Unveiling The Limo Stop

[Chris Davidson]

22 hours ago, Chris Davidson said:

In case you forgot, ballistically, JFK within the limo has to be in the correct physical location for the SBT magical mystery tour to succeed. 

The parked limo on the rightside is supposed to represent the location of JFK when the magic bullet struck.

The two red parallel lines represent both the WC(dots) and Robert West(+ sign)physical location for JFK.

As the plotted position of JFK according to the WC at z222, flashes, is the parked limo more reflective of the dot positioning by the WC or the + positioning of Robert West?

 

 

 

[Chris Davidson]

On 2/2/2023 at 12:09 PM, Chris Davidson said:

Yes, the camera was higher in the reenactment than the original. Why?

I'm quite sure it was done intentionally.

By May of 64 (among all the other prior reenactments) had they not ascertained Zapruder's camera height? Why?

They had his physical position on the pedestal well established and Zapruder was still available for height sizing.

Shaneyfelt surely knew the importance of this as he shot the reenactment from the pedestal using Z's camera.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

A vertical comparison using the difference between the so called damaged z207 frame and the Shaneyfelt height factor. 

 

 

[Chris Davidson]

23 hours ago, Chris Davidson said:

A vertical comparison using the difference between the so called damaged z207 frame and the Shaneyfelt height factor. 

 

 

Speaking of that lower sprockethole.

This next gif should help you conceptualize the sleight of hand.

What part of the StemmonsSign is in unison with the Bobbleheads?

Give your eyes a few seconds for adjusting to see its true movement.

 

 

[George Govus]

The Kennedy imagery seems the same in both frames when it should not be. The frame border rocks up and down and I cannot say which sooner. Yet the top of the Stemmons sign does not rock, many elements do not rock. Some hop up and down. Funky. Math, never my strong suit. I may need Cliff's Notes.

[Chris Davidson]

On 2/11/2023 at 5:22 AM, George Govus said:

The Kennedy imagery seems the same in both frames when it should not be. The frame border rocks up and down and I cannot say which sooner. Yet the top of the Stemmons sign does not rock, many elements do not rock. Some hop up and down. Funky. Math, never my strong suit. I may need Cliff's Notes.

George,

You don't need much math with this, just perceptive observation as with your previous comments.

A solid sign can't move independent of itself(or segments thereof) no matter how many ways you film it.

 

[Chris Davidson]

On 2/10/2023 at 11:49 PM, Chris Davidson said:

Speaking of that lower sprockethole.

This next gif should help you conceptualize the sleight of hand.

What part of the StemmonsSign is in unison with the Bobbleheads?

Give your eyes a few seconds for adjusting to see its true movement.

 

 

Credit to John Costella for the following:

There's more to come, but hopefully you understand the significance of what is being shown here.

In fact, if you take a closer look at the gif, you might be able to see the signpost remnants iteration.

[Chris Davidson]

Reenactments are fine when the aim is for truth seeking, not deception.

Moving to the left side, let's align JFK (using the extant 207 splice frame) with the signpost from the reenactment of Dec2-5, by the SS I believe.

Notice the offset between the two left-side posts and where the splice frame 207 post lands, if we were to attach it to the reenactment frame.

Look at Costella's example in the previous post for the same concept.

[Chris Davidson]

And, without skipping a beat, the reenactment photo would show us the alignment objects that were used to perfect the extant Zfilm.

If you really want to exact that left-side post position, just take a look at where the extant zframe signpost-top snugly fits into the alignment marker on the reenactment(hence the contrast added).

One other alignment object on the leftside would be the curved white line(starting where the red line ends) on the reenactment photo. Signifying where the top edge of the sign would be and the post location in the extant zfilm.

I think that's good for now.

But, moving forward later:

There are a few simple solutions to the signs orientation difference, when viewed from the filmer's location, among both frames.

One is as easy as looking in a mirror, as you watch the sign teeter-totter in the gif.

 

 

 

[Chris Davidson]

Another would be any subtle differences between when the extant Z iteration was filmed and one with a very similar LOS within 1-2 days of Nov22,1963.

And being that they are both the left-side StemmonsSign post, as one is from extant Z98, notZ104(sorry about that), I'll leave you to ponder the difference between the two.

Once you recognize the difference, then apply that knowledge to help you gain a better understanding of how many ways that difference could have been created. 

Then, enjoy a happy President's Day.

Edited February 18, 2023 by Chris Davidson
Wrong Frame Number

[George Govus]

Yep, the highlight area on each post is quite different. Yumping yiminy!

I reiterate my standing offer for anyone who has been to Dealey Plaza, who knows the lay of the land and how the Stemmons Freeway sign stood that day, to assert that, yes, they would have gotten up on that pedestal, as Zapruder apparently did, to film the parade just that way.

Edited February 18, 2023 by George Govus
ex post facto, double pun intended.

[Chris Davidson]

On 2/17/2023 at 2:15 PM, Chris Davidson said:

Another would be any subtle differences between when the extant Z iteration was filmed and one with a very similar LOS within 1-2 days of Nov22,1963.

