Guest Posted May 12, 2016 Share Posted May 12, 2016 For all we know, Lee Oswald could have been sitting in the shade on a tall stool, busily taking photographs for his alibi.Precisely. I think it is only fair that we admit that, if the photo is too fuzzy to ID PM, it is also too fuzzy to tell whether or not PM is standing erect, or standing at the front or the rear of the top landing. Or on the first step down! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrej Stancak Posted May 12, 2016 Share Posted May 12, 2016 Dear gentlemen, Robert, Richard, and Robin, I was able to reconstruct Wiegman's scene with Prayer Man being 5'9'', and it nicely and logically fits with the solution which I have proposed for Darnell's still. It is better to take Roy Lewis than Billy Lovelady as the reference landmark in Wiegman's still as Roy Lewis almost did not move (only his head rotated) whilst Mr. Lovelady changed steps and his stance and angle of his trunk (leaning). Thus, it is difficult in the 3D space, as the doorway was, to evaluate what was the absolute height of Prayer Man by using Lovelady's body height as the reference height. I apologise for not being able to show the solution for Prayer Man (5'9'') for Wiegman at this moment. This relates to my job duties which take up my time until late evenings and also whole weekends. While it is relatively easy to just write how things are, it is a time consuming affair to provide some supporting evidence using 3D modelling. For Wiegman's scene, I would certainly need to place Roy Lewis on the thirds step and reproduce his body posture. To model the details of his or Lovelady's clothing (especially Lovelady's clothing is important), I need to change surfaces (meshes) which cannot be done in Sketchup itself but in a plugin called Artisan. I will post new data once I believe they are complete and as perfect as possible. However, the first thing would be to complete the analysis of Darnell's still which can be done in a more illustrative way compared to my previous posts. I would then launch a more comprehensive project which would reconstruct the locations and movements of all human figures in the doorway during the shooting. Wiegman's stills are central to this effort. As to the depth of the doorway: Prayer Man in Wiegman's still has his trunk and head in the shadow, only the the bottom of the bottle he held in his right hand was exposed to the sun. Thus, Prayer Man could only be at one and very distinct point within the depth of the doorway. Should he stood further back, the bottle bottom would not be hit by the sun. Should he be located further to the front, his trunk and particularly his left shoulder would be in the sun light. There is simply no wiggling space in Wiegman's still, as it was not in Darnell's still, to fit Prayer Man. Once you follow the landmarks (including shadows) derived from the picture in question, the correct solution pops up automatically. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandy Larsen Posted May 12, 2016 Share Posted May 12, 2016 Dear gentlemen, Robert, Richard, and Robin, I was able to reconstruct Wiegman's scene with Prayer Man being 5'9'', and it nicely and logically fits with the solution which I have proposed for Darnell's still. It is better to take Roy Lewis than Billy Lovelady as the reference landmark in Wiegman's still as Roy Lewis almost did not move (only his head rotated) whilst Mr. Lovelady changed steps and his stance and angle of his trunk (leaning). Thus, it is difficult in the 3D space, as the doorway was, to evaluate what was the absolute height of Prayer Man by using Lovelady's body height as the reference height. I apologise for not being able to show the solution for Prayer Man (5'9'') for Wiegman at this moment. This relates to my job duties which take up my time until late evenings and also whole weekends. While it is relatively easy to just write how things are, it is a time consuming affair to provide some supporting evidence using 3D modelling. For Wiegman's scene, I would certainly need to place Roy Lewis on the thirds step and reproduce his body posture. To model the details of his or Lovelady's clothing (especially Lovelady's clothing is important), I need to change surfaces (meshes) which cannot be done in Sketchup itself but in a plugin called Artisan. I will post new data once I believe they are complete and as perfect as possible. However, the first thing would be to complete the analysis of Darnell's still which can be done in a more illustrative way compared to my previous posts. I would then launch a more comprehensive project which would reconstruct the locations and movements of all human figures in the doorway during the shooting. Wiegman's stills are central to this effort. As to the depth of the doorway: Prayer Man in Wiegman's still has his trunk and head in the shadow, only the the bottom of the bottle he held in his right hand was exposed to the sun. Thus, Prayer Man could only be at one and very distinct point within the depth of the doorway. Should he stood further back, the bottle bottom would not be hit by the sun. Should he be located further to the front, his trunk and particularly his left shoulder would be in the sun light. There is simply no wiggling space in Wiegman's still, as it was not in Darnell's still, to fit Prayer Man. Once you follow the landmarks (including shadows) derived from the picture in question, the correct solution pops up automatically. Andrej, Is there any convincing evidence that PM was holding a bottle? (A pop bottle, presumably.) Doesn't that animated GIF show that PM brings the object up to his face using two hands? If so, doesn't that indicate it is not a pop bottle? I mean, what adult drinks pop with two hands? If PM is using two hands to raise the object, it's much more likely he's handling a camera than a pop bottle. One more thing... what makes you think the object is ever exposed to direct sunlight? When I look at the stills and videos, the object seems to be lit at various shades of gray. It could be reflecting light from the ceiling and other bright objects. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray Mitcham Posted May 12, 2016 Share Posted May 12, 2016 (edited) Dear gentlemen, Robert, Richard, and Robin, I was able to reconstruct Wiegman's scene with Prayer Man being 5'9'', and it nicely and logically fits with the solution which I have proposed for Darnell's still. It is better to take Roy Lewis than Billy Lovelady as the reference landmark in Wiegman's still as Roy Lewis almost did not move (only his head rotated) whilst Mr. Lovelady changed steps and his stance and angle of his trunk (leaning). Thus, it is difficult in the 3D space, as the doorway was, to evaluate what was the absolute height of Prayer Man by using Lovelady's body height as the reference height. I apologise for not being able to show the solution for Prayer Man (5'9'') for Wiegman at this moment. This relates to my job duties which take up my time until late evenings and also whole weekends. While it is relatively easy to just write how things are, it is a time consuming affair to provide some supporting evidence using 3D modelling. For Wiegman's scene, I would certainly need to place Roy Lewis on the thirds step and reproduce his body posture. To model the details of his or Lovelady's clothing (especially Lovelady's clothing is important), I need to change surfaces (meshes) which cannot be done in Sketchup itself but in a plugin called Artisan. I will post new data once I believe they are complete and as perfect as possible. However, the first thing would be to complete the analysis of Darnell's still which can be done in a more illustrative way compared to my previous posts. I would then launch a more comprehensive project which would reconstruct the locations and movements of all human figures in the doorway during the shooting. Wiegman's stills are central to this effort. As to the depth of the doorway: Prayer Man in Wiegman's still has his trunk and head in the shadow, only the the bottom of the bottle he held in his right hand was exposed to the sun. Thus, Prayer Man could only be at one and very distinct point within the depth of the doorway. Should he stood further back, the bottle bottom would not be hit by the sun. Should he be located further to the front, his trunk and particularly his left shoulder would be in the sun light. There is simply no wiggling space in Wiegman's still, as it was not in Darnell's still, to fit Prayer Man. Once you follow the landmarks (including shadows) derived from the picture in question, the correct solution pops up automatically. Andrej, you say the sun is reflecting on the bottom of a bottle. I disagree. If the sun was shining on whatever it was, it wouldn't be the bottom of a bottle. as the sun was coming from a different direction than our view of the bottom of a bottle, if that's what it was.. I agree with Sandy. What makes you think that whatever is in PP's hand is in sunlight? Whatever it is, it isn't in direct sunlight .IMO. Edited May 12, 2016 by Ray Mitcham Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Walton Posted May 12, 2016 Share Posted May 12, 2016 I apologise for not being able to show the solution for Prayer Man (5'9'') for Wiegman at this moment. This relates to my job duties which take up my time until late evenings and also whole weekends. While it is relatively easy to just write how things are, it is a time consuming affair to provide some supporting evidence using 3D modelling. Andrej, I look forward to your work. Your other 3D models have looked great. I think if there's any way to recreate things in three perspectives it's with SU. I agree, too, it's a very time consuming process. Looking forward... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Hume Posted May 12, 2016 Share Posted May 12, 2016 Andrej, I too am looking forward to the next phase of your fine work. Diverging a bit from Andrej’s hypothesis, I’ll repeat a suggestion I’ve made before on other threads: The round bright area we see in PM’s hand is the light mounted to his movie camera. One of his alibis was to create a continuous strip of film of the people he was with at the time of the shooting. To make this work, he would also have taken some selfies, which would have required a light, since he was sitting on a stool in the shadows. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrej Stancak Posted May 12, 2016 Share Posted May 12, 2016 (edited) Hello Sandy and Ray: We have no unequivocal evidence from Darnell's or Wiegman's frames about the exact object(s) Prayer Man held in his hands. I am aware of the possibility that Prayer Man held a camera. I am referring to very subjective analysis of both films. In Darnell, the hands are held in front of the chest and are separated, the left hand positioned slightly lower and backwards compared to the right hand. The right hand in Darnell appears to hold an object (else no reason for having the hand in this position). I would reason that holding an object in front of the chest has the advantage that the content of that object, should it be a bottle, would not spill. Further, the right hand holding a bottle in front of the chest suggests the intention of that person to drink from a bottle. And indeed, the right hand in Wiegman's film does show the trajectory of motion towards the head. My analysis of both films does not suggest that the left hand would do the same. This is quite obvious in Darnell's still, however, I can see this in Wiegman's "drinking" GIF animations. The Prayer Man's left hand in Wiegman's frames also appears to point towards his head, however, it is Prayer Man's right hand showing some range of motion. The range of motion displayed by the left hand is much smaller than that of the right hand. As per light reflection, the sun light would reflect from any light-reflecting object held by any person standing in the doorway. A glass bottle is a good candidate for reflecting the light, especially the bottom of the bottle. The bottom of a bottle is circular and therefore, the light reflection will likely be also of circular shape. And this is what I see in Wiegman's frame, a bright circular object moving towards Prayer Man's head. In my 3D analysis, a short bottom part of the object held in Prayer Man's right hand is out of the shadow, in the zone of a strong sun light. To answer your question why I think it was the bottle what Prayer Man held in his hand(s), I say it is a combination of my subjective visual analysis of Darnell's and Wiegman's stills, and my pilot models of both scenes. I hope to be able to strengthen this subjective view by presenting updated reconstruction of Darnell's scene and later of Wiegman's scene. I fully respect your alternative explanations (a camera?), and propose to add further analyses that may clarify the issue. However, every research follows certain ad-hoc accepted and probable explanation called hypothesis. And so, my hypothesis would be that it was a bottle what Prayer Man held in his right hand. I just cannot find an explanation that would score better than the bottle. Edited May 12, 2016 by Andrej Stancak Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrej Stancak Posted May 12, 2016 Share Posted May 12, 2016 (edited) Andrej, I too am looking forward to the next phase of your fine work. Diverging a bit from Andrej’s hypothesis, I’ll repeat a suggestion I’ve made before on other threads: The round bright area we see in PM’s hand is the light mounted to his movie camera. One of his alibis was to create a continuous strip of film of the people he was with at the time of the shooting. To make this work, he would also have taken some selfies, which would have required a light, since he was sitting on a stool in the shadows. Tom, I have a great sympathy for your puzzles and their solutions pointing to a hidden world of the assassination. I suspect that the possibility you advocate (a stool + camera) must have popped up as a solution in some puzzle. Please, bring it on if you can, or please point to the post in which you have described it - I will certainly read it. The stool: no one has ever mentioned there was any stool in the doorway, is it not a problem? Edited May 12, 2016 by Andrej Stancak Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrej Stancak Posted May 12, 2016 Share Posted May 12, 2016 I apologise for not being able to show the solution for Prayer Man (5'9'') for Wiegman at this moment. This relates to my job duties which take up my time until late evenings and also whole weekends. While it is relatively easy to just write how things are, it is a time consuming affair to provide some supporting evidence using 3D modelling. Andrej, I look forward to your work. Your other 3D models have looked great. I think if there's any way to recreate things in three perspectives it's with SU. I agree, too, it's a very time consuming process. Looking forward... Thanks Michael, I will notify you about any progress. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandy Larsen Posted May 12, 2016 Share Posted May 12, 2016 Hello Sandy and Ray: We have no unequivocal evidence from Darnell's or Wiegman's frames about the exact object(s) Prayer Man held in his hands. I am aware of the possibility that Prayer Man held a camera. I am referring to very subjective analysis of both films. In Darnell, the hands are held in front of the chest and are separated, the left hand positioned slightly lower and backwards compared to the right hand. The right hand in Darnell appears to hold an object (else no reason for having the hand in this position). I would reason that holding an object in front of the chest has the advantage that the content of that object, should it be a bottle, would not spill. Further, the right hand holding a bottle in front of the chest suggests the intention of that person to drink from a bottle. And indeed, the right hand in Wiegman's film does show the trajectory of motion towards the head. My analysis of both films does not suggest that the left hand would do the same. This is quite obvious in Darnell's still, however, I can see this in Wiegman's "drinking" GIF animations. The Prayer Man's left hand in Wiegman's frames also appears to point towards his head, however, it is Prayer Man's right hand showing some range of motion. The range of motion displayed by the left hand is much smaller than that of the right hand. As per light reflection, the sun light would reflect from any light-reflecting object held by any person standing in the doorway. A glass bottle is a good candidate for reflecting the light, especially the bottom of the bottle. The bottom of a bottle is circular and therefore, the light reflection will likely be also of circular shape. And this is what I see in Wiegman's frame, a bright circular object moving towards Prayer Man's head. In my 3D analysis, a short bottom part of the object held in Prayer Man's right hand is out of the shadow, in the zone of a strong sun light. To answer your question why I think it was the bottle what Prayer Man held in his hand(s), I say it is a combination of my subjective visual analysis of Darnell's and Wiegman's stills, and my pilot models of both scenes. I hope to be able to strengthen this subjective view by presenting updated reconstruction of Darnell's scene and later of Wiegman's scene. I fully respect your alternative explanations (a camera?), and propose to add further analyses that may clarify the issue. However, every research follows certain ad-hoc accepted and probable explanation called hypothesis. And so, my hypothesis would be that it was a bottle what Prayer Man held in his right hand. I just cannot find an explanation that would score better than the bottle. I zoomed in and took a closer look of the animated GIF showing PM lifting (or lowering?) the object. And I agree, he is not lifting the object with two hands. What I see is that he's holding the object with both hands, and then raises it to his face with one hand. His left hand stays at waist level (or a little higher) as he raises the object with his right hand. I don't recall ever seeing a man hold a coke with two hands. I have seen many times a man holding a coffee mug with both hands and then raising it with one. Maybe so it won't spill, or maybe to steady it, as the handles on many mugs don't allow for a firm grip. I've seen many people hold a camera with two hands, of course. But I think they usually raise them with both hands, to keep the camera steady. Did movie camera's back then have a grip made for one hand? If so, then a move camera would seem to fit the bill. But what part of a movie camera would be bright? A light, as Tom suggests? Did movie cameras back then even have a light? If so, how were they powered? This was back in the days when a flash bulb could be used just once. How could a camera light remain lit for an extended period? It seems that it would require a large battery. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Hume Posted May 12, 2016 Share Posted May 12, 2016 (edited) Sandy wrote: "But what part of a movie camera would be bright? A light, as Tom suggests? Did movie cameras back then even have a light? If so, how were they powered? This was back in the days when a flash bulb could be used just once. How could a camera light remain lit for an extended period? It seems that it would require a large battery." I don't have any links for you Sandy, but I looked at this many months ago and found a plethora of 1960 vintage movie camera light attachments - some plug-in, and some battery powered. Andrej wrote: "...I suspect that the possibility you advocate (a stool + camera) must have popped up as a solution in some puzzle. Please, bring it on if you can, or please point to the post in which you have described it - I will certainly read it. The stool: no one has ever mentioned there was any stool in the doorway, is it not a problem?" I don't have enough information from the puzzles to make much of an argument for what I suspect Oswald, and Frazier too, were doing that day, but I'll see if I can put together some low hanging fruit that appear suggestive. But you raise an interesting point about not having heard of any stool in the doorway. Several years ago I read a discussion of just such a stool being found at the entrance of the TSBD. It didn't seem too interesting at the time, I made a mental note, but I have not been able to locate this source since PM became topical. It was likely just an unfounded Internet rumor, but on the off chance it wasn't, I thought it was worth mentioning in case one of you run across such a report. Edited May 12, 2016 by Tom Hume Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 12, 2016 Share Posted May 12, 2016 (edited) Dear gentlemen, Robert, Richard, and Robin, I was able to reconstruct Wiegman's scene with Prayer Man being 5'9'', and it nicely and logically fits with the solution which I have proposed for Darnell's still. It is better to take Roy Lewis than Billy Lovelady as the reference landmark in Wiegman's still as Roy Lewis almost did not move (only his head rotated) whilst Mr. Lovelady changed steps and his stance and angle of his trunk (leaning). Thus, it is difficult in the 3D space, as the doorway was, to evaluate what was the absolute height of Prayer Man by using Lovelady's body height as the reference height. I apologise for not being able to show the solution for Prayer Man (5'9'') for Wiegman at this moment. This relates to my job duties which take up my time until late evenings and also whole weekends. While it is relatively easy to just write how things are, it is a time consuming affair to provide some supporting evidence using 3D modelling. For Wiegman's scene, I would certainly need to place Roy Lewis on the thirds step and reproduce his body posture. To model the details of his or Lovelady's clothing (especially Lovelady's clothing is important), I need to change surfaces (meshes) which cannot be done in Sketchup itself but in a plugin called Artisan. I will post new data once I believe they are complete and as perfect as possible. However, the first thing would be to complete the analysis of Darnell's still which can be done in a more illustrative way compared to my previous posts. I would then launch a more comprehensive project which would reconstruct the locations and movements of all human figures in the doorway during the shooting. Wiegman's stills are central to this effort. As to the depth of the doorway: Prayer Man in Wiegman's still has his trunk and head in the shadow, only the the bottom of the bottle he held in his right hand was exposed to the sun. Thus, Prayer Man could only be at one and very distinct point within the depth of the doorway. Should he stood further back, the bottle bottom would not be hit by the sun. Should he be located further to the front, his trunk and particularly his left shoulder would be in the sun light. There is simply no wiggling space in Wiegman's still, as it was not in Darnell's still, to fit Prayer Man. Once you follow the landmarks (including shadows) derived from the picture in question, the correct solution pops up automatically. Andrej, Is there any convincing evidence that PM was holding a bottle? (A pop bottle, presumably.) Doesn't that animated GIF show that PM brings the object up to his face using two hands? If so, doesn't that indicate it is not a pop bottle? I mean, what adult drinks pop with two hands? If PM is using two hands to raise the object, it's much more likely he's handling a camera than a pop bottle. One more thing... what makes you think the object is ever exposed to direct sunlight? When I look at the stills and videos, the object seems to be lit at various shades of gray. It could be reflecting light from the ceiling and other bright objects. This last one you can just see the top of the bottle sticking out