Billy Lovelady is NOT leaning over (much) in Altgens 6.

[Chris Davidson]

Just as the person to his left is.

If we align the left shoulders to approx the same height, what would happen if you sever that left folded arm(from the person at his left shading their eyes) and extend Bells arm to that severed point. Would it give the appearance of one continuous left arm connected to a shoulder?

 

[Sandy Larsen]

1 hour ago, Chris Davidson said:

Just as the person to his left is.

If we align the left shoulders to approx the same height, what would happen if you sever that left folded arm(from the person at his left shading their eyes) and extend Bells arm to that severed point. Would it give the appearance of one continuous left arm connected to a shoulder?

 

 

I don't know Chris. Because, for one thing, you and I interpret the Bell Lovelady differently. You believe that the two red things are 1) his torso, and 2) his left arm. In contrast, I believe that the two red things are both part of his torso... the right part and the left part. I believe that his torso looks like it is split in two because a tree limb is blocking the view between them. As for Lovelady's arm in Bell, I believe that tree limbs are blocking the view of that.

Plus I have a problem with what you are doing with your gif. The shot of Lovelady in Altgens 6 is at a large angle. You are inserting into that the Lovelady from Bell, which is much closer to a straight on shot.

Several posts ago you showed what I believe to be the correct answer as to why Lovelady's shoulder appears to be missing. Here it is:

 

The camera angle to OSWALD in this gif makes his left ear disappear completely and his left shoulder to look much smaller horizontally. That is the reason that Lovelady's shoulder appears to be gone IMO, because of the large camera angle.

 

[Chris Davidson]

Sandy,

I'll stick with more of his shoulder should appear, which should be blocking out some of the white shirt? area.

 

[Alan Ford]

~Cough cough~

This is the version of Altgens that was first shown to the American people:

[Pat Speer]

6 hours ago, Alan Ford said:

~Cough cough~

This is the version of Altgens that was first shown to the American people:

Greetings. It does appear that the photo was retouched for future publication. Are you aware of any other published images from the 22nd showing this? I think the earliest version I have is an already retouched photo from the 11-22 Montana Standard. JFK was retouched but the Jones Arm was still there. 

 

[Sandy Larsen]

10 hours ago, Chris Davidson said:

Sandy,

I'll stick with more of his shoulder should appear, which should be blocking out some of the white shirt? area.

 

 

Chris,

Are you saying that something white is blocking the view of Lovelady's shoulder? Are you saying that Tie Man's white shirt is blocking the view of Lovelady's shoulder?

 

[Alan Ford]

1 hour ago, Pat Speer said:

Greetings. It does appear that the photo was retouched for future publication. Are you aware of any other published images from the 22nd showing this? I think the earliest version I have is an already retouched photo from the 11-22 Montana Standard. JFK was retouched but the Jones Arm was still there. 

 

Thank you, Mr. Speer, and good to 'meet' you here 👍

No question in my mind that the Altgens photo was retouched to (at the very least) give Mr. Lovelady a left arm............

In any 11/22 newspaper versions I've seen, the arm problem is glaringly manifest.

[Sandy Larsen]

Thanks Alan and Pat for your newspaper versions of the photo.

Carl Jones's arm is more white in those, but then so are faces of some of the black people.

BTW, I can't imagine that the newspapers would specifically touch-up people and things in the TSBD doorway area. That's not an area of interest for their readers. Though they could have done some sort of process on the whole photo that makes it appear touch-up work was done in that and other areas.

 

[Alan Ford]

6 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

Thanks Alan and Pat for your newspaper versions of the photo.

Carl Jones's arm is more white in those, but then so are faces of some of the black people.

BTW, I can't imagine that the newspapers would touch-up specifically people and things in the TSBD doorway area. That's not an area of interest for their readers. Though they could do some sort of process on the whole photo.

 

Mr. Larsen, the Cronkite version is precious because it is the one early version of Altgens whose public display we can timestamp with 100% certainty.

The retouching of the doorway area was not the task of newspapers but of the 'investigating' authorities. The doorway as shown in the original version of Altgens was unacceptable to the 'investigation'.

[Pat Speer]

3 hours ago, Alan Ford said:

Mr. Larsen, the Cronkite version is precious because it is the one early version of Altgens whose public display we can timestamp with 100% certainty.

The retouching of the doorway area was not the task of newspapers but of the 'investigating' authorities. The doorway as shown in the original version of Altgens was unacceptable to the 'investigation'.

I think that's jumping the gun. Trask (and Jack White for that matter) demonstrated that many of the photos as first published had been retouched, painted over, and that this was mostly done at the individual newspaper level. 

At one point one of the longest and most tendentious threads on this forum was one in which I (believe it or not) demonstrated that JFK's foot on the famous David Miller photo was added onto the photo to sell papers. At one point Jack White said it was originally a hand, and Gary Mack among others went insane. While I ultimately came to agree it was most likely Clint Hill's foot, it really didn't change the fact that the image was re-drawn to make it look like it was JFK's foot. As far as Altgens 6, I think we can suspect that once word got out that there was a figure on the steps who looked like Oswald, that some tool at the AP thought they could sell more photos if the Lovelady image was unobstructed, and turned Jones' arm into Lovelady's shirt. What surprises me however is that it looks like that in all the decades since, no one has republished this photo from the original negative. I mean, Robin Unger bought a massive scan from Corbis I believe but even that was second or third gen. 

[Sandy Larsen]

34 minutes ago, Pat Speer said:

... [perhaps] some tool at the AP thought they could sell more photos if the Lovelady image was unobstructed, and turned Jones' arm into Lovelady's shirt.

 

Just wondering Pat... so, can you also see Carl Jones's arm in some copies Altgens 6?

 

 

[Pat Speer]

1 hour ago, Sandy Larsen said:

 

Just wondering Pat... so, can you also see Carl Jones's arm in some copies Altgens 6?

 

 

I was skeptical at first but eventually saw what I thought was was the outline of his hand near Shelley. When Alan posted the CBS copy it all fell into place. To be clear I don't think this was part of a conspiracy beyond selling newspapers and magazines. While I thought Jack White was wrong about an awful lot, his research had a solid grounding in the historical record in that many of the first images published by the media--from the Moorman photo to the Altgens photos to the backyard photos on down--had been altered for public consumption. I find it annoying as heck. 

[Chris Davidson]

7 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

 

Chris,

Are you saying that something white is blocking the view of Lovelady's shoulder? Are you saying that Tie Man's white shirt is blocking the view of Lovelady's shoulder?

 

Along with part of Lovelady's? chin/jaw.

Do you believe the backyard photos were "touched up" ?

Could a striped shirt be touched up into a shirt/tie?

What color suit was Tie Man wearing, because his suit edge to the right  appears to match the torso clothed Lovelady?  ?

Was Jones' wearing matching clothing material to what Lovelady? was wearing?

How many times does the narrative have to change to fit the official story?

 

 

 

[Jonathan Cohen]

1 hour ago, Chris Davidson said:

 

 

 

This has been discussed ad nauseum. Lovelady was wrong in his 1964 affidavit about the shirt he was wearing on Nov. 22, 1963. He was photographed several years later by Robert Groden wearing the correct shirt.

[Chris Davidson]

We can all go home now: