Those Front Steps

[Alan Ford]

 

4 hours ago, Alan Ford said:

While you're here----------Pro Tip: Look closely at Mr. Lovelady's head in these Wiegman frames:

Let's slow it down------------------

Notice anything?

Edited October 31, 2023 by Alan Ford

[Jean Ceulemans]

Staring directly  at Mr/Mrs. PM-X, next turning away, standing at same level.

Now... if one could ask him : who did you see drinking a coffee/soft drink out there ?   He would remember, not ?  IMO he was really looking straight at the person

 

 

Edited October 31, 2023 by Jean Ceulemans

[Andrej Stancak]

5 hours ago, Alan Ford said:

I don't believe any of the Wiegman frames "show[] Lovelady's body all right".

Alan:

here you have a Wiegman frame showing Lovelady's right side of the body all right. You can see his right hand and the contour of his right arm. Of course, Lovelady was photographed from south-east direction and since his body is turned almost in parallel with the view angle of Wiegman's camera in that frame, Lovelady's right shoulder cannot be seen in full.

 

 

[Andrej Stancak]

5 hours ago, Alan Ford said:

BTW: getting on your high horse about an alterationist claim is a bit rich-----------when the Kamp frame was brought to your attention, you weren't slow to invoke the specter of alteration).

Alan:

I did not imply alterations in the red-arrowed picture, I proposed a heavy digital processing being performed with this picture. The fallouts of such processing are evident in altered shapes of several objects; I have flagged up three obvious examples: the ceiling lamp in the vestibule behind the glass door is intact in the blue-ray version but broken in the red-arrow version. Also, the young man standing next to the mail boxes has horns in his hairline in red-arrow version but an intact, smooth and continuous hairline in the blue-ray version. But the most damning example was the missing back of the had in the figure of a lady in the foreground, appearance of two dark spots and male-looking face which was displaced to the front in red-arrow picture but not in blue-ray picture. You do not seem to be concerned by the presence of these phenomena in red-arrow version of Darnell frame. The other frame which shows Prayer Man manifesting a number of Lee Oswald's features was not affected by any processing, neither in the better version or the blue-ray version of that still.

It is the question of data integrity; one cannot only select bits of picture that somehow support a certain claim and ignore glaring problems in other parts of the picture. Prayer Man's head and neck are one smudge in blue-ray version of the picture under discussion but become suddenly clear in the red-arrow version. This cannot be because just improving resolution of an image does not alleviate the smudge problem. The smudge was owing to a motion, possibly of the subject, and I doubt it was possible to arrive at a clear neckline without extensive digital processing.

 

Edited October 31, 2023 by Andrej Stancak

[Alan Ford]

1 hour ago, Andrej Stancak said:

Alan:

here you have a Wiegman frame showing Lovelady's right side of the body all right. You can see his right hand and the contour of his right arm. Of course, Lovelady was photographed from south-east direction and since his body is turned almost in parallel with the view angle of Wiegman's camera in that frame, Lovelady's right shoulder cannot be seen in full.

 

 

~Sigh~

Let's try this again, shall we?

Kindly explain to us how you see the orientation of Mr. Lovelady's body in the latter frames here-----------the ones where he has stepped down:

 

Edited October 31, 2023 by Alan Ford

[Alan Ford]

1 hour ago, Andrej Stancak said:

Alan:

I did not imply alterations in the red-arrowed picture,

Really?

Mr. Andrej Stancak, 9/10/2022: "if the picture brought here by Chris [= Kamp Darnell frame, A.F.] was photographed from the video system at SFM, then I am sure that the picture made available to researchers by the NBC/SFM is a fake."

[Andrej Stancak]

9 minutes ago, Alan Ford said:

Really?

Mr. Andrej Stancak, 9/10/2022: "if the picture brought here by Chris [= Kamp Darnell frame, A.F.] was photographed from the video system at SFM, then I am sure that the picture made available to researchers by the NBC/SFM is a fake."

 

9 minutes ago, Alan Ford said:

Really?

Mr. Andrej Stancak, 9/10/2022: "if the picture brought here by Chris [= Kamp Darnell frame, A.F.] was photographed from the video system at SFM, then I am sure that the picture made available to researchers by the NBC/SFM is a fake."

Alan:

you missed the bulk of my post that referred to the integrity of the red-arrow picture. I cannot know if it was or was not photographed at the sixth floor museum. But I questioned the data integrity of the red-arrowed picture back then and now too. 

Edited October 31, 2023 by Andrej Stancak

[Andrej Stancak]

13 minutes ago, Alan Ford said:

~Sigh~

Let's try this again, shall we?

Kindly explain to us how you see the orientation of Mr. Lovelady's body in the latter frames here-----------the ones where he has stepped down:

 

Can you please post individual frames, not GIF? I cannot analyse constantly moving frames.

However, my post was in response to your claim that no Wiegman frame shows th right side of Lovelady's body. After I showed you such a frame, you now want something else?

 

Edited October 31, 2023 by Andrej Stancak

[Alan Ford]

4 minutes ago, Andrej Stancak said:

 

Alan:

you missed the bulk of my post that referred to the integrity of the red-arrow picture. I cannot know if it was or was not photographed at the sixth floor museum.

And if it was, then you are "sure" that it's a "fake".

But no, you never remotely implied alteration!

You guys are basically trying to make the PM/Darnell=LHO claim unfalsifiable. Why, if NBC made public the original film and it showed PM to be woman-------just like the Kamp frame does-------the cry would be, 'Geez, NBC must have fed the Sixth Floor Museum this doctored version!'

[Alan Ford]

8 minutes ago, Andrej Stancak said:

Can you please post individual frames, not GIF? I cannot analyse constantly moving frames.

Stop playing games, Mr. Stancak.

Kindly explain to us how you see the orientation of Mr. Lovelady's body in the frame below:

 

 

[Alan Ford]

12 hours ago, Alan Ford said:

The original Wiegman showed him [Mr. Oswald] stepping down past Mr. Lovelady. The extant Wiegman shows just an impossible darkness to Mr. Lovelady's right (viewer's left). 

We may see support for the above in a curious fact.

Much closer to Mr. Wiegman's camera is a car aerial:

Now watch what happens when this aerial passes over the area just where darkness starts to fall down Mr. Lovelady:

In negative:

That highly localized breach in continuity of the aerial looks a lot like a dead giveaway for aerial imaging (no pun intended!).

And it is of potentially crucial significance to our understanding of the who's and when's of that doorway that no such effect is manifest when the aerial is over the PM figure

Edited October 31, 2023 by Alan Ford

[Richard Price]

Alan and anyone else interested:  The last clip in the above message shows Billy Lovelady in left profile on the extreme right (as viewing) near the top of the landing looking directly west from a position on the right side of the steps with what to me appears to be Lee Oswald towards the center (being represented as Lovelady) in the open top shirt with t-shirt showing.

[Alan Ford]

30 minutes ago, Richard Price said:

Alan and anyone else interested:  The last clip in the above message shows Billy Lovelady in left profile on the extreme right (as viewing) near the top of the landing looking directly west from a position on the right side of the steps with what to me appears to be Lee Oswald towards the center (being represented as Lovelady) in the open top shirt with t-shirt showing.

Hello Mr. Price, and thank you for this thought.

Just be sure I'm following you here

-------------PINK ARROW: Mr. Lovelady?

-------------YELLOW ARROW: Mr. Oswald?

If so (and apologies in advance if I've misread you), then I wonder might it be the other way around:

-------------PINK ARROW: Mr. Oswald

-------------YELLOW ARROW: Mr. Lovelady

Mr. Oswald slips past Mr. Lovelady NOT (as I had surmised) to his west but to his east (i.e. in between Mr. Lovelady and the railing------perhaps forcing Mr. Lovelady to move a little west to let him through).

In which case, we might turn to Altgens----------taken just a couple of seconds before this--------and identify this item, which has been generally misunderstood as Mr. Lovelady's left ear, as in fact part of the about-to-descend Mr. Oswald's face (or even his ear?):

Edited October 31, 2023 by Alan Ford

[Richard Price]

No, Alan that is not it.  In the slowed down clips, the figures appear in the most rightward panned frame.  The Lovelady left profile is all the way against the edge of the frame 3/4 of the way up and the character who appears to me to be Oswald is the one who has been altered in other films to appear to be the "leaning Lovelady".  The unknown individual being debated (about being a woman/Oswald) is to the left and behind in the shadows.  I had never noticed the individual to the extreme right having the appearance of Lovelady and had assumed the figure in the center was B F Frazier.  Your photo used to ask Andrej to explain the body orientation showed me that this figure was NOT Frazier, but Oswald, due to the Lovelady figure showing up only a few frames away in the extreme right had portion of the frame.

[Alan Ford]

11 minutes ago, Richard Price said:

No, Alan that is not it.  In the slowed down clips, the figures appear in the most rightward panned frame.

Do you mean this person, Mr. Price?

If so, then yes, I can see how that might look like the west-facing head of Mr. Lovelady (shades of him in the Martin aftermath film!). However.......................... it's actually the raised right arm of this person:

Your observation (or rather my misunderstanding of it!) has actually made something go click, which thought I shall develop in my next few posts. Creative Misprision I believe they call it! 

Edited October 31, 2023 by Alan Ford