The Zapruder film and film information between the sprocket holes

[Tom Neal]

You know you're onto something when your opponent has to resort to personal attacks.

Thanks, Sandy!

What is your opinion regarding the subject of this thread? Obviously "Math Rules" is not clear to TWO posters, one of whom states that ANYTHING that relates to z-film credibility is not OT. By this CONVENIENT definition, anyone could, for example, post about ANY aspect of the assassination that indicates LHO was a LN, and claim this PROVES that the z-film is pristine, so Chris's stuff is BS. Despite the thread owner's EARLY request and my later post that they are OT-ing, they continue to do so, while the mods deliberate.

IMO, these two posters simply don't understand the MATH involved in this thread, so to them it is "nonsense." And I COMPLETELY agree with you that when posters can only respond with personal attacks (which are ALSO against rules, are they not???) and name-calling even they KNOW they have nothing.

One of these two posters stated that he *KNOWS* not a single frame was removed or touched. Considering ALL the legerdemain involved in this case, e.g. the chain of custody of CE399, IYO, what are the requirements to actually KNOW that the z-film is untouched?

*IMO*:

1. You had to be present when Zap was filming

2. Closely observe him remove the film

3. keep the film in sight until it was developed

4. accompany the film from the developer to NPIC

5. witness the making of the FIRST storyboards

6. witness the making of the SECOND *SECRET* (secret to all but the #1 guy at NPIC) storyboards

7. have expertise EQUIVALENT to the NPIC people assuring that their actions did not affect their 'product'

8. continue to follow the film to its ultimate destination under lock and key at the archives

9. at the very least determine that the SS, CIA, FBI et al who have tampered with evidence did not have access to this film

As far as the opinion of '3rd party experts' with 'no bias,' I cite Nobel Prize winner Alvarez whose experiments were conducted until he found that a soft melon produced the results he required. He then released this data only while suppressing the CONTRADICTORY data acquired using objects vastly closer to a human head. Multiple examples of Alvarez providing "proof" reagarding 'gov't statements that a number of major events happened or did not happen were later proven to be untrue. IMO "Gov't Disinfo Agent" should appear on his resume, and the Nobel Committee should have revoked his prize, or at the very least provided public censure. Is intervention by the US gov't a factor in their continued silence?

To accept the opinion of an "expert" regarding the assassination requires evidence FAR BEYOND that of a 'normal' case.

Tom

[Michael Walton]

TOM - To accept the opinion of an "expert" regarding the assassination requires evidence FAR BEYOND that of a 'normal' case.

Tom so let me get this straight. According to your logic, all experts who present evidence that the Z film is authentic are wrong because...they need even more evidence to prove their case? Even after they picked up and examined the NARA Z film, which none of us have ever done?

And yet crazy Danny on his Facebook page spouts that, "Oh, yeah, I've transferred films and I've just never seen images over in the sprocket holes like you can see in the Z film and it must be fake." And you immediately fall for it?

And then your old buddy in "facts far above a normal case" Chris shows a strip from his own 8mm Z camera on this thread. He doesn't have the guts to say anything about his post but the image proves that, yes, there are images in the sprocket hole areas and yes, even old Chris disagrees with crazy Danny.

And you continue to argue on this thread? After even old buddy Chris has proven you and crazy Danny wrong?

And when I said on this thread that yes, images in the sprocket holes were normal, you disagreed with me, too?

So according to you, crazy Danny is right, I'm wrong, Chris is wrong, while over on The 67% Solution, Chris is right, I'm wrong, and the Zavada report is wrong?

Do you not see how delusional your answers are here with all of this? You hold the Zavada report to a "far beyond" level, yet Danny spews nonsense and Chris plays around with math and animated GIFs of his wife's car driving down the street, and that's your "far beyond" standards?

[Jeremy Bojczuk]

Sandy,

Perhaps I could have expressed things more clearly. I wasn't claiming that the experts' verdicts are the final truth of the matter. Look again at the first part of the sentence you highlighted in red: "Unless anyone can come up with a more credible expert opinion ...".

In other words, the current expert opinion is overwhelmingly that the film in the Archives is genuine. In the absence of a credible expert opinion to the contrary, the only rational approach for a non-expert is to agree with the current expert opinion.

Many readers will already be aware that there's a good analogy to this in the global warming debate. As in the Zapruder film debate, expert opinion seems to be very strongly in favour of one conclusion over the opposite conclusion. For a non-expert, the only rational approach is to reflect the balance of expert opinion and to assume, provisionally, that the majority expert opinion is correct. If the majority expert opinion shifts to the opposite conclusion, then that is what the non-expert should assume, provisionally, to be correct. If expert opinion is equally divided, then you may perhaps be justified in brushing it aside.

There may well be experts who contradict the opinions of Zavada and Fielding. Two separate claims were made on the crazy mathematics thread (here and here) that there are experts who can see evidence that the back of JFK's head has been painted in. Regrettably, no-one has yet been able to locate these experts. It is possible that when these experts come out of hiding, there will be justifiable reasons to doubt Zavada and Fielding, but until such contradictory expert opinion materialises, the only rational approach for a non-expert is to assume, provisionally, that Zavada and Fielding are correct. It would be irrational and unjustified to brush aside their opinions.

Does anyone know of any experts who have examined the Zapruder film in the National Archives and whose opinions contradict those of Zavada and Fielding?

[David G. Healy]

[...]

There may well be experts who contradict the opinions of Zavada and Fielding.

[...]

Does anyone know of any experts who have examined the Zapruder film in the National Archives and whose opinions contradict those of Zavada and Fielding?

re your above:

first: when did he make them and where are Fielding's comments and opinion to which you refer?

second: no experts have examined the Zapruder film for possible alteration and that includes Fielding. In fact, Raymond told me he wanted nothing to do with this controversy, at all. You do understand the relationship between KODAK and university film schools, correct?

Thank you

Edited August 1, 2016 by David G. Healy

[Brad Milch]

@all:

If alterations were not performed on the Z-film, why was the film taken to Hawkeyeworks?

For those with experience with film special effects & the equipment used to produce those effects, may I offer this premise:

Let's say I have Donald Trump, Vladamir Putin, Bill Gates or Sir Paul McCartney billionaire big bucks to play around with (trust me, I don't, but this is a 'what if' premise) and I want to study the JFK assassination visuals with a different approach than what's been previously applied by others who attempt to pass themselves off as authority figures on the subject. Let's start with the Z-film:

Let's quickly review what we've been told about the Z-film: What is stored at the National Archives is supposedly the product of a Bell & Howell 8 mm home movie camera using Kodachrome II film. The camera setting is said to be at full zoom & the frames per second setting is said to be 18-24 frames per second ('normal' speed setting for the camera). Mr. Zapruder is said to have filmed the motorcade 'coming in from Houston St., making his (JFK) turn' (onto Elm St.) Holding on to Mr. Zapruder on top of a roughly 4 foot ornamental concrete block ('pedestal') was Marilyn Sitzman. Mr. Z is said to suffered vertigo & Marilyn was there to hold Mr. Z steady in case he got dizzy. From this point on, the Z-film travels several routes, one of them being a CIA film lab that prepared poster boards for the SS, then to super secret film labs called 'Hawkeyeworks' (alterations are alleged to have taken place there), then back to the CIA film lab for a different set of poster boards to be made. Life magazine is alleged to have received some of what was created the assassination weekend by Government operatives & NOT before Government people got their hands on the film first & had it in their possession most of the assassination weekend.

First, we want to film a re-enactment of the shooting using historically accurate cars & stand-in actors using the same equipment & film as Zapruder is alleged to have used 53 years ago. We want to film where he allegedly filmed (we don't necessarily need a pretty babe hanging onto us as we film, but, heck, why not? (lol). In addition to Mr. Z's camera & film, we also want to film the re-enactment with state of the art (circa 1963) cameras & film (16mm, 35mm & higher, TV & motion picture cameras & available film formats). We want this additional stuff there to try 'bumping down' to 8mm later on in our study (some believe the original Z film was purchased, trashed & replaced with 'bumped down' to 8 mm from higher quality equipment & film. We want to see what that looks like later in our studies & how it compares to what is alleged to be the Zapruder 'camera original' stored in the National Archives.

