news about the Darnell film

[Denis Morissette]

7 hours ago, David Von Pein said:

BTW / FWIW....

Duncan MacRae, in this discussion at his own forum, seems to think he has located "Prayer Woman" in one of Phil Willis' post-assassination photographs (the pic on the right):

Edit -- Thanks and kudos to Duncan MacRae and Denis Morrissette.

 

Thanks!

[Denis Morissette]

I think ANDREJ posted this a while ago. 
https://postimg.cc/gallery/34RLzY5

Edited Saturday at 02:59 PM by Denis Morissette

[Andrej Stancak]

The recently posted Darnell film appears to contain frames, i.e., those depicting the doorway, that have been tampered with. I was afraid that Darnnell film would be altered as such and the original destroyed, however, this appears to be just a primitive image manipulation aimed to cover up similarities between Prayer Man and Lee Oswald. Thus, the original Darnell film may still exist and it may be possibly retrieved in some future times when we all are gone.

I have analysed the frame which is most instrumental in showing Lee Oswald potentially standing in the doorway. Below is a side-by-side comparison of the 6th-floor version (left) and the image available so far:

 

 

The 6FM version (left) appears less smooth and pixelated and shows sharper contrasts compared to the so-far available version (right). In 6FM version, Prayer Man appears to orient his gaze toward the street in front of the doorway while his gaze aims to the east wall in the known version of this frame. This has been achieved by editing Prayer Man's left shoulder, and also editing the left side of his chest. There is a large smudge in the area to the right of Prayer Man's head covering up details of the right back of Prayer Man and part of his right shoulder. I also can see editing in the area between the supposed Prayer Man's left leg and Mrs. Reese's figure. Prayer Man's right forearm appears thin and bent in the 6FM version compared to the version available before. 

The composite image above summarises the anomalies in the 6FM version not seen in the version showing an intact figure of Prayer Man. The 6FM is in the left panel.

1. A large smudge to the right of Prayer Man causing indentation in the certical pole of the aluminum door frame (highlighted with a yellow arrow).

2. The left shoulder in the 6FM version was enlarged making an impression that the trunk of Prayer Man is orientated in parallel with the glass window. The left image shows in blue a partial contour of the left face and the neck and the contour of the left shoulder in the so-far available image. 

3. The neck area below the chin in the 6FM version shows editing. A darker round patch has been added making an impression of a circular light-colour shirt or blouse. This patch contributed to the new orientation of Prayer Man's trunk as facing toward in front of the doorway.

4. The area of the right wrist has been edited, in addition to increasing the contrast. The right arm appears  bent unnaturally in the 6FM version.

5. The area to the left of Prayer Man's left bent leg appears edited so that it looks homogenous and not showing the contrast between the leg and the space between the leg and Mrs. Reese.

6. Prayer Man's head in the 6FM version appears small and disproportionate to the rest of the body. It certainly does not show any form of female hair. However, editing in the left part of Prayer Man's head and adding what appears to be eyes create an illusion that Prayer Man faces the camera.

Here is a reconstruction of Prayer Man's figure, including the orientation of his head and torso based on the frame that was avaliable to us before this 6FM version appeared. It is based on realistic modelling of Lee Oswald's figure, including details of his hairline, shape of his neck and overall body proportions.

I have limited opportunities at the moment to analyse the rest of frames in the new 6FM version of Darnell, however, it is enough to show one frame that has been manipulated to classify the whole film as "their"  another forgery attempt.

 

 

 

 

[Paul Bacon]

Great analysis Andrej!!  I agree with all of what you've pointed out.  You (and Sandy) have hit the nail on the head--another useless piece of film at the Six Floor Museum.  Well, maybe not completely useless, because it does demonstrate further effort at coverup.

[David Josephs]

On 9/12/2024 at 5:43 PM, Tony Krome said:

Forget about PM, who is that behind Frazier? Is that a door opening? Do we have PM2?

I believe that's Joe MOLINA.. 

Mr. BALL. Where were you when you saw him go into the building?
Mr. MOLINA. I was right in the entrance.
Mr. BALL. Did you see a police officer with him?
Mr. MOLINA. I didn't see a police officer. I don't recall seeing a police officer but I did see him go inside.
Mr. BALL. Did you see a white-helmeted police officer any time there in the entrance?
Mr. MOLINA. Well, of course, there might have been one after they secured the building, you know.
Mr. BALL. No, I mean when Truly went in; did you see Truly actually go into the building?
Mr. MOLINA. I saw him go in.
Mr. BALL. Where were you standing?
Mr. MOLINA. Right at the front door; right at the front door.
Mr. BALL. Outside the front door?
Mr. MOLINA. Yes, outside the front door I was standing; the door was right behind me.
Mr. BALL. Were you standing on the steps?
Mr. MOLINA. Yes, on the uppermost step.
Mr. BALL. You actually saw Truly go
Mr. MOLINA. Yeah.
Mr. BALL. You were still standing there?
Mr. MOLINA. Yes.

