Swan-Song -- Math Rules

[Chris Davidson]

On 7/9/2020 at 4:04 PM, Chris Davidson said:

 

It would be easy to justify the 33 second length included in the Jan 20th FBI document.

If one looks at Groden’s copies they can view the version with the partial(supposed to be around 117frames total) Hester’s segment included.

That version also includes the rest of the extant assassination which consists of the other two segments from extant frames 1-486.

In terms of Groden’s total running film time the cycle cop segment(pre-limo) = 8.2seconds
The limo segment = 22.1seconds

117 frames /18.3fps = 6.393seconds

8.2 + 22.1 = 30.3 x (16/18.3) = 26.49 sec

6.393 + 26.491 = 32.88 seconds total

But, included in that same FBI document is the Nix listed 8 second version.

Some have determined, the Nix frame rate was pretty much equal to the universally
accepted Z rate of 18.3fps.

The only way you arrive at an 8 second length for Nix is if the FBI made an assumption it was shot at 16fps.

But but, you would then have to believe the FBI didn’t run any tests on Nix’s camera after they abruptly seized it.

Attachment is a quote from Gayle Nix’s book:

 

[David Josephs]

When Max Phillips sent a film to Rowley in DC on 11/22, he wrote a note...

This "Note" at the end suggests those frames may indeed have been on THAT copy...
except after that evening we do not know what happens to that film...

do we now know?
DJ

ps...  "the 3rd print is forwarded...."  2 to Sorrels... so one of the Sorrels films was NOT the one he sends to DC
Zapruder had "master" and best copy... thats 1 original and 4, not 3 copies.  0184?

CD - 87 Folder 1
CO2 34030 11/22
9:55

To: Chief Rowley
From: Max D. Phillips
Subject: 8mm movie film showing President
Kennedy being shot

Enclosed is an 8mm movie film
taken by Mr. A. Zapruder, 501 Elm St., Dallas
Texas (RI8-6071)

Mr.. Zapruder was photographing
the President at the instant he was shot.

According to Mr. Zapruder, the position of
the assassin was behind Mr. Zapruder.

Note: Disregard personnel scenes
shown on Mr. Zapruder’s film.. Mr. Zapruder
is in custody of the "master" film. Two prints
were given to SAIC Sorrels, this date.
The third print is forwarded.

 

 

Edited July 13, 2020 by David Josephs

[Chris Davidson]

On 7/13/2020 at 8:20 AM, John Butler said:

 The truth is more important than ego.

 Working with the Zapruder film must be truly frustrating in trying to get the truth out of it. 

John,

Quite true.

But, alterations were made and it's up to us to find and reveal them.

For instance, I'm not supporting a threesome with this gif, but somebody doesn't belong up there.

[David G. Healy]

On 7/13/2020 at 4:03 PM, David Josephs said:

When Max Phillips sent a film to Rowley in DC on 11/22, he wrote a note...

This "Note" at the end suggests those frames may indeed have been on THAT copy...
except after that evening we do not know what happens to that film...

do we now know?
DJ

ps...  "the 3rd print is forwarded...."  2 to Sorrels... so one of the Sorrels films was NOT the one he sends to DC
Zapruder had "master" and best copy... thats 1 original and 4, not 3 copies.  0184?

[...]

0184 goes a long way answering questions re early dupes rumored to be created by an optical film house in NYC. Nice work.

[David Josephs]

3 minutes ago, David G. Healy said:

0184 goes a long way answering questions re early dupes rumored to be created by an optical film house in NYC. Nice work.

   Nice to see ya David....  Hope you and yours are doing well

DJ

ps... that 0184 was allowed to simply fade into history given the impossibility of it NOT being a print made between 0183 and 0185.
 

[Chris Davidson]

On 7/10/2020 at 4:48 PM, David Josephs said:

But what about that 24fps speed?

Was he watching a 48fps original or a 16fps?

Or a variation thereof.

Zavada excerpts:

“A question raised during discussions was, when the shots were
fired could Zapruder have unintentionally pressed down harder and
momentarily increased the velocity of the film for a fraction of a
second. Would the camera mechanism allow a gradual or partial
increase in velocity -- or -- would the change from normal velocity to
slow motion be “positive”?

“I discussed the question with David MacMillin and in his letter of
29 April 1998 he responded.”

MacMillan excerpts:

“This was all part of a patent application of mine.”

“If Zapruder had inadvertently gone into slow motion, then eased
up to go into normal speed, it could be accompanied with over and
under exposure frames at each speed change if his camera did not get
to speed instantly upon starting or slowing down from slow motion to
normal." David’s patent is referenced in Part 1 of this report. Our
camera test of shifting between normal and slow motion indicated it
was highly unlikely that Zapruder inadvertently shifted to slow motion.”

[John Butler]

14 hours ago, Chris Davidson said:

John,

Quite true.

But, alterations were made and it's up to us to find and reveal them.

For instance, I'm not supporting a threesome with this gif, but somebody doesn't belong up there.

Your job would be a lot easier if you had the film or photos that were being taken in that moment as shown in the Willis and Betzner photos.  Some, but not all might be someone clapping their hands.  But, many look like they are holding cameras.

If you look at the films and photos taken in Dealey Plaza of the motorcade you only find just a couple showing the passenger side of the presidential limousine.  This is Zapruder and Skaggs along Houston and Elm Streets.  There is something that the conspirators did not want shown from the passenger side of the limo.  IMO, the reason for this is if you saw the photos or films being taken here they might show something different from Zapruder.  All along the parade route from Main Street to Elm Street there are these unknown photographers. 

Edited July 15, 2020 by John Butler

[David Josephs]

11 hours ago, Chris Davidson said:

If Zapruder had inadvertently gone into slow motion, then eased
up to go into normal speed, it could be accompanied with over and
under exposure frames at each speed change if his camera did not get
to speed instantly upon starting or slowing down from slow motion to
normal."

And if those frames are removed intentionally, we would never know about the camera stopping and starting to take 48 & 16 fps ...

Then again it only requires 1 change as the limo rounds the corner...  From 132 to 133 we do not see the stop/start light bleed...  then again, it could have also happened at 157...
or even better 161....

The post alteration frame numbering is a sight to behold....

  

 

[Chris Davidson]

On 7/13/2020 at 1:03 AM, Chris Davidson said:

"In the early afternoon on the day of the Kennedy assassination, I was told by Mr. Chamberlain to set up a processing machine for some special film the secret service would be bringing in. I did so. Sometime later a secret service agent with a roll of film was brought to me. (I cannot comment on any handling of the film before this). I took the agent and the roll of film into the processing room. There the single roll of film was fed into the #2 processing machine by B. Davis (deceased). Davis, the agent and myself stayed in the darkroom until the film entered the dry cabinet. The agent and I then went to the dry alley. The lights in the drying cabinet were turned off so we could not view the film. When the roll of film reached take off, I removed it and gave it to the agent. No film was removed from roll at the processing operation. I am not sure if the edge printer was off or on (for some reason I think the agent requested we turn it off). After talking with Mr. Chamberlain and the fact that dupes were made of the film, I did not at this time, see it in its slit 8mm form."

Seems like two different films.

Three people.

Two films?

Sounds a lot like a couple of NPIC sessions.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[David Josephs]

Are you putting a camera into Sitzman's hands?

[Chris Davidson]

1 hour ago, David Josephs said:

Are you putting a camera into Sitzman's hands?

Zavada excerpt:

"Phil Chamberlain speculated that the perforators at the head end could have been used for the Zapruder films, the perforator "tested" between the original and dupes and because of auto indexing to the next number, 0184 was lost. Sounds good - but its speculation! We still need an example of 1963 Dallas processed 8mm movie film in a standard 50 ft. return box."

There are two others besides her.

I'll stick with two separate films floating around Kodak for now.

Since 0184 should have been subsequent to 0183 and prior to 0185, what would make me believe that the Kodak processing session involving only the SS agent and Kenny Anderson wasn't a second(circa pedestal) assassination film perforated as 0184?

Look at the LOS faint lines that were drawn on the FBI/SS plat in the previous gif.

 

[David Josephs]

Oh, I see...  back, behind them...  I'll take a closer look at Betzner

DJ

[Chris Davidson]

On 7/10/2020 at 4:48 PM, David Josephs said:

But what about that 24fps speed?

Was he watching a 48fps original or a 16fps?

Initial viewing on the Inspection(otherwise known as an Analyst)projector.

Normal 16mm speed(doubled) I equate to 2x24fps =48fps

Not sure if the 4 times speed is based on a 16fps rate or a 24fps rate.

Either way, 64 or 96fps possibly?

Phil Chamberlain excerpt:

"When the film finally left the drying cabinet and wound 
up on the take-off assembly, we transferred it to a 
projection spool, and a group of about 15 of us — Zapruder, 
me, the process men, Dick Blair of our Customer Service 
Department, and other staff people — headed for our little 
conference room, where we had set up an inspection 
projector." 
"Regular 8mm film (this was before the days of Super-8) 
was actually 16mm wide, but with twice as many perforations 
on the edges as the full 16mm product. Before return to the 
customer, it was slit down the middle, and the two halves 
spliced together end to end. The inspection projector was 
used to spot-check processed films for quality, especially 
for scratches or physical problems, just as quickly as they 
came off the machine. It ran about twice as fast as normal 
16mm projection speed, and was used for both 8 and 16mm. So 
when 8mm. was projected before it was slit in two, there were 
four individual frames on the screen — with the two frames 
on the left side upside down! — and it ran at four times 
normal speed!" 

 

 

 

[Chris Davidson]

7 hours ago, Chris Davidson said:

Seems like two different films.

Three people.

Two films?

Sounds a lot like a couple of NPIC sessions.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Which one is it?  He initially came alone or he was joined by Schwartz, McCormack and Sorrels.

No mention of Schwartz(partner/lawyer) until after they return from Jamieson's and nothing of McCormack and Sorrels.

What happens to Schwartz between the time his photo is taken(standing in the studio holding the Z camera case) while Z is interviewing on TV until they reach Kodak?

Two rolls of dupe film to take to Jamieson's?

Phil Chamberlain excerpts:

"I don’t remember the exact time, but I think it was about 2:30 when the receptionist, Marilyn Brandon (now Marilyn Jennings), called me and said, "There’s a Mr. Zapruder here in the lobby, who thinks he might have pictures of the shooting". The lobby was on the second floor, almost next to my office, so I quickly walked out and met Mr. Zapruder. 1 He was a heavy-set man, bald on top, with an arc of black hair around the edges. He wore a dark suit, was carrying his camera bag, obviously nervous, and said "I'm not sure what I've got, but I think I was taking pictures when the shooting happened". It was much later that it sunk in that Zapruder didn't realize at the time he was taking pictures that there was a shooting. He was simply taking pictures of the motorcade, and though he heard the shots, and saw the motorcade roar off, since he was looking through the view-finder of the camera, he didn't know what had happened until he heard it on the radio — and wasn't sure what he had pictures of! But he did have a spool of 8rrm Kodachrome film, and somewhere on it, were the pictures he made of the motorcade.

Dan Rather of CBS, in his book "Th'e Camera Never Blinks", states that "...we helped arrange for Eastman Kodak to process the film. This job had to be done by the best equipment. It had to be done fast. And it had to be kept confidential.". This was not so. At the time Zapruder came to Kodak, even he didn't know if he had pictures of the event, let alone Rather. Zapruder was alone, and gave every indication that he had come to the lab on his own volition, not because of urging by someone else.

