Unveiling The Limo Stop

[Chris Davidson]

44 minutes ago, Chris Bristow said:

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.

This was the 2nd time ever filming with a B/H 414. First time, I used one roll for test shooting at home.

Didn't move my feet at all, while up on the pedestal, only rotated my torso.

That was for all filming segments.

https://vimeo.com/800442739

 

[Chris Davidson]

11 hours ago, Chris Davidson said:

How apropos.

Leading us into the next gif:

 

What was the official story again?

[David Josephs]

2 hours ago, Chris Davidson said:

What was the official story again?

Which film/photo is the one with the arrows Chris?

 

[Chris Davidson]

11 minutes ago, David Josephs said:

Which film/photo is the one with the arrows Chris?

 

Dave Wiegman

[Chris Davidson]

On 2/14/2023 at 1:24 PM, Chris Davidson said:

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.

Let's match the filmer's orientation from the Barnes photo(via the StemmonsSign)with the extant Z frame.

Horizontally flip Barnes, adjust the sign angle since it was flipped and overlay it.

I believe that right side, sign post angular movement, is similar to what John Costella discovered many years ago.

Don't forget those mounting holes.

[Steven Kossor]

The top of the pedestal is about 2 1/2 feet square.  If I recall correctly, my feet were planted 90 degrees to the street and I pivoted at the waist to record the transit of a car and keep it in frame from Houston to the underpass.  I did shift the position of my feet at one point and noticed that the pedestal doesn't have a flat top, so it was a little unnerving to move my feet up there (without a secretary behind me to keep me steady).  Interesting note about the position of the Newman family.  They were near the curb and standing, so the limo would have to be far into the left lane to be filmed without catching the tops of their heads (at least).  Maybe Zapruder was just trying to avoid filming the backs of their heads and panned so far up that the limo almost drops off the bottom of the frame right around the head shot.  Sure.

Edited February 21, 2023 by Steven Kossor
Clarification

[Chris Davidson]

 

30 minutes ago, Steven Kossor said:

The top of the pedestal is about 2 1/2 feet square.  If I recall correctly, my feet were planted 90 degrees to the street and I pivoted at the waist to record the transit of a car and keep it in frame from Houston to the underpass.  I did shift the position of my feet at one point and noticed that the pedestal doesn't have a flat top, so it was a little unnerving to move my feet up there (without a secretary behind me to keep me steady).  Interesting note about the position of the Newman family.  They were near the curb and standing, so the limo would have to be far into the left lane to be filmed without catching the tops of their heads (at least).  Maybe Zapruder was just trying to avoid filming the backs of their heads and panned so far up that the limo almost drops off the bottom of the frame right around the head shot.  Sure.

Steven,

That was one idea we tested (that's my 5'9" brother down at the curb) but found he rose up a little above the top of the tires.

[Steven Kossor]

One of the things I noticed about the Zfilm is that the panning seems to have been horizontal, rather than tracking the limo down the incline of Elm Street.  Chris, thanks so much for your scholarship in studying the film so carefully.  Best wishes always!

[Chris Bristow]

2 hours ago, Steven Kossor said:

The top of the pedestal is about 2 1/2 feet square.  If I recall correctly, my feet were planted 90 degrees to the street and I pivoted at the waist to record the transit of a car and keep it in frame from Houston to the underpass.  I did shift the position of my feet at one point and noticed that the pedestal doesn't have a flat top, so it was a little unnerving to move my feet up there (without a secretary behind me to keep me steady).  Interesting note about the position of the Newman family.  They were near the curb and standing, so the limo would have to be far into the left lane to be filmed without catching the tops of their heads (at least).  Maybe Zapruder was just trying to avoid filming the backs of their heads and panned so far up that the limo almost drops off the bottom of the frame right around the head shot.  Sure.

Thanks for the info on the pedestal.

[Chris Bristow]

1 hour ago, Chris Davidson said:

 

Steven,

That was one idea we tested (that's my 5'9" brother down at the curb) but found he rose up a little above the top of the tires.

Perfect. That resolves the Newman's back of the head issue, and thanks for the video.
  The original Barnes photo used in one of your last comps is extremely distorted causing the buildings in the background to lean outward from the center of the image. It makes determining if the photo is level a big hassle. I don't know how much of it is due to the camera's downward tilt or the wide angle lens he used. 
   The vertical center of the image should not be distorted by either, so the south corner of the Records Building would barley be affected. It should still be a good measure of level and it leans about 1 degree left. This might be the reason the right Stemmons pole does not match in the Z vs Barnes Stemmons pole comp.
   I skewed the image below to correct the leaning but the center, the records building south corner, was still leaning. I concluded the photo was not level and I added one degree of rotation to it.
 

[Chris Davidson]

Chris,

Thanks for the adjustment.

The signs orientation to the person filming is what I'm most interested in.

Here's the copy I am using, resized using 145%W/149%H/2° CW, layered over your corrected version.

I don't think it's a coincidence that the bobblehead effect appears on the same side as the Costella post lean.

 

[Chris Davidson]

What else might the reenactments reveal in terms of alternative methods used to convince us of the official story?

[Chris Davidson]

The red X is approx where the camera person filming Shaneyfelt (in black upon the pedestal) is.

[Chris Davidson]

Then, referring back to the previous plat, along with the Betzner/Wiegman composite, the physical position of Shaneyfelt is much closer to the following gentleman:

So, I'll ask again, who and how many were filming?

Keeping in mind, that parallax could be created by either one person moving to different locations or two people within close proximity filming.

And, if you still believe the official story, I highly recommend not following this topic any longer.

[Chris Davidson]

4 hours ago, Chris Davidson said:

What else might the reenactments reveal in terms of alternative methods used to convince us of the official story?

 

From Above: Add some contrast to the original frame and the right signpost spreads.

Layer the reenactment frame over the contrasted original frame and the rightside signpost is the same size.

Where else can we find an occurance of the spread? Extant Z186

The signposts(that's plural) were never going to align from the reenactment to the original.

Same reason for not using the correct camera height in the reenactments.

We do know that the camera was higher in the reenactment and who was taller, Sitzman/Zapruder or ?

Look at the cut frame I created from the reenactment, aligning the sign/curb segment that extends in front of the sign.

Notice where the leftside signpost ends up.

After that, look at where the bottom edge of that cut frame ends up in relationship to the black line on the original sign, among other quite interesting original sign markings.

Down below:

Steven, I believe you were interested in horizontal movement. I like the substitute term parallax better.

You could almost believe that extant z186 lighting is reminiscent of a start up frame from a different camera/position with all that parallax movement occurring.

Betzner takes his photograph at extant z186, previously supplied in the overlay gif with Wiegman.

Coincidences!!!

Not