Chris Davidson Posted February 24, 2012 Author Share Posted February 24, 2012 I thought I would pass along a few thoughts/hints to keep in mind when dealing with two different film speeds: If you take frames away, you speed things up. Or, if you add frames, you slow things down. Especially when converting from 24fps down to 18.3 fps. It would probably be a lot easier to keep frames in sequence, also. chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Josephs Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 The two different versions are now synced up in distance and in frame count by IMPLEMENTING 2 SECONDS OF FILM AT 24FPS. into the 18.3 fps version. Thanks Chris... I want to clearly understand this.... 2 seconds at 24fps into the 18.3 version of the Zfilm I assume. Can you state your conclusion related to the T film and Z film without pronouns My understanding is The WCR slowed the limo to 2.25 mph from 161-166 so the movement would only be .97 feet during that time so the different films would sync... specifically Towner The Towner Splice also allows the films to sync? The splice at 156 allows for ?? Where exactly is the 2 seconds of fim at 24fps? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Davidson Posted February 25, 2012 Author Share Posted February 25, 2012 The two different versions are now synced up in distance and in frame count by IMPLEMENTING 2 SECONDS OF FILM AT 24FPS. into the 18.3 fps version. Thanks Chris... I want to clearly understand this.... 2 seconds at 24fps into the 18.3 version of the Zfilm I assume. Can you state your conclusion related to the T film and Z film without pronouns My understanding is The WCR slowed the limo to 2.25 mph from 161-166 so the movement would only be .97 feet during that time so the different films would sync... specifically Towner The Towner Splice also allows the films to sync? The splice at 156 allows for ?? Where exactly is the 2 seconds of fim at 24fps? David, The true Towner film ran at 18.3 fps for approx 168 frames. The true Z film is a combination of 2 different film speeds at least. It started at 18.3 fps and ran for 108 frames, at which point the 24fps segment runs for 2 seconds =156 frames. The adjustment of 161-166 is to sync WC CE884 on paper, with the 2 second@24fps version, since the 2 second version ends at frame 156 and is 5 frames short of where WC CE884 starts. The Towner splice moved JFK into alignment with the physical corner of the TSBD, a measuring point to start from for the WC. The splice at 156 allows the extant film to switch back to 18.3fps. The Croft photo is at Z161, that's another reason why the WC started their calculations there. The Willis and Betzner photos were between 157 and 207, that's why the film has to go back to 18.3fps at that point. Myer's film syncing is bogus. The Zfilm is bogus. The WC report is bogus. All in Zone 1 if you go back to my initial posts. More to come. chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg Burnham Posted February 25, 2012 Share Posted February 25, 2012 Great summary, Chris! KUTGW... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Lamson Posted February 25, 2012 Share Posted February 25, 2012 (edited) Just a simply question Chris. How have you decided the WC distance traveled for 161-166 is not just a misprint or other error in the PRODUCTION process of the chart? Edited February 25, 2012 by Craig Lamson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Davidson Posted February 25, 2012 Author Share Posted February 25, 2012 Just a simply question Chris. How have you decided the WC distance traveled for 161-166 is not just a misprint or other error in the PRODUCTION process of the chart? Craig, Tom Purvis has pointed this out many times before. The relevant testimony is provided. The first question my wife asked me " Why not just unseal CE882 and look at the original"? and she has no interest whatsoever in the assassination. We know the answer to her question. chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Davidson Posted February 25, 2012 Author Share Posted February 25, 2012 Long ago I discovered 'Mysteryman" in the Dorman film and a long discussion ensued about who he was. (gif provided) My point of contention was "if it was Croft moving to the position we see him at Z133, he didn't have enough time according to the Myer's sync scenario which was less than 1/4 second. (Myer's graphic provided) The last gif frame equates to Dorman333 This is what occurs when you change film speeds around the time frames I have been discussing. It is Croft, he just needs more time to get from where we see him in Dorman to Z133. One other comment about the Myer's graphic, you will notice that 4 different camera operator's stop filming within approx 1.2 sec of each other. I have referred to that previously as "selective splicing" and stand by it, or it's just a mere coincidence that this occurs concurrently between Z108 and Z156. chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Davidson Posted February 25, 2012 Author Share Posted February 25, 2012 Attached is Croft in Z at frame 133. chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Lamson Posted February 25, 2012 Share Posted February 25, 2012 (edited) Just a simply question Chris. How have you decided the WC distance traveled for 161-166 is not just a misprint or other error in the PRODUCTION process of the chart? Craig, Tom Purvis has pointed this out many times before. The relevant testimony is provided. The first question my wife asked me " Why not just unseal CE882 and look at the original"? and she has no interest whatsoever in the assassination. We know the answer to her question. chris That is NOT relevant to the question at all Chris. The long and short of it is you simply don't know if the figure is correct or not. Instead you make up this amazing story of changing frame rates and other gymnastics. Makes a great fairy tale. Proves very little I'm afraid. Wanna try again? Oh wait this is the same path this has traveled every time you hoist it out again. Edited February 25, 2012 by Craig Lamson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Davidson Posted February 26, 2012 Author Share Posted February 26, 2012 Craig, I do know the figure is correct because math works. Made up story!!! I don't think so. The math, plat, graphics, testimony have been provided and explained. Some deceptions have been revealed. If you would like to ask specifics, go right ahead. The only entity making up stories is the WC. I'll let others be the judge as you don't appear willing to do the math. chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Lamson Posted February 26, 2012 Share Posted February 26, 2012 Craig, I do know the figure is correct because math works. Made up story!!! I don't think so. The math, plat, graphics, testimony have been provided and explained. Some deceptions have been revealed. If you would like to ask specifics, go right ahead. The only entity making up stories is the WC. I'll let others be the judge as you don't appear willing to do the math. chris You DON'T know the figure is correct because YOU MADE UP THE MATH THAT "makes it work". And of course it is all made up Chris...BY YOU. You keep slicing and dicing and working you fantasy...