Simple proof that the Zapruder film has been altered.

[Sandy Larsen]

1 hour ago, Paul Cummings said:

Need an expert to help you out Sandy. Maybe Jim D can get Oliver Stone to help. lol

LOL

Well, I don't think Jonathan would trust Oliver Stone's expertise on this (or any other) topic given that he's an LNer. Maybe DVP can get Gerald Posner to help out!

Gerald Posner... the Case Closinator!®  (You need to say that with an Austrian accent.)

 

[W. Tracy Parnell]

Here is the thing about Sandy. He's a forensic dentist when you need one. He's a physicist when you need one. Now I see he's an expert on the Zapruder film and has found things that Zavada couldn't. Amazing!

Sorry Sandy, I couldn't resist.

[Jonathan Cohen]

57 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

Well, I don't think Jonathan would trust Oliver Stone's expertise on this (or any other) topic given that he's an LNer.

And once again, Sandy proves that his reading comprehension skills leave a lot to be desired. I'm not sure how many times I've said it on this forum, but I guess for Sandy's benefit I will have to say it again: I am not a "LNer." What I am is someone who simply doesn't buy the absolutely absurd conspiracy theories peddled here by Sandy, John Butler and others.

[Sandy Larsen]

17 minutes ago, Jonathan Cohen said:

And once again, Sandy proves that his reading comprehension skills leave a lot to be desired. I'm not sure how many times I've said it on this forum, but I guess for Sandy's benefit I will have to say it again: I am not a "LNer."

 

Sorry, somebody told me you're an LNer.

 

17 minutes ago, Jonathan Cohen said:

What I am is someone who simply doesn't buy the absolutely absurd conspiracy theories peddled here by Sandy, John Butler and others.

 

If you're not an LNer, then why do you object to my observations about the selective double exposures we seen in the copy of the  Z film in that Secret Service film? I'm merely stating obvious facts. Only an LNer would disagree with facts that tend to contradict the WC findings.

 

Edited July 7, 2022 by Sandy Larsen

[Sandy Larsen]

[duplicate]

 

Edited July 7, 2022 by Sandy Larsen

[Sandy Larsen]

57 minutes ago, W. Tracy Parnell said:

Here is the thing about Sandy. He's a forensic dentist when you need one. He's a physicist when you need one. Now I see he's an expert on the Zapruder film and has found things that Zavada couldn't. Amazing!

Sorry Sandy, I couldn't resist.

 

That's okay Tracy.

Just to be clear:

• I'm not a dental expert. I just know how to read charts. And I can understand dental journals.
• I'm not a physicist. But I took many physics classes to get my BS and MS degrees in electrical engineering.
• I'm not a Zapruder film expert. But I actually am an expert on signals (I specialized in digital signal processing (DSP) for my masters) and photos are essentially two-dimensional signals.

I am also very good at self teaching. I taught myself electronics and repaired my first television when in 6th grade, and was working at a TV repair shop beginning in 8th grade. That was back in the days when you actually had to signal-trace with an oscilloscope and narrow the problem down to a specific transistor, resister, or capacitor. (BTW my boss paid me half what he charged, and went fishing whenever I was in. That was half of $22 per hour, which in today's dollars would be $94 per hour in my wallet!)

 

Edited July 7, 2022 by Sandy Larsen

[W. Tracy Parnell]

3 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

I am also very good at self learning.

Great trait to have. I taught myself many things, so we have that in common. 

[Jonathan Cohen]

19 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

If you're not an LNer, then why do you object to my observations about the selective double exposures we seen in the copy of the  Z film in that Secret Service film? I'm merely stating obvious facts. Only an LNer would disagree with facts that tend to contradict the WC findings.

What you deem to be "obvious facts" are merely your own personal interpretations of something that could have multiple, non-conspiratorial explanations. And this, of course, is the crux of the problem.

[Sandy Larsen]

3 minutes ago, W. Tracy Parnell said:

8 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

I am also very good at self learning.

Great trait to have. I taught myself many things, so we have that in common.

 

Cool. I'm all ears if you'd like to share. I'm sure you've taught yourself a lot about building a website. And maybe how to be a good writer. It shows in your work.

 

[W. Tracy Parnell]

3 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

 

Cool. I'm all ears if you'd like to share. I'm sure you've taught yourself a lot about building a website. And maybe how to be a good writer. It shows in your work.

 

I prefer not to share too much information on the Internet. But yes, I have learned a little HTML and I learned to write (what little I know) by necessity. 

[Sandy Larsen]

1 minute ago, Jonathan Cohen said:

What you deem to be "obvious facts" are merely your own personal interpretations of something that could have multiple, non-conspiratorial explanations. And this, of course, is the crux of the problem.

 

You don't find it obvious that those double images are due to double exposing the film? What else could possibly do that doubling?

And given that, you don't find it obvious that a double exposure would cause everything to be doubled, including the limo?

Where are your critical thinking skills, man? Are they shut out by your ideology?

Anyway, ask any highly intelligent person about this and I'm sure they will agree with what I said.

If anybody can tell me any other way those double images could have occurred, I'd love to hear it!

 

[Sandy Larsen]

2 minutes ago, W. Tracy Parnell said:

I prefer not to share too much information on the Internet. But yes, I have learned a little HTML and I learned to write (what little I know) by necessity. 

 

Necessity can  be a great motivator! It has been for me. Though curiosity has been my strongest motivator.

 

[Mark Tyler]

8 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

Here is the same frame from the Secret Service film:

 

Note it's a double exposure. Normally I would blame this on mechanical failure of one of the photographic devices. However, look closely and you will see that there is no double exposure of the limo. Hmm... odd.

Hi Sandy

I think this is a function of an 18 FPS input film being adjusted for a different output rate (e.g. 24/30 FPS for film/NTSC output).  Have a look at this article for an explanation of the "pulldown" and the image blending:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telecine#2:2_pulldown

I think @Chris Davidson wrote some things about this a while ago too.

The limo doesn't have the same problem because Zapruder is panning so the error isn't so obvious in that portion of the image.

[Sandy Larsen]

1 hour ago, Mark Tyler said:

Hi Sandy

I think this is a function of an 18 FPS input film being adjusted for a different output rate (e.g. 24/30 FPS for film/NTSC output).  Have a look at this article for an explanation of the "pulldown" and the image blending:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telecine#2:2_pulldown

I think @Chris Davidson wrote some things about this a while ago too.

The limo doesn't have the same problem because Zapruder is panning so the error isn't so obvious in that portion of the image.

 

Mark,

Thanks for your reasoned response.

Your idea seems to have some merit. I recall that the odd and even lines in the video standard in the U.S. (NTSC) are split into two frames (interlacing), and they are displayed alternately. If there is a time delay in the scanning of one frame relative to the other, the end result would be that the images in the two frames would no longer line up horizontally and you would see two of every object on the display. Of course, each of these would be half the vertical resolution as the normal de-interlaced image.

Is that what you're getting at?

 

Edited July 7, 2022 by Sandy Larsen

[Chris Bristow]

Here is an overlay of frames 274 and 275. The limo does stay in focus because Z was panning with the limo.

 

Edited January 26, 2023 by Chris Bristow