A Response To DiEugenio's "Dale Myers and his World of Illusion"

[James DiEugenio]

Dave:

Why the seven frame interval?  Why that number?

[Bob Ness]

4 hours ago, David G. Healy said:

Doubt that he made any models, although he may have AFTER the fact... Best to remember at that particular time only Hollyweird and NASA had proprietary 3D software (optical special effects) and computers with the *umf* to run'em. For NASA (Ames Institute, Mountain View Ca.) UNIX operating system-work stations running UNIX proprietary code with CRAY support (same type of kernel that Apple OSX sits on today).. Kinda the same situ for DP "topo" survey(s), I recall 2 surveys that were tempted in the 90's, but what would they prove, other than endless argument? Finding accurate plat's of the day 1963 proved very difficult, even for a specific researcher that educated this board for years and knew, KNEW the gent who created the latter day, official, DP plats...

Which leaves what? Yes, the Z-film... some believe a 3D simulation of 2D Z-film frame fabrication became the basis of the cartoon --frame by frame!  To the best of my knowledge no one has ever seen those Lightwave project files. I wonder why?

Yeah actually that's right. It was UNIX mostly pre-96 or 98? or so. NASA engineers made some of their software available and you could get those if you knew where to look. Google essentially grabbed "Google Earth" from NASA and there was a mapping and survey program I used to use. I thought his animation was done a little later?

I think we had a discussion about his files being proprietary or something and that's why he didn't want to share them. 

Either way, creating an animation of the situation and calling it "proof" may fool the fans but not the players.

Edited November 27, 2022 by Bob Ness

[David G. Healy]

6 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

Dave:

Why the seven frame interval?  Why that number?

7 frames ... I think that came from Pat's comment that I picked up on... Its a *key frame* point reference (to check if layers are lining up when and where you want them to be at the proper time. A reference point location for the computer to shoot to. A great software package to see frame-interpolation on display is Adobe After Effects, especially doing titles and object motion keyed overlays. I used the program for years, starting back when it was called COSA After Effects. There is no set number or frames required however shorter durations preferred. I've composed projects that ran 60 seconds only, had 20 layers with moves being made in all layers at the same time. You set the starting point (key frame) for a layer, and where you want its end point (another keyframe). Re how long the move takes? The computer determines how many frames based on the video/film projects output, ie., film 24fps total length :30sec -- NTSC video 30fps/29.98fps-DF total length. With computer horsepower, good software, great artwork and a talented editor, sky is the limit... also, rendering time at a minimum - especially with todays rigs....  All these computer/software goodies mimmic the old film optical film printing techniques -- in fact many New York, Chicago, San Francisco, Hollywood, etal printing houses were virtually ran out of business because of After Effects type software and computer technology...

I'm sure within the company your keeping at the moment they can fill in the blanks...

Wish you the best buddy, I will be checking out from this forum soon -- in your travels tell Lt. Stone (I beat him there), glad he got out of Vietnam alive and welcome back to the world its a better place because of folks like Oliver and you...  Please...

DGHealy MAAG-Vietnam/MACV 1963-64

11th Air Assault Div. 1964-65 - 1st Cavalry Div 1965 - Guess where?

Edited November 27, 2022 by David G. Healy

[Bob Ness]

16 hours ago, David G. Healy said:

7 frames ... I think that came from Pat's comment that I picked up on... Its a *key frame* point reference (to check if layers are lining up when and where you want them to be at the proper time. A reference point location for the computer to shoot to. A great software package to see frame-interpolation on display is Adobe After Effects, especially doing titles and object motion keyed overlays. I used the program for years, starting back when it was called COSA After Effects. There is no set number or frames required however shorter durations preferred. I've composed projects that ran 60 seconds only, had 20 layers with moves being made in all layers at the same time. You set the starting point (key frame) for a layer, and where you want its end point (another keyframe). Re how long the move takes? The computer determines how many frames based on the video/film projects output, ie., film 24fps total length :30sec -- NTSC video 30fps/29.98fps-DF total length. With computer horsepower, good software, great artwork and a talented editor, sky is the limit... also, rendering time at a minimum - especially with todays rigs....  All these computer/software goodies mimmic the old film optical film printing techniques -- in fact many New York, Chicago, San Francisco, Hollywood, etal printing houses were virtually ran out of business because of After Effects type software and computer technology...

I'm sure within the company your keeping at the moment they can fill in the blanks...

Wish you the best buddy, I will be checking out from this forum soon -- in your travels tell Lt. Stone (I beat him there), glad he got out of Vietnam alive and welcome back to the world its a better place because of folks like Oliver and you...  Please...

DGHealy MAAG-Vietnam/MACV 1963-64

11th Air Assault Div. 1964-65 - 1st Cavalry Div 1965 - Guess where?

