dave and take a swing. That would be a novel idea for you.

Edited January 9, 2012 by Craig Lamson

[David G. Healy]

[snip]...

Your failures in this regard have reached epic proportions.

Now if you think the blur disparity is somehow suspect...MAKE YOUR CASE.

Or leave....

Craig,

You are trading in double talk. It is obvious. I haven't time for bafoons who masquerade as know-it-alls.

Let's see... where is that "IGNORE A MEMBER" option again? Oh yeah, there it is. Goodbye.

Translated from Burnhamspeak...I'm toast, I NEED to run away...FAST.

Nothing new here, you are in over your head.

I see you're still living in fantasy-land, eh? LMAO!

You just knew someone would open the cage and them it out....

Lots of interesting stuff on the table, will you or Costella actually step up to the plate?

I've seen the frames, know the Z-film imagery pedigrey-lineage, what's to step up to? The 1963 imagery-frames don't lie... You and most Z-film non-alteration advocates have a problem, Indiana.

[John Costella]

Hi Dunc,

Not sure of your source there, but this is what I have from the DVD, blown up. It looks quite different to your version.

(I'm glad to see that everyone here agrees that we'd all be better off with access to the original scans!)

John

[David G. Healy]

lmao.... 3D model to determine shadow location? Is this turning into the Dale *see my emmy* Myers school of photo interpretation? Come on craigster, LMAO!

There's a few others here that I suspect have seen these frames, some, the entire 35mm *in-motion* film.

You got a problem with Farid? And yes you might be surprised to know who has seen what...

So step up the the plate dave and take a swing. That would be a novel idea for you.

swing at what, a wiffle ball? Perhaps someone someday soon will show Farid a frame or two, blows non-conspiracy right out of the water... Appears even Jimmy D. is getting a chance to see...

the question dude is this: did someone (not who) screw with the NARA held, in-camera original Z-film? If so, why? Focus son!

[Craig Lamson]

lmao.... 3D model to determine shadow location? Is this turning into the Dale *see my emmy* Myers school of photo interpretation? Come on craigster, LMAO!

There's a few others here that I suspect have seen these frames, some, the entire 35mm *in-motion* film.

You got a problem with Farid? And yes you might be surprised to know who has seen what...

So step up the the plate dave and take a swing. That would be a novel idea for you.

swing at what, a wiffle ball? Perhaps someone someday soon will show Farid a frame or two, blows non-conspiracy right out of the water... Appears even Jimmy D. is getting a chance to see...

the question dude is this: did someone (not who) screw with the NARA held, in-camera original Z-film? If so, why? Focus son!

You are woefully uninformed. No internet in the cage?

Edited January 10, 2012 by Craig Lamson

[David Josephs]

I was under the impression that testing the dye structure on the film had already been suggested as one way to authenticate the film, and was turned down.

Add to this we simply do not know where it was from about 11pm friday till saturday morning... and Mrs. Z says something to the e

• Mrs. Zapruder told me in November 1971 that Abe "gave them the film," clearly implying he had parted with the original, and at an early hour. Local newspaper stories state that Abe Zapruder was closeted with "government agents" into the evening. Years later, Life representative Stolley said he couldn't find Zapruder at home until midnight Friday, and that when he expressed his interest in viewing it as soon as possible, Zapruder begged off. He was tired, he had been driving around all night, he said; and would prefer seeing Stolley in the morning. Zapruder's business partner Erwin Swartz said he took two film cans to the Dallas Naval Air Station on Friday night. All this raises the question of whether Zapruder possessed the original on Friday night.

According to the detailed surveys, the distance the limo covered from z207-z208 was 2.3 feet....

2.3 feet over one frame equates to almost 28.7 mph in the midst of data that suggests the limo was traveling about 11-12 mph just before and just after 207/208...

Please remember that at 207 JFK is just going behind the sign...

In any case... I've looked at 302 and 303 and I'm sorry but there are no focusing anomolies there...

in 302 the limo occupants are all blurry while jean and mary are not..

in 303, Jean and Mary are blurry, the limo occupants not nearly as much...

Where exactly is the entirely clear frame?