We won't be able to fit all this extra equipment & people on Mr. Z's pedestal, so we are going to move our photographers back a bit, to inside the north Pergola shelter, on top of & behind the north pergola, from inside & on top of the series of Pullman train cars parked in the rail yards behind Mr. Z, plus on top of the railroad signal light tower. We might put someone at the corner of the triple underpass where it meets the stockade fence as well as the stockade fence too. Let's go all out & cover the most probable filming locations that might produce a film that could be passed off as having been filmed by Mr. Z.

For those with short memories, let’s quickly review (up to this point):

With persons positioned in multiple locations in Dealey Plaza with non-Zapruder film equipment (that varies from 16mm, 35mm on up to Hollywood film equiment used for their motion picture releases. We have these folks filming from camouflaged locations, such as van & trucks positioned at likely spots where a ‘bumped down’ Z-film we are creating can be passed off as being filmed by Zapruder with his lady assistant hanging onto him for stability support. In addition to this extra equipment & film capabilities,
I also have my assistants standing on the Zapruder 'pedestal' at Dealey Plaza with an exact movie camera as Zapruder had with identical Kodak film. On Elm Street I have replicas of the JFK Lincoln parade car & the Cadillac 'Queen Mary' tailgating JFK's ride. I might have a robot programmed by software to move Zapruder's camera exactly as he did 53 years ago & I might re-film the Z-frame frame by frame, moving the parade car, the SS guards vehicle with actor stand-ins inch by inch, foot by foot down the incline of Elm Street in an attempt to match the Z-film as historically accurate as possible. I want to use all available Zapruder camera zoom & non-zoom settings to compare my images to Zapruder’s.

After filming the replica cars with duplicate Zapruder film equipment & film stock, I also film the entire Elm St & background area (meridian area) completely empty. I want to use those as backdrops after blending subject matter from the different films I took on an optical printer (and other applicable special effects film equipment). I want to see what I end up with after applying the effects, particularly if my tampered film suffers from visual anomalies that give away that I monkeyed with the film in the first place.

As we move along, let's say one of my settings (zoom, 1/2 zoom, normal) in my z-film re-enactment shows some of the SS car in the left corner of the film's viewing window & more of the car in the sprocket hole area & compare to Z's film. Do I have a match to the Z-film or no match? This is an important step.

My assistants & I are wanting to make the SS car disappear completely out of the sprocket area on the film I am going to attempt to make on an optical printer with the films I took (not Zapruder's film) if what we produce in our re-enactment matches what we see in the z-frames.

As I progress along, I want to address some of the many allegations made against the Z-film over the years, probably beginning around the time of David Lifton's blockbuster book & support video, 'Best Evidence'. Most will remember these allegations really kicked into high gear after the release of 'Image Of An Assassination' when high quality enlargements made from the National Archive's 'camera original' were first made available to the public to study on their home PC's. These allegations include:

_Use of composite images (two or more portions of images are combined together to produce a false image. An example of this would be: Jackie turns her head from looking to her left (towards the grassy meridian area) to looking at JFK in conjunction with the 1st shot. Let's say we suspect her head turn is a composite image contained in the film that the human eye doesn't catch when the film is run in motion. We want to see if we can make her head turn in a different direction in our film.

_Simple artwork (such as darkening a portion of an image) to obscure something. Let's say we want to darken Babushka Lady's head with a black marker & refilm her action scenes. Perhaps darken a portion of the reflecting pool shrubs to see how that looks when the film is run in motion. We might paint in a sniper laying in the bushes & then use black marker film paint to darken his image. Can we fool the human eye when the film is run in motion? Maybe darken a spectator on the overpass so that his image disappears. Stuff like that. We want to make changes to the film material as simple as possible & observe those changes we made when the film is run in motion.

