The Zfilm, The copies and The Geraldo

[Sandy Larsen]

18 hours ago, Jeremy Bojczuk said:

Whatever his reasons, Costella's manipulation has left some of the colours distorted.

 

And you claim that it is this distortion that changed the color of the woman's clothing from beige to a dark-bluish color.

If so, that should be easy to prove. Just produce a non-Costella version of the frame (and its source link for verification). If the woman's clothing in that frame is beige, then your theory is correct.

But as of now the mystery stands. You have proven nothing.

 

[Greg Doudna]

On 4/1/2022 at 10:31 AM, Joe Bauer said:

Never got into this area very much but just now I noticed a few things in the pics Sean Coleman posted that seems quite noticeable to me.

Just my 2 cents worth.

The top pic shows an older aged lady in a bulky tan colored coat running up the grassy knoll along with other rushing people.

Some say this is the same lady shown in the lower pic with a tan coat and head covering of some sort ( scarf?)  This lower photo scarf wearing woman is first shown standing about 10 feet to the right of Jean Hill on the grass on the other side of Elm and is shown taking a picture of the Presidential limo a micro-second before JFK's head explodes.

Number 1:

The older grassy knoll running woman shown in the upper photo is not the same woman shown standing behind Brehm and then seconds later actually in front of a sitting Jean Hill and Mary Moorman. 

So easy to compare each woman's coats and see how different they are.

The older grassy knoll running woman's coat has much more bulky upper sleeves than the woman shown standing near Hill, Moorman and Brehm. Very noticeably different. Also, the upper torso part of the Hill, Moorman, Brehm woman's coat is clearly tailored much tighter around her versus the Knoll woman's coat. Also, the older grassy knoll running women's hair is clearly dark brown versus blond and she has no head adorned scarf as the lower photo woman does.

...<snip>...

I never gave much thought to Beverly Oliver's life long claim that the woman in the tan coat and scarf taking a picture with Hill and Brehm just as JFK's head explodes was her, but I now have a much more open mind to this being the case.

Oliver was a fairly big boned women. The tan coat picture taking woman's exposed lower legs depict a woman similarly built imo. And I don't think Oliver was short. The tan coat woman looks to be 5 ft.9 in. at least. And the posture of the tan coat picture taking lady seems very youthfully healthy and upright straight.

Maybe Beverly Oliver was telling the truth about her being right there when JFK was shot. 

Just thought I'd throw in my two cents here as uninformed as they are. The thread is compelling.

I have not followed this topic but found this comment of Joe Bauer of interest, in challenging the identity of the older aged running lady running up the Grassy Knoll and the shorter tan coat woman on the south side of Elm. What do others think? To me, that older aged running lady has always been the main reason I saw for excluding the Beverly Oliver identity claim. But if that is removed, as Joe B. is suggesting per argument, then Beverly Oliver may not quite so obviously be falsified on the basis of the rest of the photos, as Joe also suggests. That does not mean it would be Beverly Oliver, but it could reopen the question. But never mind Beverly Oliver which is irrelevant to the strict point at issue: are those two women certainly the same woman, or not? Has this question been asked and answered long ago?

[Pat Speer]

47 minutes ago, Greg Doudna said:

I have not followed this topic but found this comment of Joe Bauer of interest, in challenging the identity of the older aged running lady running up the Grassy Knoll and the shorter tan coat woman on the south side of Elm. What do others think? To me, that older aged running lady has always been the main reason I saw for excluding the Beverly Oliver identity claim. But if that is removed, as Joe B. is suggesting per argument, then Beverly Oliver may not quite so obviously be falsified on the basis of the rest of the photos, as Joe also suggests. That does not mean it would be Beverly Oliver, but it could reopen the question. But never mind Beverly Oliver which is irrelevant to the strict point at issue: are those two women certainly the same woman, or not? Has this question been asked and answered long ago?

No, that woman has not been positively ID'ed as the babushka lady. Someone colorized the photo years ago and raised the question if it was or was not the babushka lady, and many jumped in line and said it was proof positive Oliver was a fabricator. When the truth is we don't even know the color of that woman's coat. It was a rainy morning. There were dozens of women in the plaza with beige, tan, or yellow coats.  There simply isn't enough info to say where the woman charging up the stairs came from. 

[Chris Davidson]

3 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

Just produce a non-Costella version of the frame (and its source link for verification). If the woman's clothing in that frame is beige, then your theory is correct.