We used to render at partial frame rates (for previews) to cut down on render times also. I was using it when it was COSA or there abouts. I used it extensively with Laz Long (I believe he had the rendering patent on it) and actually had some ideas implemented into it at around version 3 after Adobe took it over. Great program. Henry and Hal I believe were the standard until AE took over sometime later.

[James DiEugenio]

Thanks Dave,.

 

Will miss you if you are gone.

[Michael Griffith]

On 11/26/2022 at 10:42 AM, Steve Roe said:

It's time to grow up folks, Oswald murdered Patrolman Tippit and there's plenty of evidence to support it.

No, there's not. There are enormous, gaping holes in the case against Oswald in the Tippit shooting.

The eyewitness IDs of the shooter were all over the map, with some clearly pointing away from Oswald, but those IDs were minimized or ignored. The IDs of Oswald in the obscenely rigged police lineups are highly questionable and would have been subjected to a severe challenge at trial. The fingerprints on the patrol car's front passenger door, which at least one witness said the assailant touched, were not Oswald's. The clear weight of the evidence shows that Tippit's killer was walking toward him, west, not away from him, east, which, for a number of reasons, makes it even more unlikely that the assailant was Oswald. There is credible evidence that Oswald was in the Texas Theater several minutes before Tippit was shot. There is no credible innocent explanation for Tippit's being so far out of his assigned area and in Oswald's neighborhood, for his stopping at Oswald's rooming house and tapping his horn, for his speeding off from the Gloco gas station minutes before the shooting, and for his frantic use of the Top Ten Record Shop's phone shortly before his death when he could have used any one of the phones set aside for police use in the area. There is no believable way to even get Oswald to 10th and Patton without assuming he got a ride. The clothing and ballistics evidence is a mass of contradictions and smells to high heaven. No one has yet explained why Tippit would have stopped the assailant in the first place if the assailant was Oswald, since the man was, by all accounts, walking normally, and since the police description of the killer differed markedly from Oswald's appearance. And on and on we could go. 

For that matter, to even assume that Oswald would have had any reason to shoot Tippit, one must assume that Oswald shot JFK, but new research strongly indicates that Oswald was not even on the sixth floor of the TSBD during the shooting and that he did not fire a rifle that day. 

Edited November 28, 2022 by Michael Griffith

[Guest]

Of all familiar aspects of the case that Michael mentions, the toot-toot outside the rooming house has always been a stand-out. It just isn't something that you can argue Earlene Roberts 'imagined'. And if she didn't, then in all the post-assassination frenzy to reassign patrol cars, who from the DPD had the time to cruise down N Beckley and say 'hi' to Mrs Roberts via their car horn? Michael assigns this toot-toot to Tippit; now, while I've never seen a convincing argument it was Tippit; equally, I've never seen one to say it wasn't. Add the fact of a tunic hanging up inside the car at 10th and Patton to, perhaps, explain Mrs Robert's testimony that she saw two men in the patrol car, and there's more than a whiff of Occam's Razor about this incident. Or perhaps I just need to grow up.

[Tom Gram]

43 minutes ago, Michael Griffith said:

No, there's not. There are enormous, gaping holes in the case against Oswald in the Tippit shooting.

The eyewitness IDs of the shooter were all over the map, with some clearly pointing away from Oswald, but those IDs were minimized or ignored. The IDs of Oswald in the obscenely rigged police lineups are highly questionable and would have been subjected to a severe challenge at trial. The fingerprints on the patrol car's front passenger door, which at least one witness said the assailant touched, were not Oswald's. The clear weight of the evidence shows that Tippit's killer was walking toward him, west, not away from him, east, which, for a number of reasons, makes it even more unlikely that the assailant was Oswald. There is credible evidence that Oswald was in the Texas Theater several minutes before Tippit was shot. There is no credible innocent explanation for Tippit's being so far out of his assigned area and in Oswald's neighborhood, for his stopping at Oswald's rooming house and tapping his horn, for his speeding off from the Gloco gas station minutes before the shooting, and for his frantic use of the Top Ten Record Shop's phone shortly before his death when he could have used any one of the phones set aside for police use in the area. There is no believable way to even get Oswald to 10th and Patton without assuming he got a ride. The clothing and ballistics evidence is a mass of contradictions and smells to high heaven. No one has yet explained why Tippit would have stopped the assailant in the first place if the assailant was Oswald, since the man was, by all accounts, walking normally, and since the police description of the killer differed markedly from Oswald's appearance. And on and on we could go. 

For that matter, to even assume that Oswald would have had any reason to shoot Tippit, one must assume that Oswald shot JFK, but new research strongly indicates that Oswald was not even on the sixth floor of the TSBD during the shooting and that he did not fire a rifle that day. 

There are indeed enormous gaping holes in the case against Oswald for both the Tippit and JFK shootings. I have an open mind about all the evidence in this case, and judge researchers’ arguments on merit regardless of their opinions of Oswald’s guilt - but for Steve to state that there is zero uncertainty about Oswald’s guilt in the Tippit case and that everyone should “grow up” is just ridiculous. The evidence is obviously and indisputably ambiguous as all hell, and it is impossible to come to a truly definitive conclusion on whether or not Oswald did it. 

To add to your points above, we don’t even have a clear chain of custody of the alleged murder weapon, the episode in the Theater is the ultimate clusterf***, and Oswald’s alleged motive for killing Tippit is in direct opposition to the motive suggested by lone assassin theorists for Oswald killing JFK and subsequently denying it. 

If the evidence against Oswald was so conclusive, lone assassin theorists wouldn’t need to make condescending and intentionally provocative comments. Dale Myers is by far the worst offender. The deliberately insulting unhinged rants on his blog read to me like insecurity and desperation, which makes it very hard to take him seriously. I can’t trust someone who needs to go on a massive ego trip just to make a point - and Myers would be a lot more credible if he could handle legitimate criticism without throwing a tantrum, in my opinion. 

[Michael Griffith]

15 minutes ago, Tom Gram said:

There are indeed enormous gaping holes in the case against Oswald for both the Tippit and JFK shootings. I have an open mind about all the evidence in this case, and judge researchers’ arguments on merit regardless of their opinions of Oswald’s guilt - but for Steve to state that there is zero uncertainty about Oswald’s guilt in the Tippit case and that everyone should “grow up” is just ridiculous. The evidence is obviously and indisputably ambiguous as all hell, and it is impossible to come to a truly definitive conclusion on whether or not Oswald did it. 

To add to your points above, we don’t even have a clear chain of custody of the alleged murder weapon, the episode in the Theater is the ultimate clusterf***, and Oswald’s alleged motive for killing Tippit is in direct opposition to the motive suggested by lone assassin theorists for Oswald killing JFK and subsequently denying it. 

If the evidence against Oswald was so conclusive, lone assassin theorists wouldn’t need to make condescending and intentionally provocative comments. Dale Myers is by far the worst offender. The deliberately insulting unhinged rants on his blog read to me like insecurity and desperation, which makes it very hard to take him seriously. I can’t trust someone who needs to go on a massive ego trip just to make a point - and Myers would be a lot more credible if he could handle legitimate criticism without throwing a tantrum, in my opinion. 

Good points all. When I first began to study the JFK case and for a few years thereafter, I believed that Oswald shot Tippit in self-defense, that Tippit was sent to Oak Cliff to find and kill Oswald but that Oswald beat him to the draw. However, in later years, as I read more about the shooting, I changed my mind and concluded that Oswald had nothing to do with Tippit's death. 

I've presented most of my case for Oswald's innocence in the Tippit shooting in my review of Myers' book With Malice.

 

Edited November 28, 2022 by Michael Griffith

[Pat Speer]

1 minute ago, Tom Gram said:

There are indeed enormous gaping holes in the case against Oswald for both the Tippit and JFK shootings. I have an open mind about all the evidence in this case, and judge researchers’ arguments on merit regardless of their opinions of Oswald’s guilt - but for Steve to state that there is zero uncertainty about Oswald’s guilt in the Tippit case and that everyone should “grow up” is just ridiculous. The evidence is obviously and indisputably ambiguous as all hell, and it is impossible to come to a truly definitive conclusion on whether or not Oswald did it. 

To add to your points above, we don’t even have a clear chain of custody of the alleged murder weapon, the episode in the Theater is the ultimate clusterf***, and Oswald’s alleged motive for killing Tippit is in direct opposition to the motive suggested by lone assassin theorists for Oswald killing JFK and subsequently denying it. 

If the evidence against Oswald was so conclusive, lone assassin theorists wouldn’t need to make condescending and intentionally provocative comments. Dale Myers is by far the worst offender. The deliberately insulting unhinged rants on his blog read to me like insecurity and desperation, which makes it very hard to take him seriously. I can’t trust someone who needs to go on a massive ego trip just to make a point - and Myers would be a lot more credible if he could handle legitimate criticism without throwing a tantrum, in my opinion. 

I agree, Tom, that there are two sides to the story, and that one should not be too confident in either of them. The thought occurs that some film-maker could (and should) redo 12 Angry Men, and make it about the Tippit case. Change the names. Don't tell the audience ahead of time. Just do it. Start off with a discussion of the prosecution evidence, with the hard-liners anxious to vote and go home. But then have one juror bring up problem after problem. And then end the film with a vote, which the viewer does not get to witness, or, perhaps even better, with the defendant getting murdered before the verdict is announced. In any event, then, and only then, over the closing credits, reveal that the facts and arguments presented in the film mirror those of the case against Oswald for killing Tippit. Or maybe not have that, and let the audience figure it out via word of mouth after the fact. 