[David Josephs]

It is uncanny how he fits so well into the image...  I posted a while back how this part of that frame of the 8mm film is ridiculously small.. even at film resolution of about 1000dpi converted.

  

This is ALL my putting Oswald into the image..  Top right tho 

[Sandy Larsen]

2 hours ago, Andrej Stancak said:

The recently posted Darnell film appears to contain frames, i.e., those depicting the doorway, that have been tampered with. I was afraid that Darnnell film would be altered as such and the original destroyed, however, this appears to be just a primitive image manipulation aimed to cover up similarities between Prayer Man and Lee Oswald. Thus, the original Darnell film may still exist and it may be possibly retrieved in some future times when we all are gone.

 

Andrej,

Thanks for your thorough and informative analysis of the newly posted Darnell clip.

However, I'm afraid that a mistake has been made in this thread in that TWO VERSIONS OF DARNELL HAVE BEEN POSTED AND CONFLATED:

1. First, the (supposed) NBC original version of Darnell that the Sixth Floor Museum allegedly bought from NBC. And ...
2. Second, a Darnell clip posted by Mark Ulrik. This is the one I said was a hoax designed to embarrass Bart Kamp and the other researchers at Greg Parker's forum for their promotion of Prayer Man.

Here again is the Hoax Version of Darnell:

 

The easy way to identify this as the Hoax Version is to look at the neckline of PM's shirt. It has a low-cut circular shape that looks like it belongs on a woman's blouse.

Andrej has confirmed that PM has been altered in the Hoax Version. Thanks Andrej for doing that.

To those of you who have been studying the reflection in the swinging door... please keep in mind that you studying the Hoax Version of Darnell. Which should be okay given that you are not studying Prayer Man himself on the clip. I mean, there is little reason to believe that whoever altered PM's image in the frames also went to the trouble to alter the swinging door area.

 

 

[Andrej Stancak]

1 hour ago, David Josephs said:

It is uncanny how he fits so well into the image...  I posted a while back how this part of that frame of the 8mm film is ridiculously small.. even at film resolution of about 1000dpi converted.

  

This is ALL my putting Oswald into the image..  Top right tho 

While I saw your composite earlier, it is always useful to remind us what has driven many researchers to consider the possibility that Prayer Man was Lee Oswald. The similarity is uncanny, indeed.

If you would take the same frame from the recent 6FM version, you would not be able to find such similarity, I am afraid. 

[Andrej Stancak]

The whole affair of publicising a doctored version of Darnell film works in favour of those who thought of the possibility that Lee Oswald was out there in the doorway while Darnell was filming: now, we know that they know that we know. There was a reason for concealing the film for 60+ years and then providing a forged version which just happens to cover up true features of Prayer Man. It had to be some very serious reason for doing all that, something which would destroy the official version of assassination. So, this panic action by NBC&6FM just shows that it was correct to follow the Prayer Man lead, and we should continue doing so.

Concealing the film and doctoring the figure of Prayer Man is equal to: having Harper fragment to vanish, eliminating oblique X-rays of Kennedy's head, destroying the neck wound by a crude incision, not taping or stenographying Lee Oswald's interrogations, doctoring the backyard photographs, allowing Lee Oswald to be killed by Jack Ruby, suppressing important witnesses and misinterpreting witness depositions, not returning original Nix film to the rightful heirs, manipulating Zapruder film, and so many more misdeeds which I cannot even make a complete list of.

One way forward would be to have a renowned photo analysis experts to compare the extant frame with the 6FM version and list all anomalies (basically, what I did but I doubt my report would be considered as legally valid). That report could be submitted to 6FM with request to solicit from the NBC the film itself, not a digital copy. The film should go to where it belongs to - the NARA, and should then be digitised with utmost care and quality, and made available to researchers. 

 

Edited Saturday at 02:30 PM by Andrej Stancak

[Andrej Stancak]

1 hour ago, Sandy Larsen said:

 

Andrej,

Thanks for your thorough and informative analysis of the newly posted Darnell clip.

However, I'm afraid that a mistake has been made in this thread in that TWO VERSIONS OF DARNELL HAVE BEEN POSTED AND CONFLATED:

1. First, the (supposed) NBC original version of Darnell that the Sixth Floor Museum allegedly bought from NBC. And ...
2. Second, a Darnell clip posted by Mark Ulrik. This is the one I said was a hoax designed to embarrass Bart Kamp and the other researchers at Greg Parker's forum for their promotion of Prayer Man.

Here again is the Hoax Version of Darnell:

 

The easy way to identify this as the Hoax Version is to look at the neckline of PM's shirt. It has a low-cut circular shape that looks like it belongs on a woman's blouse.

Andrej has confirmed that PM has been altered in the Hoax Version. Thanks Andrej for doing that.

To those of you who have been studying the reflection in the swinging door... please keep in mind that you studying the Hoax Version of Darnell. Which should be okay given that you are not studying Prayer Man himself on the clip. I mean, there is little reason to believe that whoever altered PM's image in the frames also went to the trouble to alter the swinging door area.

