Black Dog Man's Companion

[Alan Healy]

We now have a better source for analysis than the one Duncan used.

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...pe=post&id=1560

If anyone can beat this enhancement of Betzner3 I would like to see it.

Alan

Thanks for the link, Alan. Having a link to click onto can be a nice option rather than just looking at it ewmbedded in the actual post. It is the same photo as seen in post # 3, 4, 5, 10 and 12 of this thread.

Bill

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

It is a high resolution scan of the LIFE print & far superior than anything we have seen before.

If your not sure, zoom in to Blackdog in my link & compare him to the same figure in these other sources.

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...pe=post&id=1560

Edited February 13, 2005 by Alan Healy

[Bill Miller]

It is a high resolution scan of the LIFE print & far superior than anything we have seen before.

If your not sure, zoom in to Blackdog in my link & compare him to the same figure in these other sources.

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...pe=post&id=1560

Yes - I have that same image on hand. I can also say with confidence that I can post any image onto the forum and not lose any of its details. Often times improving the image. I have not yet learned the knack of taking otherwise clean photos and causing them to become blurry and pixeled when enlarging them.

Edited February 13, 2005 by Bill Miller

[Alan Healy]

It is a high resolution scan of the LIFE print & far superior than anything we have seen before.

If your not sure, zoom in to Blackdog in my link & compare him to the same figure in these other sources.

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...pe=post&id=1560

Yes - I have that same image on hand. I can also say with confidence that I can post any image onto the forum and not lose any of its details. Often times improving the image. I have not yet learned the knack of taking otherwise clean photos and causing them to become blurry and pixeled when enlarging them.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That link to the Costella scan/enhancement isn't working for some reason, try this one.

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...pe=post&id=1560

You should notice that you can zoom right into Blackdog without any "pixiflication".

I think this is a better view of Blackdog than anyone has ever had before.

Alan

[Shanet Clark]

It does look like someone lurking in the bushes with a hat on.

Very much like the Black Spy in "Spy vs. Spy" --- but not funny...

I am intrigued by the similar black fedora glimpsed over the fence in the

Couch film.........

[Guest Stephen Turner]

It does look like someone lurking in the bushes with a hat on.

Very much like the Black Spy in "Spy vs. Spy" --- but not funny...

I am intrigued by the similar black fedora glimpsed over the fence in the

Couch film.........

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

[Guest Stephen Turner]

Hi all my first ever post on this site (first ever post anywhere)

its a question for Bill or shanet looking at the bdm photo how could this

individual have taken a shot at jfk without being noticed by several

bystanders surely Zapruder or sitzman could not have been unaware of his

presence, what with discharging a rifle and all.I would really value your

comments.

[Bill Miller]

Hi all my first ever post on this site (first ever post anywhere)

its a question for Bill or shanet looking at the bdm photo how could this

individual have taken a shot at jfk without being noticed by several

bystanders surely Zapruder or sitzman could not have been unaware of his

presence, what with discharging a rifle and all.I would really value your

comments.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Your question is a good one for it touches on the common sense aspect of the equation that a few seem to overlook. People who have never been to the plaza are mislead sometimes by the field of depth that a photo brings to the table. Elm Street is wider (40 ft.) than the distance from Zapruder to the BDM or from BDM to the street below. Brehm, Jean Hill, Mary Moorman were all about the same distance from home plate to second base on a baseball diamond as they were from the concrete wall. So at the time the shooting occurred, it has been suggested that someone could have stood out in plain view in less the distance across a baseball diamond and took a shot(s) at the motorcade and not had anyone take notice. The alternative to that is Gordon Arnold who had a movie camera in his hand that would not have been of any concern to anyone when they would be more inclined to be looking for someone with a gun. The BDM would not have appeared dark and distorted by shadow in real life. So what we see in the Willis and Betzner photos is not what the witnesses would have seen.

Edited February 18, 2005 by Bill Miller

[Guest Stephen Turner]

Hi all my first ever post on this site (first ever post anywhere)

its a question for Bill or shanet looking at the bdm photo how could this

individual have taken a shot at jfk without being noticed by several

bystanders surely Zapruder or sitzman could not have been unaware of his

presence, what with discharging a rifle and all.I would really value your

comments.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Your question is a good one for it touches on the common sense aspect of the equation that a few seem to overlook. People who have never been to the plaza are mislead sometimes by the field of depth that a photo brings to the table. Elm Street is wider (40 ft.) than the distance from Zapruder to the BDM or from BDM to the street below. Brehm, Jean Hill, Mary Moorman were all about the same distance from home plate to second base on a baseball diamond as they were from the concrete wall. So at the time the shooting occurred, it has been suggested that someone could have stood out in plain view in less the distance across a baseball diamond and took a shot(s) at the motorcade and not had anyone take notice. The alternative to that is Gordon Arnold who had a movie camera in his hand that would not have been of any concern to anyone when they would be more inclined to be looking for a someone with a gun. The BDM would not have appeared dark and distorted by shadow in real life. So what we seen in the Willis and Betzner photos is not what the witnesses would have seen.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

[Guest Stephen Turner]

Hi all my first ever post on this site (first ever post anywhere)

its a question for Bill or shanet looking at the bdm photo how could this

individual have taken a shot at jfk without being noticed by several

bystanders surely Zapruder or sitzman could not have been unaware of his

presence, what with discharging a rifle and all.I would really value your

comments.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Your question is a good one for it touches on the common sense aspect of the equation that a few seem to overlook. People who have never been to the plaza are mislead sometimes by the field of depth that a photo brings to the table. Elm Street is wider (40 ft.) than the distance from Zapruder to the BDM or from BDM to the street below. Brehm, Jean Hill, Mary Moorman were all about the same distance from home plate to second base on a baseball diamond as they were from the concrete wall. So at the time the shooting occurred, it has been suggested that someone could have stood out in plain view in less the distance across a baseball diamond and took a shot(s) at the motorcade and not had anyone take notice. The alternative to that is Gordon Arnold who had a movie camera in his hand that would not have been of any concern to anyone when they would be more inclined to be looking for a someone with a gun. The BDM would not have appeared dark and distorted by shadow in real life. So what we seen in the Willis and Betzner photos is not what the witnesses would have seen.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

[Guest Stephen Turner]

Hi all my first ever post on this site (first ever post anywhere)

its a question for Bill or shanet looking at the bdm photo how could this

individual have taken a shot at jfk without being noticed by several

bystanders surely Zapruder or sitzman could not have been unaware of his

presence, what with discharging a rifle and all.I would really value your

comments.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Your question is a good one for it touches on the common sense aspect of the equation that a few seem to overlook. People who have never been to the plaza are mislead sometimes by the field of depth that a photo brings to the table. Elm Street is wider (40 ft.) than the distance from Zapruder to the BDM or from BDM to the street below. Brehm, Jean Hill, Mary Moorman were all about the same distance from home plate to second base on a baseball diamond as they were from the concrete wall. So at the time the shooting occurred, it has been suggested that someone could have stood out in plain view in less the distance across a baseball diamond and took a shot(s) at the motorcade and not had anyone take notice. The alternative to that is Gordon Arnold who had a movie camera in his hand that would not have been of any concern to anyone when they would be more inclined to be looking for a someone with a gun. The BDM would not have appeared dark and distorted by shadow in real life. So what we seen in the Willis and Betzner photos is not what the witnesses would have seen.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>