 

 

Don't hold your breath on that one.

But, if someone is bold enough to provide the requested Zframes, they can use a few Bell frames for color syncing.

 

[Jeremy Bojczuk]

Sandy Larsen writes:

Quote

Just produce a non-Costella version of the frame (and its source link for verification). If the woman's clothing in that frame is beige, then your theory is correct.

Ray Mitcham posted a non-Costella version of the frame, on page 17. It didn't have the purple-blue cast that was John Butler's reason for claiming that this was not the same woman we see in numerous other films and photos.

The only 'theory' here is the latest absurdity from John Butler: that the blue (or purple) colour in his version of the frame shows that she is not the same woman we see in all those other images. It's up to him to prove that claim, not for anyone else to disprove it. But John doesn't go in for that sort of thing. We are still waiting for him to prove that the white car was back to front in the Zapruder film and "badly distorted" in the Altgens 6 photo, and that the Moorman photo had its background replaced during the two and a half hours before it was broadcast on TV.

The evidence against John's latest far-fetched claim is overwhelming:

• The blue (or purple) cast appears to exist only in the Costella version. Other versions of the Zapruder film exist which do not show it. The blue (or purple) cast is an artefact of Costella's editing process.
• The woman in that frame is the same size and shape as the woman in the light brown coat whom we see in the Muchmore film, the Bronson film, and the Bond photos.
• The woman in that frame is standing in the same place, just behind Charles and Joe Brehm, with the same posture, as the woman in the light brown coat whom we see at exactly the same time in the Moorman and Bronson films.

Obviously she is the same woman. If Sandy has a plausible, non-Butlerian alternative theory, a simpler way of explaining that body of evidence, he should feel free to put it forward.

[Sandy Larsen]

9 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

You claim that it is [a Costella] distortion that changed the color of the woman's clothing from beige to a dark-bluish color.

If so, that should be easy to prove. Just produce a non-Costella version of the frame. If the woman's clothing in that frame is beige, then your theory is correct.

But as of now the mystery stands. You have proven nothing.

 

4 hours ago, Jeremy Bojczuk said:

Ray Mitcham posted a non-Costella version of the frame, on page 17.

 

No he didn't. In fact, Ray posted the very same frame that John Butler used to show that the woman's clothing is dark blue! Only difference is that he turned down the color level setting. Doing this makes dark colors look more black (or dark gray) and light colors look more white (or light gray).

Tan would look light gray and dark blue would look dark gray. And which do we see:

 

 

We see dark gray where the sun hits, and black where it doesn't. Which is what we would expect for dark blue clothing.

So Jeremy, let us know when you really do find a non-Costella frame where the woman is wearing tan clothing. So you can prove that your theory explaining this mystery is correct.

 

4 hours ago, Jeremy Bojczuk said:

It didn't have the purple-blue cast that was John Butler's reason for claiming that this was not the same woman we see in numerous other films and photos.

 

For the record, "purple-blue cast" is Jeremy's description of the color. John Butler simply calls it blue. I call it dark blue. But really, it is so dark that it can be called black IMO.

 

[John Butler]

44 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

No he didn't. In fact, Ray posted the very same frame that John Butler used to show that the woman's clothing is dark blue! Only difference is that he turned down the color level setting. Doing this makes dark colors look more black (or dark gray) and light colors look more white (or light gray).

Sandy,

This is one of the reasons, and there are many, that I have tried to drop out of this thread.  Jeremy's outrageous claims and insults have become boring.  There is no answer you can give that will satisfy his need to need to deny that the Zapruder film and others have been altered.

OBTW, I asked Ray what was a "chaser".  To me a chaser is a shot of whiskey after a beer, but thought it might be some Brit slang.  It's a shame he didn't answer.

Another thing I might add is the BB Lady had a fairly large black box camera and the Lady in Blue looks like she has a smaller camera of a different design.

Edited April 4, 2022 by John Butler

[David G. Healy]

5 hours ago, John Butler said:

Sandy,

This is one of the reasons, and there are many, that I have tried to drop out of this thread.  Jeremy's outrageous claims and insults have become boring.  There is no answer you can give that will satisfy his need to need to deny that the Zapruder film and others have been altered.

OBTW, I asked Ray what was a "chaser".  To me a chaser is a shot of whiskey after a beer, but thought it might be some Brit slang.  It's a shame he didn't answer.