 

 

Thanks, Sandy, for spotting the difference between the "Hoax version" and the Youtube version. I have checked at 1k resolution the Youtube version linked in the primary message in this link of the 6FM film. It is of very poor resolution and the back of Prayer Man's head was darkened to conceal the shape of Prayer Man's head. Thus, it is the 6FM's turn to provide a high-resolution copy of the film rather than a low-resolution one. 

 

 

[Roger Odisio]

3 hours ago, Andrej Stancak said:

The whole affair of publicising a doctored version of Darnell film works in favour of those who thought of the possibility that Lee Oswald was out there in the doorway while Darnell was filming: now, we know that they know that we know. There was a reason for concealing the film for 60+ years and then providing a forged version which just happens to cover up true features of Prayer Man. It had to be some very serious reason for doing all that, something which would destroy the official version of assassination. So, this panic action by NBC&6FM just shows that it was correct to follow the Prayer Man lead, and we should continue doing so.

Concealing the film and doctoring the figure of Prayer Man is equal to: having Harper fragment to vanish, eliminating oblique X-rays of Kennedy's head, destroying the neck wound by a crude incision, not taping or stenographying Lee Oswald's interrogations, doctoring the backyard photographs, allowing Lee Oswald to be killed by Jack Ruby, suppressing important witnesses and misinterpreting witness depositions, not returning original Nix film to the rightful heirs, manipulating Zapruder film, and so many more misdeeds which I cannot even make a complete list of.

One way forward would be to have a renowned photo analysis experts to compare the extant frame with the 6FM version and list all anomalies (basically, what I did but I doubt my report would be considered as legally valid). That report could be submitted to 6FM with request to solicit from the NBC the film itself, not a digital copy. The film should go to where it belongs to - the NARA, and should then be digitised with utmost care and quality, and made available to researchers. 

 

 

I agree, Andrej. With a minor qualification.  I think early on NBC knew what the film showed.  It would have been only due diligence on their part, if they were going to take the drastic step of hiding the film, an important piece of information, for what has been 60 years.  They had a lot of time, and every reason, to enhance the film if there was significant doubt about the figure. 

 

Even if they weren't sure about the image, their corporate policy, as they explained to Alec Baldwin, has always been to back the Warren Report.  They didn't want there to even be a discussion of the figure that would be hard to control.

 

All of the relevant parties have known for some time why researchers want access to the original film.  When Greg Parker wrote to NBC in 2017 seeking access, he explained his reasons for wanting the original. They rejected him with the ludicrous, self contradictory reason that the films' safety was too important to risk letting anyone see it!  Think about that for a minute.

 

The press release says the film was sent to the museum to ensure it "will remain accessible to scholars, researchers and the general public...for generations to come".  That's a perfect explanation for why, under the JFKA Act, the original film belongs in the JFKA Collection at NARA, not the museum, a private institution.  The film is a JFKA record.  That's what the law requires.

 

NARA knows this of course, but their current position in the MFF lawsuit is they have no responsibility to add the film and other JFKA records to their Collection.  It seems to me that the fact that NBC Universal has now sent a version of the film to the museum for public viewing opens the way to forcing them to give the original to NARA as the law requires.

 

Did NBC Universal send the original or a copy to the museum?  That's an important question.  The museum's press release doesn't say.  The museum is not answering its phone.  Per the work of Andrej, Sandy, and others it appears that the museum has merely gotten a copy, and probably a doctored one at that.  Do the folks at the museum know that? 

 

Interesting fact:  A new President and General Manager of NBC5, the Dallas affiliate, a man named Tony Canales, was appointed last year.  Could that have been related to the new policy of releasing the film to the museum for public viewing?

 

In any case, sending a version of the film to the museum has all the earmarks of another limited hangout to try to further conceal the truth.

[Jonathan Cohen]

Yawn. Once again, we're subjected to "every film and photo taken in Dealey Plaza is altered." 

[John Cotter]

21 hours ago, David Von Pein said:

There's absolutely nothing that is "very different" in this Darnell film clip when compared to previously published versions of the same images.

It's just that the newer version posted by Mark Ulrik is a higher-quality and more stabilized version. But the reflections in the glass door and the "dark gap" I talked about previously can still be seen (although not quite as clearly) in the lower-quality version of James Darnell's film below:

 

No, David. What Sandy, Andrej, Roger and others have said about this matter is essentially correct.

(By the way, the phrase “windows of mirrors” in my post should have been “wilderness of mirrors”. Jungian slip.)

Edited Saturday at 07:55 PM by John Cotter

[Denis Morissette]

There are 2 questions: 1. Does the 6FM have the original, the film taken out of Darnell’s camera? 2. Is the version on YouTube off the original film or is it a multi-generation copy? 

[Denis Morissette]

Doyle thinks I have found Ms. Stanton in the Owens film. It’s actually not the Owens film. I don’t know which. 
 

https://postimg.cc/hQV95nXr