The Kodachrome machines had not been down long enough to require a new process check or "OK for customers’ film", and although it was very unusual for us to start up a machine for one roll of film, we soon had Zapruder's film spliced into "leader" and started into the machine, with our best processor and inspector both in the machine room. Kodachrome film took something over an hour to process, so for the next long hour, we waited, chewed our knuckles, and wondered what the film would show. Zapruder told us he had a little dress-manufacturing business in down-town. He was a very casual amateur photographer, had decided at the last minute to see the motorcade, and took his camera almost as an afterthought. When the film finally left the drying cabinet and wound up on the take-off assembly, we transferred it to a projection spool, and a group of about 15 of us — Zapruder, me, the process men, Dick Blair of our Customer Service Department, and other staff people — headed for our little conference room, where we had set up an inspection projector.

We had no idea where .the pictures would be in the roll. It started off with pictures of Zapruder's family or friends, and like most amateur photographers, he sheepishly apologized for them. And then came the pictures. Fortunately, they were right-side-up, on the right-hand side of the screen. Even at the high speed, we could see the results, including the infamous frame where the top of Kennedy's head was blown off. And then nothing but blank film, where Zapruder had run off the rest of the roll to take it out of the camera.

Zapruder said, "Let's look at it again", at which point I made one of my better decisions of the day. Since it is always possible that film will jump the sprocket in a projector, putting sprocket holes in the pictures — or that a piece of foreign material will lodge in the projector gate, scratching the film, I took the spool off the projector, handed it to Zapruder, told him it was now in his possession, and that there would be no charge for the processing!

His next question was, "Can you make some copies?" We did not have the equipment to duplicate movies, so we called the Jamieson Film Laboratory, and asked them if they could duplicate unslit 8mm Kodachrome. They said that yes, they had the duplicating printer, but that they did not have any duplicating film perforated for 8mm. (Kodachrome film was made in three types in those days — Daylight, Type A for pictures under Tungsten light, and Duplicating Film. Duplicating film was a special finer-grain, low-contrast film, designed to give better quality copies, and was not available to the public). Our only alternative was to make the copies on Type A camera film, recognizing that they would not be of the best quality, and that Jamieson would have to guess at the color balance to use in their printer. So we gave Zapruder two rolls of Type A Kodachrome , and sent him off for Jamieson's.

Less than an hour later, he was back with the two rolls of film, and a man he introduced as his partner, who was also his attorney. Once again we started a processing machine. It was now 5:30 or so. My wife had come over after work, and a little group of us sat in our smoking area-coffee shop while we waited for the processing.

Zapruder was very nervous -- repeatedly mopping his brow. His suit by now was rumpled and creased. The partner was very quiet and businesslike. We all thumbed through magazines, made small talk, drank coffee, but mostly just waited.

This time, we slit and spliced the films and put them on regular 8mm projection spools, and once again trooped to the conference room — this time to see the film at normal size and speed, and several times, if we wished! Those of us in the lab realized that the duplicate was soft, or fuzzy, compared to the original, but really of good quality, considering the circumstances. As we watched with a confused mixture of emotions, Zapruder commented on the film, and I particularly remember his saying, "Look, you can see where 1 jumped as I heard the shots". And sure enough, the camera jumped three times as Zapruder was startled by each shot, even though he hadn't realized at the time what they were or what was happening. We cringed when JFK's head exploded -- and guessed even then that Jackie was trying to pick up a piece of his skull or brains from the back of the convertible. Other than Zapruder's commentary, no one else talked much."

 

[Chris Davidson]

On 9/18/2019 at 11:38 AM, David Josephs said:

I was thinking more along the lines of the height as I thought you were of the opinion a 3rd story origin was way too high...

Yet you do mention the idea of multiple Dal Tex shooters....

The top of the van is 10-12 feet it appears.... and from that angle - looking at Elm - I'd have to think the shot originated much higher up.

2nd AND 3rd floors?

Nice view for a back shot.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1d61nVKY4YejDOnzdL1w9RJkW0ZtqkEw1/view?usp=sharing