("2 seconds at 24 FPS them back to 18.3"...ROFLMAO!. It's a joke Chris. You INVENTED your conclusion and then you worked your "facts" and "math" so they FIT YOUR CONCLUSION. Your fantasy is the deception Chris. You are just making it up as you go along. No problem with people judging it as they please. It's a free country. However a consensus of kooks does not fact make. And this one is right up there... Ztoon people....LMAO! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Davidson Posted February 26, 2012 Author Share Posted February 26, 2012 Earth to Craig, You caught me!!! I made up the distance between the front of the limo and JFK's position in the limo. I created the Myer's graphics which switches the yardstick when it comes to relative position of limo and JFK. I created the splice at Z157. I created the false distances on the survey plat, labeled them as such,and now it all works. I created the splice in Towner. I created the distance traveled figure in CE884. I have created a limo speed in Z, that is not representative of what the film shows from z133-Z157 based on Myer's multiple film syncing analysis. It's not a conclusion at this point because I 'm not finished. It's called a hypothesis. Can you figure out how that relates to math? Yes the WC figures are valid and fair game because they are the ones that provided and published it. Why don't you ask Arlen Spector to show the world CE882, then we can separate your fantasy from reality. I'm moving forward with more math. chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Lamson Posted February 26, 2012 Share Posted February 26, 2012 Earth to Craig, You caught me!!! I made up the distance between the front of the limo and JFK's position in the limo. I created the Myer's graphics which switches the yardstick when it comes to relative position of limo and JFK. I created the splice at Z157. I created the false distances on the survey plat, labeled them as such,and now it all works. I created the splice in Towner. I created the distance traveled figure in CE884. I have created a limo speed in Z, that is not representative of what the film shows from z133-Z157 based on Myer's multiple film syncing analysis. It's not a conclusion at this point because I 'm not finished. It's called a hypothesis. Can you figure out how that relates to math? Yes the WC figures are valid and fair game because they are the ones that provided and published it. Why don't you ask Arlen Spector to show the world CE882, then we can separate your fantasy from reality. I'm moving forward with more math. chris ROFLMAO! This is classic ct ztoon kook-ism at it's best. Lets review. Davidson is taking a timeline of four films capturing SEGMENTS of a single event created by someone else....( which is best is close but surely not perfect) ...then taking a flawed attempt at a "recreation" ( which at best is a fools errand since you can't accurately recreated slices of time).... ...and plugging those "fantasy" numbers into the timeline.... ...and finally creating his OWN FANTASY MATH of how to make his CONCLUSION that the Z FILM IS FAKE fit the cobbled up collection of fantasy facts outlined above. Earth to Chris.... The only one in fantasy land is YOU. Fricking amazing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Davidson Posted February 27, 2012 Author Share Posted February 27, 2012 In a previous post these are the times and frames I gave for Tina Towner's film. 92frames x 18.3 fps=5.02 seconds. This aligns JFK with the physical corner of the TSBD. 76frames x 18.3 fps=4.15 seconds. I've always held to the belief that her camera was running at the speed it was manufactured to run at, in this case 18 fps but let's make it 18.3 so it's paralleling Z's camera. Myers has it syncing with all other films at 22.8 fps a 25% increase over its defined specs. If Towner is running at approx 18.3 fps then Z should be running at 22.8 fps or above. (More than likely, 24fps). There is that 18.3/24 fps ratio. But its Towner to Z, not Z to Towner. If Z is running at 24 fps for 5.02 seconds, the amount of time it takes to get JFK to the TSBD corner in Towner is: 24 fps x 5.02sec=120frames. And overall, if the Z film is running at 24 fps for the total frames in Towner, then it becomes: 24fps x 4.15sec=100frames = 120+100 So, a camera running at 24 fps the length of the Towner segment would yield a total of aprox 220 frames. Frame 1 would start with JFK aligned with the physical corner of the TSBD and end at frame 100 when filming at 24fps. Frame 100, now there's an easy number to work with. chris Frame 100 Referring back to the partial plat previously supplied, notice the distance between frame161 and Position A Compare the distances given from the WC recreation in regards to Position A and frame 161. From Position A to Station C is 44ft. From frame161 to Station C is 94.7ft So, from Position A to frame161 is 50ft. chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Davidson Posted February 27, 2012 Author Share Posted February 27, 2012 (edited) The partial plat shows Station numbers in 25ft increments. These Station numbers are also included in CE884 excluding a frame number and elevation for Position A. Look at the right side red 54ft arrow pointing toward the + symbol. This is the 2+75 Station number label. If you look to the left of that, you'll notice the 3+00 label which indicates a 25ft span between the two. Also, near the 2+75 label is Position A. The distance between 2+75 and Position A is approx 4ft. Almost straight down from the 2+75 label is a mark on Drommer listed as 99.5. It's a point on the curb labeled in white. This is what the HSCA used for their elevation labels. So, within approx 5ft of each other is Station number 2+75, Position A and HSCA 99.5 elevation. Tom gave us the conversion factor for the Drommer plat assumed elevations in reference to the WC work. The conversion is adding 329.6 to any Drommer elevation to arrive at the WC listed elevations. 99.5 + 329.6 = 429.1 which ends up a little past the 2+75 station number. About 1.25ft past. chris Edited February 27, 2012 by Chris Davidson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now