Charles Blackmon Posted April 2, 2023 Author Share Posted April 2, 2023 (edited) On 4/2/2023 at 2:45 PM, Joe Bauer said: Here is an BYP observation I think we can all agree on. Look closely at Oswald's hands in the original thread photo. The middle finger of the left hand ( digitus medius ) is very clearly longer than the index finger and the ring finger next to it. Very clearly so. Now look at the fingers of Oswald's right hand. Look at the length of the middle finger relative to the other two fingers on it's sides. Tell me you do not see the difference. It's quite stark. Edited April 4, 2023 by Charles Blackmon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandy Larsen Posted April 2, 2023 Share Posted April 2, 2023 I believe that Lee Harvey Oswald is one of the more credible sources of information regarding himself. Possibly the most credible. He said that the BYPs were created by attaching his head to someone else's photo. I believe that is true. There are a number of things that are wrong with the photos that begs the question put forth by Charles Blackmon, "Who paid off the so-called photo experts interviewed by the HSCA to say the BYP are all authentic?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonathan Cohen Posted April 2, 2023 Share Posted April 2, 2023 8 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said: I believe that Lee Harvey Oswald is one of the more credible sources of information regarding himself. Possibly the most credible. OK, so that must mean you believe the photos are genuine, considering Oswald autographed a print of one of them for George DeMohrenschildt. That must also mean you believe he attempted to assassinate General Walker, since he told Marina that he'd done so. I'm sure you're aware that Marina has insisted from day one that she took the backyard photos herself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charles Blackmon Posted April 2, 2023 Author Share Posted April 2, 2023 (edited) 56 minutes ago, Jonathan Cohen said: I'm sure you're aware that Marina has insisted from day one that she took the backyard photos herself. If you want to bet your life on the original testimony of Marina "please, don't send me back to Russia" Oswald then go for it! Edited April 3, 2023 by Charles Blackmon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandy Larsen Posted April 3, 2023 Share Posted April 3, 2023 3 hours ago, Jonathan Cohen said: 4 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said: I believe that Lee Harvey Oswald is one of the more credible sources of information regarding himself. Possibly the most credible. That must .... mean you believe he attempted to assassinate General Walker, since he told Marina that he'd done so. Marina's word versus Lee's. Lee is infinitely more credible than Marina! IMO 3 hours ago, Jonathan Cohen said: I'm sure you're aware that Marina has insisted from day one that she took the backyard photos herself. Oh sure.... the camera she didn't even know where the viewfinder was. Another Marina lie. (Can't blame her though, given what she was put through.) 3 hours ago, Jonathan Cohen said: OK, so that must mean you believe the photos are genuine, considering Oswald autographed a print of one of them for George DeMohrenschildt. What.... you mean that faked autograph? LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Bulman Posted April 3, 2023 Share Posted April 3, 2023 Somewhere up above, Jack White is flapping his wings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Bulman Posted April 3, 2023 Share Posted April 3, 2023 (edited) 8 hours ago, Charles Blackmon said: The thing is, why do we not notice weird stuff like this in the many other non-BYP pictures we have seen of Oswald? Inquiring minds and all... This has been done in a sense. I believe David Josephs has previously posted in other threads a group of photos that show some fairly apparent discrepancies in the Oswald's shown. Yes, this relates to Harvey and Lee. But if they're all of the same guy, but then they are obviously not, that presents a conundrum. Edited April 3, 2023 by Ron Bulman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Bulman Posted April 3, 2023 Share Posted April 3, 2023 If anyone wants to take a Deep dive on the BYP's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Brown Posted April 3, 2023 Share Posted April 3, 2023 The HSCA Photographic Panel studied CE-133A, CE-133B, the negative of CE-133B and Oswald's camera (among many other items related to the photos, such as first generation prints of CE-133C). The panel first performed a visual inspection of the photos, by use magnifiers and microscopes. During this inspection, the panel made enlargements of the photos using various exposures and ranges of contrast. These enlargements produced prints which ranged from very light to very dark. In the darkest parts of the photos, the detail could be seen best in the lighter prints. In the lightest parts of the photos, the detail could be seen best in the darker prints. The panel felt this was the best opportunity of detecting any evidence of falsification anywhere in the pictures. The panel also used digital image processing to determine if there were any unnatural edge lines or differences in grain structure or contrast. Both photos (CE-133a and CE-133B) were also studied by the panel using stereoscopic techniques, which allowed the panel to see the photos in 3-D. This method will detect forgeries in prints because it produces a photographic copy of a photograph. When viewed in stereo, these copies will not project a three-dimensional image unless made from different viewpoints along the same axis. Retouching of the original photo can be detected when two photos depicting the same scene are viewed in stereo, the retouched print will not be on the same plane in which it should be lying; the items seen in the photo will be either in front of the plane or behind the plane. Because of this, when viewed stereoscopically, fakery can easily be detected. One final method the panel used to examine the photos was photogrammetrically. Using all of these methods, the HSCA Photographic Panel detected no signs of forgery. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Von Pein Posted April 3, 2023 Share Posted April 3, 2023 (edited) FYI / BTW / FWIW.... Take note of the "Oswald lean" in the photo of LHO on the left below. It's remarkably similar to the "leaning" posture that many conspiracy theorists think was physically impossible for Lee Harvey Oswald to achieve in the backyard photos. I wonder if there are now CTers who think the picture on the left is a fake too? .... DVP's JFK Archives / The Backyard Photos (Part 1) Edited April 3, 2023 by David Von Pein Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Von Pein Posted April 3, 2023 Share Posted April 3, 2023 (edited) 17 hours ago, Charles Blackmon said: 60th anniversity of the backyard photos I think you'll want to change Anniversity to Anniversary, Charles. (I knew a guy who once attended Harvard Anniversity.) 😛 Edited April 3, 2023 by David Von Pein Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sean Coleman Posted April 3, 2023 Share Posted April 3, 2023 (edited) On 4/3/2023 at 6:27 AM, David Von Pein said: FYI / BTW / FWIW.... Take note of the "Oswald lean" in the photo of LHO on the left below. It's remarkably similar to the "leaning" posture that many conspiracy theorists think was physically impossible for Lee Harvey Oswald to achieve in the backyard photos. I wonder if there are now CTers who think the picture on the left is a fake too? .... DVP's JFK Archives / The Backyard Photos (Part 1) The uncropped version with a good true vertical reference in the stair post. Amazing. Edited June 11, 2023 by Sean Coleman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Bristow Posted April 3, 2023 Share Posted April 3, 2023 5 hours ago, David Von Pein said: FYI / BTW / FWIW.... Take note of the "Oswald lean" in the photo of LHO on the left below. It's remarkably similar to the "leaning" posture that many conspiracy theorists think was physically impossible for Lee Harvey Oswald to achieve in the backyard photos. I wonder if there are now CTers who think the picture on the left is a fake too? .... DVP's JFK Archives / The Backyard Photos (Part 1) David, the image on the left is very misleading and really can't be compared without compensating for the off angle of the camera. in 133a he is facing almost directly to the camera with his torso. His spine sits pretty much directly behind his belly button and gives a true measure of his Center. In the other photo his spine sits far to the right and the belly button sits to the left creating the illusion that he's leaning farther to the left, when it's really created by the depth of the Torso from the spine to the belly button. He also seems to have his hips forward which from the off angle increases the illusion of him leaning left. If he had his hips forward in 133a it would make no difference because he's facing towards the camera. The camera seems to be almost 40° off to the side and it is completely distorting his actual position. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Bristow Posted April 3, 2023 Share Posted April 3, 2023 Stereoscopic analysis is good for testing the background but I don't think it works when testing Oswald. Oswald changes his position completely with each photo and that should make a stereoscopic analysis of him impossible. When your eyes look at a 4x4 stairway post each eye sees it from a slightly different position. if you take two photographs of that post from slightly different positions you simulate what your two eyes take in. Then if you use a stereoscopic viewer to see one photo in your left eye and the other in your right eye, your brain will fuse the two images just like it does when you look at the real post and that results in a 3d effect. For that effect to happen you have to be looking at the same stationary object from two slightly different positions. as soon as Oswald shifts his stance that becomes impossible. A stereoscopic test could show if they used the same background for two different photos because there would be no 3d effect but it really doesn't tell us much about Oswald. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charles Blackmon Posted April 3, 2023 Author Share Posted April 3, 2023 5 hours ago, David Von Pein said: I think you'll want to change Anniversity to Anniversary, Charles. (I knew a guy who once attended Harvard Anniversity.) 😛 Thats cool. I might leave it for kicks and giggles though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now