And being that they are both the left-side StemmonsSign post, as one is from extant Z98, notZ104(sorry about that), I'll leave you to ponder the difference between the two.

Once you recognize the difference, then apply that knowledge to help you gain a better understanding of how many ways that difference could have been created. 

Then, enjoy a happy President's Day.

One way to convert the mounting holes to the opposite side of the same post?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F1HrO2W6w-4

 

[Steven Kossor]

I went to DP and stood on the pedestal myself, and videotaped cars coming down Elm Street so I know what it feels like to stand precariously up there and try to keep a moving vehicle that is also going down an incline in the center of the frame.  With nobody standing in front of the pedestal, it would seem much easier (and afford a better field of view as well) to stand a little bit in front of the pedestal and film from there, safely at ground level but still above the action being filmed. When you add the fact that Zapruder wanted/needed Sitzman to help "steady him" on the pedestal, it makes even less sense that he would mount and maintain that precarious filming position as a personal choice.  When you watch Abe demonstrating the enormous blow-out of the side of JFK's head in his filmed TV interview a few hours later (that nobody at Parkland mentioned seeing), you'll realize that his demonstration matched the appearance of JFK's head at Bethesda, not Parkland.  Not sure how to account for Mr. Zapruder's expressing such a clear image from the future - as if it came straight through his camera. It did look that way on the film that was eventually developed, so Mr. Zapruder's account was certified correct, after all, right?  Food for thought.

[Chris Davidson]

4 hours ago, Steven Kossor said:

  Not sure how to account for Mr. Zapruder's expressing such a clear image from the future - as if it came straight through his camera. It did look that way on the film that was eventually developed, so Mr. Zapruder's account was certified correct, after all, right?  Food for thought.

How apropos.

Leading us into the next gif:

[Chris Bristow]

5 hours ago, Steven Kossor said:

I went to DP and stood on the pedestal myself, and videotaped cars coming down Elm Street so I know what it feels like to stand precariously up there and try to keep a moving vehicle that is also going down an incline in the center of the frame.  With nobody standing in front of the pedestal, it would seem much easier (and afford a better field of view as well) to stand a little bit in front of the pedestal and film from there, safely at ground level but still above the action being filmed. When you add the fact that Zapruder wanted/needed Sitzman to help "steady him" on the pedestal, it makes even less sense that he would mount and maintain that precarious filming position as a personal choice.  When you watch Abe demonstrating the enormous blow-out of the side of JFK's head in his filmed TV interview a few hours later (that nobody at Parkland mentioned seeing), you'll realize that his demonstration matched the appearance of JFK's head at Bethesda, not Parkland.  Not sure how to account for Mr. Zapruder's expressing such a clear image from the future - as if it came straight through his camera. It did look that way on the film that was eventually developed, so Mr. Zapruder's account was certified correct, after all, right?  Food for thought.

I have often pondered Zapruder's precarious position on the pedestal. He seems to have switched his stance from the Willis 5 position facing toward the Stemmons sign to a position about 45 degrees to his right by the Moorman photo. If that is correct he had to switch his stance while looking through the viewfinder. He could not see were to place his feet and his balance must have been compromised because he could only see the tiny landmarks through the viewfinder.
 Did you find it necessary to pivot while you panned?. I tried to test a changing stance during the pan and found switching your weight to the left foot as you pan to the right momentarily cancels out any parallax. I found the switching of stance happened right about the time I would be panning past the lamppost. I considered it may be the reason we see no parallax from the lamppost and background in the Z film.
  I am not positive on this but standing in front of the pedestal would cause the Newman's to block the view to JFK. I measured it and it is a close call but it is likely Newman would have blocked at least part of the view.

[Chris Bristow]

On 2/10/2023 at 11:49 PM, Chris Davidson said:

Speaking of that lower sprockethole.

This next gif should help you conceptualize the sleight of hand.

What part of the StemmonsSign is in unison with the Bobbleheads?

Give your eyes a few seconds for adjusting to see its true movement.

 

 

That is very strange. The simple answers don't work. It is not a change of Z' camera position as no other objects like the wall change relative to the sign. So it is definitely not the change of camera tilt or a change of camera height. It does not seem to be due to the distortion found in the sprocket area because the ladies remain in almost the same exact place in both frames. If it was a distortion the women would change shape significantly but they don't. I thought maybe it could be an illusion because we don't have any stationary objects in their background. It is not that. I thought maybe there is some rotational distortion where the center of rotation would be outside the frame to the right side causing greater change on the right side. That was a total fail.
The woman in the blue scarf partially blocked by the sign looks as if her head is bobbling up and down while her coat does not move. I am not yet convinced this is an artifact of fakery but it is baffling as hell. If a non CT photogrametric(Maybe not a real word) answer is found it will be hugely educational. Would love to think this is proof of alteration but I have been disappointed before so I will be skeptical for now, but wow it sure is strange.