_Elaborate artwork within the film. This is where body movements & actions are painted into the action scenes,falsely portraying the film actors doing things they did not do in real life when the events were filmed. For example, let's say we suspect JFK's arms flying up towards his face or neck area was achieved by artwork. Roy Kellerman tells us in his WC testimony that he looked back at the back seat & saw JFK pointing towards his back shoulder. Some James Altgens photo analysts interpret Altgen photo #6 as depicting JFK leaning forward towards the jump seats with his hands covering his head. We want to try that too with our actor stand ins. We might turn JFK's body around & have him looking back at the TSBD in a manner that matches what Life Magazine told the global public happened in the Z-film, does not exist in the z-film as we know it, but DOES match Kellerman’s WC testimony. Could that be why the Elm St. limo turn is missing from the Z-film? In our re-enactments, we'll film an actor standinin turning back to look at the TSBD in the area that seemingly has been cut from the film. Then we'll cut it out too. We’ll make lighting adjustments on the start-up frame following the cut to conceal the omission.

We will also address the ‘blacked out’ portion of the rear of jfk’s head as well as the suspected ‘painted’ explosion & head wound damage not seen by a multitude of Parkland medical professions minutes after the ambush occurred.

_Insertion of optical objects with the purpose of obscuring an action scene. An example of this would be Zapruder telling the WC in his testimony that he believed he had cleared the Stemmons sign, prompting allegations that the sign had been raised higher in the film than it actually was during the ambush of JFK. We want to try that too. We also want to obscure most of the film action by adding in a super zoomed image of the bush in front of Zapruder's lens.

_making sidewalk spectators disappear. Even though the Newman family were positioned directly in front of Zapruder (roughly 30 yards in front and slightly below his line of sight to them), all 4 people (2 adults & 2 adolescents) are not in his film. Neither are the two ladies standing next to them by the lamp post We want to include them in our film & then make them disappear by playing around with false zoom settings & enlargements.

_Duplicating & de-coding the JFK parade car side, hood (bonnet) & trunk reflections seen in the Z-film. As JFK's shiny, dark colored parade car made its way toward, in front of & away from Mr. Z & Sitzman, it resembled giant mirrors reflecting objects it approached, passed & traveled away from. Some images appear only for a moment; a frame later they disappear. Some people or objects we see JFk's car passing on the Elm Street sidewalk do not appear in the reflections (such as Umbrella Man, 'the Cuban' or the Stemmons sign}. We want to have our actor stand ins positioned in the same places & ascertain why we don't see their reflections on JFK's car as his replica passes them in our re-enactment film. We want to strive for perfect matches between our film & Mr. Z's. We also want to spot what should be there in the Z-film that our film picked up. Vice versa, we want to note what the Z-film shows that conflicts with our re-enactment images.

Let’s wrap this premise up for now. After assuring the reader that in all our filming efforts we tried to match light, temperature & wind conditions as close to what they were 53 years ago when President Kennedy was driven around the corner of the intersection of Houston & Elm Streets in Dealey Plaza very much alive & exited the triple underpass just the opposite.

In all our proposed filming efforts, we have produced materials to both compare to the Zapruder ‘camera original’ as well as visual materials far superior to what Zapruder allegedly used that we can experiment with in various capacities & scenarios. We have focused strictly on re-creating a home movie as historically accurate as possible and not on shooters or orchestrators. In time, we’ll try our hand at re-creating some of the special effects many people believe exist in the Zapruder film (regardless of how the effects got there) and inform the public what we found each step of our journey through our premise.

Anyone with a sincere desire & funds to cover costs to tackle what I have proposed here can do the same thing with their own people & equipment. CBS News could do it just as well as the US Government, the FBI, Justice Department, PBS Nova, the UK & Russian film professionals & their global brothers..

It probably could be done a lot cheaper than a billion dollars too. Whatever the cost, I’d encourage the inclusion of David Healy, David Lifton & Doug Horne as consultants.

Until some of this premise, all of it or other things I didn’t think of or mention is performed ‘hands on’, no one should have the audacity to proclaim themselves as knowing all there is to know about the Zapruder film.

Best to all,

Brad Milch

Edited August 3, 2016 by Brad Milch

[David G. Healy]

[...]

....(to be continued).....

Brad Milch

well, I'm interested...