Another thing I might add is the BB Lady had a fairly large black box camera and the Lady in Blue looks like she has a smaller camera of a different design.

a chaser is the beer AFTER the shot of whisky... 😇

[Richard Price]

11 minutes ago, David G. Healy said:

a chaser is the beer AFTER the shot of whisky... 😇

Thank you for that, David.  I'm a non drinker and I thought that was the correct order, but there for a moment I thought I was a victim of another conspiracy - the Mandela effect.

[John Butler]

3 hours ago, David G. Healy said:

a chaser is the beer AFTER the shot of whisky... 😇

Thanks David for correcting that.  If you were an alcoholic like myself when you were younger the order was not important.  Shot of whiskey before, after, during drinking a beer was quite acceptable.  It's like that old drinking song.  If I were a duck and the ocean was whiskey I would fly to the bottom and never come up.  But, I did.

[John Butler]

In another thread I used Z 138 to illustrate something.  While doing that I noticed that the Johnson security vehicle was correctly portrayed with its top going in the right direction.

So, I went and looked at other Z frames and saw that the top of the vehicle is portrayed correctly from Z 138 to about Z frame 155.  In later frames particularly Z 157-160 the top is reversed. 

That is one strange copying error.  

[Greg Doudna]

On 4/3/2022 at 10:56 PM, Pat Speer said:

No, that woman has not been positively ID'ed as the babushka lady. Someone colorized the photo years ago and raised the question if it was or was not the babushka lady, and many jumped in line and said it was proof positive Oliver was a fabricator. When the truth is we don't even know the color of that woman's coat. It was a rainy morning. There were dozens of women in the plaza with beige, tan, or yellow coats.  There simply isn't enough info to say where the woman charging up the stairs came from. 

Thanks Pat. I think that older lady can be excluded as being babushka lady, not simply from the bulkiness of the coat that Joe B. mentioned, but the removal of the head covering. That the head covering was not removed seems confirmed by a photo of babushka lady, with head covering on, heading east on Elm after crossing the street to the Grassy Knoll area. Also, babushka lady had a camera strap over her shoulder, and the older lady does not. After reviewing Beverly Oliver's book and this 2013 video of her speaking, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IOtZetem1qI, I think babushka lady was Beverly Oliver. Another photo that should be excluded as babushka lady is the one with the smiling face and sunglasses on the other side of JFK and Jackie in the limousine. That woman was on Houston, is not taking film footage, and the distance to run and set up to take film footage where babushka lady is before the presidential limousine got there does not make sense logistically. Most of all, in Beverly Oliver's book she gives photos of babushka lady (herself) and does not include either the older lady or the smiling face lady as pictures of herself. Also, in her book and story she tells her path of walking and it was west on Commerce, crossing Houston, seeing the spot on the south side of Elm where there were not many people and she could get good film coverage, and going there, the only place she was situated, for the purpose of taking the film footage (then crossing Elm to the Grassy Knoll, then east on Elm and east back to her parked car on Commerce). In the utube, she holds up a pair of shoes that she says were the shoes she was wearing visible in one of the babushka lady photos, and they do look identical. She fits in size, shape, she publishes photos of herself with the same dark-haired wig she says she wore, there is no other babushka lady ... I think its her, not much doubt to me about it now.

 

[Ray Mitcham]

16 hours ago, John Butler said:

OBTW, I asked Ray what was a "chaser".  To me a chaser is a shot of whiskey after a beer, but thought it might be some Brit slang.  It's a shame he didn't answer.

Sorry, John must have missed your post. A chaser is someone who chases after another poster who won't admit he(or she) is wrong. For example, remember the case of the post shadows?(I'm still waiting for an apology by the way.) You seemed to think I was picking on you, particularly, but I can't let incorrect posts go by without saying something.

[Chris Davidson]

On 4/4/2022 at 12:46 AM, Chris Davidson said:

Don't hold your breath on that one.

But, if someone is bold enough to provide the requested Zframes, they can use a few Bell frames for color syncing.

 

[Ray Mitcham]

Re the Johnson Press car in frame 157, there is nothing wrong with the direction, it is travelling, i.e. North on Houston. Perhaps John can point out why the "triangular" shape of the rear roof support back has disappeared.

Same with 158/160.

 

All we can see is the backward slope of the windscreen. 

 

Edited April 5, 2022 by Ray Mitcham