In any event, an honest presentation of the case would probably result in a mixed response from the audience leaving the theater, with some claiming the defendant was obviously guilty, and others too troubled by the problems with the evidence to come to that conclusion. 

[Bill Brown]

It should be noted that twelve days have passed and Mr. DiEugenio has not responded to even one point raised by Myers in the blog post.

[David G. Healy]

16 minutes ago, Bill Brown said:

It should be noted that twelve days have passed and Mr. DiEugenio has not responded to even one point raised by Myers in the blog post.

lmao... why respond to anything/anyone trying to push the validity of a Saturday Morning Cartoon? -Or,- trying to make hay out of a tragic, albeit cop's 11/22/63 murder on the streets of Dallas...?

And "It should be noted," 21,557 day's have passed since the Kennedy Assassination and right-wing whack jobs STILL can't prove LHO did it all by his lonesome...  Get-a-grip!

Edited November 28, 2022 by David G. Healy

[David G. Healy]

4 hours ago, Pat Speer said:

I agree, Tom, that there are two sides to the story, and that one should not be too confident in either of them. The thought occurs that some film-maker could (and should) redo 12 Angry Men, and make it about the Tippit case. Change the names. Don't tell the audience ahead of time. Just do it. Start off with a discussion of the prosecution evidence, with the hard-liners anxious to vote and go home. But then have one juror bring up problem after problem. And then end the film with a vote, which the viewer does not get to witness, or, perhaps even better, with the defendant getting murdered before the verdict is announced. In any event, then, and only then, over the closing credits, reveal that the facts and arguments presented in the film mirror those of the case against Oswald for killing Tippit. Or maybe not have that, and let the audience figure it out via word of mouth after the fact. 

In any event, an honest presentation of the case would probably result in a mixed response from the audience leaving the theater, with some claiming the defendant was obviously guilty, and others too troubled by the problems with the evidence to come to that conclusion. 

"I agree, Tom, that there are two sides to the story, and that one should not be too confident in either of them. The thought occurs that some film-maker could (and should) redo 12 Angry Men, and make it about the Tippit case..."

That's your watermark, Pat perfect project for HULA... followed by a 10 week, 30:00 minute recap each week of various show scenes discussed by a panel of researchers, at the end of the 10 week review another rendition of the documentary is screened of "how post assassination JFK researchers see the evidence fits the case (with some input from the viewing public). So you got two docu's before and after.

You a writer, Jim D. a writer/historian sounds like a good start -- toss in one of America's best documentarian/writer/producer/director and team sitting on the sidelines with a ton of advice (paid or unpaid)....  it's all in the script, baby....  only today could this happen...

 

[Michael Griffith]

21 hours ago, Mike Kiely said:

Of all familiar aspects of the case that Michael mentions, the toot-toot outside the rooming house has always been a stand-out. It just isn't something that you can argue Earlene Roberts 'imagined'. And if she didn't, then in all the post-assassination frenzy to reassign patrol cars, who from the DPD had the time to cruise down N Beckley and say 'hi' to Mrs Roberts via their car horn? Michael assigns this toot-toot to Tippit; now, while I've never seen a convincing argument it was Tippit; equally, I've never seen one to say it wasn't. Add the fact of a tunic hanging up inside the car at 10th and Patton to, perhaps, explain Mrs Robert's testimony that she saw two men in the patrol car, and there's more than a whiff of Occam's Razor about this incident. Or perhaps I just need to grow up.

The police car that Mrs. Roberts saw in front of the rooming house after it beeped its horn may not have been Tippit's car. It is unclear exactly when Tippit was at the Gloco gas station. If he was there until just after Oswald left the rooming house, then he could not have been the one who stopped at the house a few minutes earlier. If that's the case, it was another patrol car, one that was operating off-the-record. However, Mrs. Roberts thought the car's number may have started with a 1.

[David Josephs]

On 11/16/2022 at 5:50 PM, Bill Brown said:

A common sense, fact-filled response to DiEugenio's nonsense:

 

http://jfkfiles.blogspot.com/2022/11/the-single-bullet-fact.html

FACT: The path of the supposed single transiting bullet - from back to front - RISES 11 degrees.

Bill - how does a bullet rising by 11 degrees strike another man at a 25 degree downward angle? Unless you can show us that JFK was bending over past 45 degrees while sitting in the limo...  z225 seems to contradict that. No?

 

And when test after test is performed we get an absurd illustration of the back-shot exiting thru JFK"S CHEST ON A DOWNWARD TRAJECTORY.

"Single" bullet?  yet below are just 2 mentions of OTHER bullets/fragments that are not in inventory and have disappeared to history...  How many Single Bullets are there in that Silly Bullet Theory?