Chris Davidson Posted July 1, 2020 Author Share Posted July 1, 2020 The approx 2.3ft distance played an important role in the assassination. Just as silly as it was for the WC-CE884 data to use a (head height for JFK that was 10" lower than it should have been at extant z313) was the entry of the limo at 2.3ft per frame from z207-z208(splice time). Since this equals approx 28.6 mph, it's rather obvious it was a sync adjustment with other actions down the road. A sync which involved an instantaneous limo stop and two shots quite close together. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Davidson Posted September 9, 2020 Author Share Posted September 9, 2020 My additions are in red. Moving up Elm St. +/- 1 frame Keep 33,41 and 74 in mind, along with the other labels, if you choose to decipher this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Josephs Posted September 10, 2020 Share Posted September 10, 2020 23 hours ago, Chris Davidson said: Moving up Elm St. Chris... once again great stuff... well done... A question comment.... Marie Muchmore insists she did not take any film of the shooting itself... The sync you did is wonderful.... any thoughts then where this amazingly clear portion of the Muchmore film comes from... as the rest of the film simply doesn't match... Even these 2 prints from that one frame doesn't seem possible it's the same original film....?? Thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Butler Posted September 10, 2020 Share Posted September 10, 2020 The restoration of the Marie Muchmore film is from the National Geographic's JFK The Lost Bullet I believe Edit to add I might have misremembered that so I'll need to check later unless someone else knows Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Josephs Posted September 10, 2020 Share Posted September 10, 2020 30 minutes ago, David Butler said: The restoration of the Marie Muchmore film is from the National Geographic's JFK The Lost Bullet I believe yet she claims not to have taken images of the assassination... How dat? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Davidson Posted September 10, 2020 Author Share Posted September 10, 2020 1 hour ago, David Josephs said: A question comment.... Marie Muchmore insists she did not take any film of the shooting itself... any thoughts then where this amazingly clear portion of the Muchmore film comes from... as the rest of the film simply doesn't match... Even these 2 prints from that one frame doesn't seem possible it's the same original film....?? David J, I don't know the origin of your supplied frame. It looks familiar to me but I just can't place where I've seen it before. If it was posted on the forum previously that's probably my remembrance of it. David B, I rechecked "The Lost Bullet" and did not find any Muchmore footage either original or restored material. As for Muchmore not filming, take a look at what is added to her statement(2 1/2 months later) in a subsequent interview. I guess she must have been a real camera buff to include the film footage length in the interview.(Red flag warning) I have no reason to doubt what she stated about leaving early and not filming. My selection for who possibly filmed this is the gentleman in the black suit standing near Wilma Bond within 1 minute after the extant z313 headshot. P.S. I will be filling in the details for the "Up Elm St" graphic moving forward. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Davidson Posted September 10, 2020 Author Share Posted September 10, 2020 2 hours ago, David Josephs said: One more comment on this Muchmore iteration as I want to continue up Elm St for now. I call this the Muchmore Patch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Price Posted September 10, 2020 Share Posted September 10, 2020 Not to get this off topic, I just wanted to make a quick observation based on years of looking at the various films and video of the JFKA. The attached Altgen's 6 photo has always looked like a manipulated photo (particularly in the red box drawn in below). Too many anomalies in an otherwise professional quality photograph. Have you ever analyzed this area? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Davidson Posted September 10, 2020 Author Share Posted September 10, 2020 Richard, Very little on the contents within, mostly from a timing/location aspect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Davidson Posted September 10, 2020 Author Share Posted September 10, 2020 On 9/9/2020 at 8:36 AM, Chris Davidson said: My additions are in red. Moving up Elm St. +/- 1 frame Keep 33,41 and 74 in mind, along with the other labels, if you choose to decipher this. 8mm film = 80 frames per 1ft of film x 7ft = 560 frames 35sec x 16fps = 560 frames Credit to Pat Speer for the UPI article. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Josephs Posted September 10, 2020 Share Posted September 10, 2020 37 minutes ago, Richard Price said: Not to get this off topic, I just wanted to make a quick observation based on years of looking at the various films and video of the JFKA. The attached Altgen's 6 photo has always looked like a manipulated photo (particularly in the red box drawn in below). Too many anomalies in an otherwise professional quality photograph. Have you ever analyzed this area? One of the things that always bothered me about that area was how JFK was blocked by the mirror making him look very distorted so I put him back in: if it helps your thought process. Below that is a reconstruction of where McHugh SHOULD have been sitting.... the windshield hole takes on a whole new perspective, no? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Josephs Posted September 10, 2020 Share Posted September 10, 2020 3 hours ago, Chris Davidson said: I call this the Muchmore Patch. Great image... can you please post 1-2 frames before and after? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Davidson Posted September 10, 2020 Author Share Posted September 10, 2020 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Davidson Posted September 10, 2020 Author Share Posted September 10, 2020 On 9/9/2020 at 8:36 AM, Chris Davidson said: My additions are in red. Moving up Elm St. +/- 1 frame Keep 33,41 and 74 in mind, along with the other labels, if you choose to decipher this. 560 - 486 = 74 frames Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Davidson Posted September 11, 2020 Author Share Posted September 11, 2020 16 hours ago, Chris Davidson said: 560 - 486 = 74 frames 2ft 7inches of film = 2.583...ft film footage 2.583... x 80 frames per ft =206.666... rounded to 207 total frames Credit to Doug Horne for the following research and quote below: 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