Edited May 12, 2016 by Bart Kamp Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandy Larsen Posted May 12, 2016 Share Posted May 12, 2016 (edited) Dear gentlemen, Robert, Richard, and Robin, I was able to reconstruct Wiegman's scene with Prayer Man being 5'9'', and it nicely and logically fits with the solution which I have proposed for Darnell's still. It is better to take Roy Lewis than Billy Lovelady as the reference landmark in Wiegman's still as Roy Lewis almost did not move (only his head rotated) whilst Mr. Lovelady changed steps and his stance and angle of his trunk (leaning). Thus, it is difficult in the 3D space, as the doorway was, to evaluate what was the absolute height of Prayer Man by using Lovelady's body height as the reference height. I apologise for not being able to show the solution for Prayer Man (5'9'') for Wiegman at this moment. This relates to my job duties which take up my time until late evenings and also whole weekends. While it is relatively easy to just write how things are, it is a time consuming affair to provide some supporting evidence using 3D modelling. For Wiegman's scene, I would certainly need to place Roy Lewis on the thirds step and reproduce his body posture. To model the details of his or Lovelady's clothing (especially Lovelady's clothing is important), I need to change surfaces (meshes) which cannot be done in Sketchup itself but in a plugin called Artisan. I will post new data once I believe they are complete and as perfect as possible. However, the first thing would be to complete the analysis of Darnell's still which can be done in a more illustrative way compared to my previous posts. I would then launch a more comprehensive project which would reconstruct the locations and movements of all human figures in the doorway during the shooting. Wiegman's stills are central to this effort. As to the depth of the doorway: Prayer Man in Wiegman's still has his trunk and head in the shadow, only the the bottom of the bottle he held in his right hand was exposed to the sun. Thus, Prayer Man could only be at one and very distinct point within the depth of the doorway. Should he stood further back, the bottle bottom would not be hit by the sun. Should he be located further to the front, his trunk and particularly his left shoulder would be in the sun light. There is simply no wiggling space in Wiegman's still, as it was not in Darnell's still, to fit Prayer Man. Once you follow the landmarks (including shadows) derived from the picture in question, the correct solution pops up automatically. Andrej, Is there any convincing evidence that PM was holding a bottle? (A pop bottle, presumably.) Doesn't that animated GIF show that PM brings the object up to his face using two hands? If so, doesn't that indicate it is not a pop bottle? I mean, what adult drinks pop with two hands? If PM is using two hands to raise the object, it's much more likely he's handling a camera than a pop bottle. One more thing... what makes you think the object is ever exposed to direct sunlight? When I look at the stills and videos, the object seems to be lit at various shades of gray. It could be reflecting light from the ceiling and other bright objects. This last one you can just see the top of the bottle sticking out Thanks Bart. Yes, I was aware of that bottle. Still, I don't see men holding a coke with two hands. And there's even a bigger problem. The bottom of the "bottle" is facing us when PM is drinking from it, and ALSO when he is holding it at waist level! The coke would be running down his pants! No, I don't think PM has a coke bottle in his hands. He has something that he keeps at the same angle as he raises it. Edited May 12, 2016 by Sandy Larsen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandy Larsen Posted May 12, 2016 Share Posted May 12, 2016 Sandy wrote: "But what part of a movie camera would be bright? A light, as Tom suggests? Did movie cameras back then even have a light? If so, how were they powered? This was back in the days when a flash bulb could be used just once. How could a camera light remain lit for an extended period? It seems that it would require a large battery." I don't have any links for you Sandy, but I looked at this many months ago and found a plethora of 1960 vintage movie camera light attachments - some plug-in, and some battery powered. Yeah, I found some on eBay. Here's one with a pistol grip and light: The problem with this is that the light is too far above the hand. So is the lens. It doesn't fit what we see in the videos. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandy Larsen Posted May 12, 2016 Share Posted May 12, 2016 Is there a camera that one would hold with one hand when taking pictures? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts