Jump to content
The Education Forum

The Dealey "Master Film"


Shanet Clark
 Share

Recommended Posts

Duncan McRae has made a very serious claim, one I have heard before.

Can anyone vouch for this?

Has anyone seen this Dealey "Master Film" ?

Also, I would like anyone else to weigh in on the original question I asked of Duncan...

QUOTE(Shanet Clark @ Feb 20 2005, 06:47 AM)

Duncan

From your experince with handling the dubs and various prints,

what do you think the NIX, the MUCHMORE and the dreaded ZAPRUDER

films looked like before ANY handling whatsoever?

What do you think may have been edited, or guided the final product?

How degraded are NIX and MUchmore, and why are they so short and cut

to the same part, and what was edited from Zapruder...

Any ideas on how to approach this field...?

"Hi Shanet..That's quite a question you ask,and a good one.The answer is one i can only guess at just like anyone else.The "other film" as it is known was first brought to my attention on Rich Della Rossa's Forum back around 2001 www.jfkresearch.com which Miller is banned from for reasons which i will leave to him to explain if he so desires.The "other film apparently shows the limo coming to a complete stop,and 2 head shots striking the president,and much more brain matter being ejected as is seen in the Zapruder movie.I stand to be corrected by anyone who has seen the other film if this short description is wrong.Now this intrigued me very much,as when i regained an interest in the assassination after many years,i showed my brother the Zapruder movie,and he was surprised that it did not show a limo stop or as much brain matter as we both recalled seeing in the early 70's when a film was shown on Scottish television.My brother remembered a limo stop,and i had not even mentioned that others on the Della Rossa forum had claimed to have seen this too.Personally i do not remember a limo stop,only much more brain matter,but he is adamant that it stopped.The purpose of the "other film" i do not know,but from what information i have gathered,it seems to have been used for military purposes.The logic of this is beyond my understanding.Why they had to keep the "other film" and not destroy it (maybe it has been destroyed now) is also beyond my understanding,but to answer your question,i can only guess that the Nix,Muchmore,and Zapruder films were possibly altered (i am open minded on the topic of alteration) to confirm the lone gunman theory.I can't think of any other logical reason that would make sense.As you probably know,the original Nix film is missing...lost...it's disgraceful,so degragated copies of this film are all we have to work with.My suspicions about this film are mainly in the seemingly blacked out background between the wall and the fence which probably contains lots of clearer information and answers about..BDM,Arnold,Badgeman,Classic gunman etc etc etc.

Muchmore was also spliced at the exact frame of the commonly seen headshot apparently by accident..Now the "other film" as far as i am aware,shows 2 almost similtaneous headshots.Could this splice be significant?...who knows?.I would like to see the technical aspects of the Muchmore and Nix camera mechanics explored in as much detail as the Zapruder film has been scrutinised.Perhaps Costella or someone of that caliber could undertake such a project at some point." DUNCAN MACRAE

Can anyone support this or shed light on this? Theory and Speculation is welcome...

Thanks, Shanet

[Rather than call it the generic "other" film, easily confused with NIX or MUCHMORE I call it the "Master Film"]

Edited by Shanet Clark
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Shanet wrote:

Duncan McRae has made a very serious claim, one I have heard before.

[...]

Can anyone vouch for this?

Has anyone seen this Dealey "Master Film" ?

Can anyone support this or shed light on this? Theory and Speculation is welcome...

Thanks, Shanet

[Rather than call it the generic "other" film, easily confused with NIX or MUCHMORE I call it the "Master Film"]

_______________

Covered pretty much in Jim Fetzer's HOAX... RDellaRosa comments in HOAX about the "other film" he, as well as others have seen. Including one person [from Europe] that has posted to this forum in the past. His post were under another topic.

Having a background in special effects compositing and matting techniques in both film and electroinc media, its pretty easy to speculate how alteration to the Z-film could of happened. It's not a question of; was it possible -- was the know how, manpower, technology available? Of course it was -- it available years prior to the assassination. The black art of optical film printing [and all it entails] became a known commodity during WW2... Washington turned to Hollywood for ALL the talents resident there in support of the WAR effort [which all of us Americans, amongst others,should be thankful for]

Those photo researchers that have seriously broached the film alteration subject - find one area of question that needs more clarification: was the time avaialble to perform alteration? Coupled with that simple question, I've couched another: when did Shanneyfelt of the FBI give the actual Z-film frame, numbers?

Another perplexing question has risen in the past few years: no one can attest too, or verify, that the sitting members [not aides or staff] of the Warren Commission ever saw the camera original Z-film...

Ask your self this: following the assassination, the Secret Service and the FBI conducted their investigations in Dealey Plaza, why, during those investigations did they [sS, FBI] conclude the notorious headshot [Z-313] happend further down Elm St., approximately the concrete stairs ascending the Grassy Knoll (the area where we see Z-358 - today) ...

Confusing investigation details, coupled with the FINAL WC report lead to big, BIG questions... then we can get to; WHY was it deemed necessary to alter the film, in the first place!

Welcome to the can of worms, Shanet. I wish you well!

David Healy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

dgh01:

Covered pretty much in Jim Fetzer's HOAX... RDellaRosa comments in HOAX about the "other film" he, as well as others have seen. Including one person [from Europe] that has posted to this forum in the past. His post were under another topic.

/do you think Fetxer is right on this, is this credible?/

Having a background in special effects compositing and matting techniques in both film and electroinc media, its pretty easy to speculate how alteration to the Z-film could of happened. It's not a question of; was it possible -- was the know how, manpower, technology available? Of course it was -- it available years prior to the assassination. The black art of optical film printing [and all it entails] became a known commodity during WW2... Washington turned to Hollywood for ALL the talents resident there in support of the WAR effort [which all of us Americans, amongst others,should be thankful for]

/howard hughes? cd jackson? or joint agency psy ops propaganda commnd?/

Those photo researchers that have seriously broached the film alteration subject - find one area of question that needs more clarification: was the time avaialble to perform alteration? Coupled with that simple question, I've couched another: when did Shanneyfelt of the FBI give the actual Z-film frame, numbers?

/splices? half-trees? missing frames? nix and muchmore start after 313/

Another perplexing question has risen in the past few years: no one can attest too, or verify, that the sitting members [not aides or staff] of the Warren Commission ever saw the camera original Z-film...

/they didn't want to see it...deniability, elitists distanced from gory reality/

Ask your self this: following the assassination, the Secret Service and the FBI conducted their investigations in Dealey Plaza, why, during those investigations did they [sS, FBI] conclude the notorious headshot [Z-313] happend further down Elm St., approximately the concrete stairs ascending the Grassy Knoll (the area where we see Z-358 - today) ...

/big difference since nix and muchmore cut in here and braking headpins in Z here/

Confusing investigation details, coupled with the FINAL WC report lead to big, BIG questions... then we can get to; WHY was it deemed necessary to alter the film, in the first place! /no doubt/

Welcome to the can of worms, Shanet. I wish you well!

/thanks dgh#1/David Healy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ask your self this: following the assassination, the Secret Service and the FBI conducted their investigations in Dealey Plaza, why, during those investigations did they [sS, FBI] conclude the notorious headshot [Z-313] happend further down Elm St., approximately the concrete stairs ascending the Grassy Knoll (the area where we see Z-358 - today) ...

Why would one waste time on an irrelevant point? The Nix, Muchmore, and Zapruder films all show that the limo is not all the way to the steps when the head shot occurred. Moorman's photo supports the assassination films 100% on where the limo was located at the time of the head shot. If her photo did nothing else when it was filmed 30 minutes after the assassintion - It showed where the limo was when she took her photo. If anyone cannot find the steps in her photo - look for the three men standing on the hill. If you still cannot find the steps, I will be happy to place an arrow on Moorman's photo showing where they are. Then if need be ... we can have Duncan make the steps disappear with one of his enhancements only to then draw them in somewhere else. ;)

Here are some links to a 1975 re-creation. Such films were made as far back as the mid-60's:

http://www.icp.org/exhibitions/ant_farm/introduction.html

http://www.bavc.org/meet/news/articles/restoring.htm

Those who claim to have seen a "different" film saw only a fake version of the assassination and couldn't tell the difference. It can be the only logical reason for their describing different events in each.

"Heather Weaver and Kirsten Menger-Anderson

Restoring The Eternal Frame

[Reprinted from DV.com Feature Story, 06.18.03]

On November 22, 1963, millions of people watched footage of John Fitzgerald Kennedy's assassination on television. The 8 mm film captured by Abraham Zapruder was endlessly examined for clues, evidence, and explanation by authorities and the media.

In 1975, inspired by television's portrayal of reality and how people construct recollections, members of the art collective Ant Farm (Cadillac Ranch, Media Burn) and the multimedia performance group T.R. Uthco decided to re-create the footage.

The resulting piece, The Eternal Frame, contains reenactment footage, interviews with the artists and tourists, and commentary on the re-creation. Ultimately, the work is not about the reenactment, but about examining the power and significance of visual representation. "

Edited by Bill Miller
Link to comment
Share on other sites

dgh01:

Covered pretty much in Jim Fetzer's HOAX... RDellaRosa comments in HOAX about the "other film" he, as well as others have seen. Including one person [from Europe] that has posted to this forum in the past. His post were under another topic.

/do you think Fetxer is right on this, is this credible?/

dgh02: Jim Fetzer has managed to bring together folks that have practical, as well as historical knowledge regarding the possibilty of Z-film alteration. People that debunkers woukld have a tough time * discrediting * ... Not that they didn't try! Unfortunately Rolands Zavada withdrew from the conference. He and I did spend some time discussing Z-film alteration issues... His last vestiage of defense is the "time" factor...

Having a background in special effects compositing and matting techniques in both film and electroinc media, its pretty easy to speculate how alteration to the Z-film could of happened. It's not a question of; was it possible -- was the know how, manpower, technology available? Of course it was -- it available years prior to the assassination. The black art of optical film printing [and all it entails] became a known commodity during WW2... Washington turned to Hollywood for ALL the talents resident there in support of the WAR effort [which all of us Americans, amongst others,should be thankful for]

/howard hughes? cd jackson? or joint agency psy ops propaganda commnd?/

dgh02: Lynwood Dunn actaully. His brilliance and presence is still felt today in digital and optical compositing... You might find it interesting that B&H won a Oscar for the color film optical printer, I think in 1962-64 somewhere in that time frame

Those photo researchers that have seriously broached the film alteration subject - find one area of question that needs more clarification: was the time avaialble to perform alteration? Coupled with that simple question, I've couched another: when did Shanneyfelt of the FBI give the actual Z-film frame, numbers?

/splices? half-trees? missing frames? nix and muchmore start after 313/

dgh02: what we know factually and what we think we know in theory? Factually: transposed frames, missing frames, mis-numbered frames --regardless of whose responsible, ALL *alteration* despite vigorious protestations, alteration none-the-less. The recent MPI DVD is ""massive"" alteration

Theory: I can post a few URL's if you'd like -- one thats always bothered me, if the Z-film is so valuable, when in the custody/ownership of Life Mag, and film accidents happened to the "camera original" [broken film x2] why was the film spliced back together? Of course LIFE could do what they damned well pleased with the film, but with this visual record of American History? Try as I have, I've never seen, read or heard, nor do I know who [operator - technician]was during these 'accidents' nor what they were doing when [was the film was laced up?] accidental breaks ocurred....

Another perplexing question has risen in the past few years: no one can attest too, or verify, that the sitting members [not aides or staff] of the Warren Commission ever saw the camera original Z-film...

/they didn't want to see it...deniability, elitists distanced from gory reality/

dgh02: faint at heart wusses? Nah, I dont think so -- denialbility the more likely answer, from my perspective anyway... probably a good call on their part

Ask your self this: following the assassination, the Secret Service and the FBI conducted their investigations in Dealey Plaza, why, during those investigations did they [sS, FBI] conclude the notorious headshot [Z-313] happend further down Elm St., approximately the concrete stairs ascending the Grassy Knoll (the area where we see Z-358 - today) ...

/big difference since nix and muchmore cut in here and braking headpins in Z here/

dgh02: yeah, the "seamless films of DP" even the history channel docu regarding these films of DP didn't address: a composite comparison of the essential film covering Elm Street... Something I might add Bill Miller said he'd put together [bout 3-4 years ago] tap-tap-tap!

Confusing investigation details, coupled with the FINAL WC report lead to big, BIG questions... then we can get to; WHY was it deemed necessary to alter the film, in the first place!

/no doubt/

dgh02: be aware -- there are MANY more 1st and 2nd generation of the "alledged" Zapruder film camera original, created by comapnies that most have never heard of in relationship to the investigation -- and to the best of my knowledge there is NOT one double 8mm [un-slit] optical print of same in existexce... unless you take into consideration the elusive missing control number fromJjamieson Film Company in Dallas...

DHealy

Welcome to the can of worms, Shanet. I wish you well!

/thanks dgh#1/David Healy

Edited by David G. Healy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

dgh01:

Covered pretty much in Jim Fetzer's HOAX... RDellaRosa comments in HOAX about the "other film" he, as well as others have seen. Including one person [from Europe] that has posted to this forum in the past. His post were under another topic.

/do you think Fetxer is right on this, is this credible?/

dgh02: Jim Fetzer has managed to bring together folks that have practical, as well as historical knowledge regarding the possibilty of Z-film alteration. People that debunkers woukld have a tough time * discrediting * ... Not that they didn't try! Unfortunately Rolands Zavada withdrew from the conference. He and I did spend some time discussing Z-film alteration issues... His last vestiage of defense is the "time" factor...

Having a background in special effects compositing and matting techniques in both film and electroinc media, its pretty easy to speculate how alteration to the Z-film could of happened. It's not a question of; was it possible -- was the know how, manpower, technology available? Of course it was -- it available years prior to the assassination. The black art of optical film printing [and all it entails] became a known commodity during WW2... Washington turned to Hollywood for ALL the talents resident there in support of the WAR effort [which all of us Americans, amongst others,should be thankful for]

/howard hughes? cd jackson? or joint agency psy ops propaganda commnd?/

dgh02: Lynwood Dunn actaully. His brilliance and presence is still felt today in digital and optical compositing... You might find it interesting that B&H won a Oscar for the color film optical printer, I think in 1962-64 somewhere in that time frame

Those photo researchers that have seriously broached the film alteration subject - find one area of question that needs more clarification: was the time avaialble to perform alteration? Coupled with that simple question, I've couched another: when did Shanneyfelt of the FBI give the actual Z-film frame, numbers?

/splices? half-trees? missing frames? nix and muchmore start after 313/

dgh02: what we know factually and what we think we know in theory?

Factually: transposed frames, missing frames, mis-numbered frames --regardless of whose responsible, ALL *alteration* despite vigorious protestations, alteration none-the-less. The recent MPI DVD is ""massive"" alteration of a more than likely 'already altered camera original.

Theory: I can post a few URL's if you'd like -- one thats always bothered me, if the Z-film is so valuable, when in the custody/ownership of Life Mag, and film accidents happened to the "camera original" [broken film x2] why was the film spliced back together? Of course LIFE could do what they damned well pleased with the film, but with this visual record of American History? Try as I have, I've never seen, read or heard, nor do I know who [operator - technician]was during these 'accidents' nor what they were doing when [was the film was laced up?] accidental breaks ocurred....

Another perplexing question has risen in the past few years: no one can attest too, or verify, that the sitting members [not aides or staff] of the Warren Commission ever saw the camera original Z-film...

/they didn't want to see it...deniability, elitists distanced from gory reality/

dgh02: faint at heart wusses? Nah, I dont think so -- denialbility the more likely answer, from my perspective anyway... probably a good call on their part

Ask your self this: following the assassination, the Secret Service and the FBI conducted their investigations in Dealey Plaza, why, during those investigations did they [sS, FBI] conclude the notorious headshot [Z-313] happend further down Elm St., approximately the concrete stairs ascending the Grassy Knoll (the area where we see Z-358 - today) ...

/big difference since nix and muchmore cut in here and braking headpins in Z here/

dgh02: yeah, the "seamless films of DP" even the history channel docu regarding these films of DP didn't address: a composite comparison of the essential film covering Elm Street... Something I might add Bill Miller said he'd put together [bout 3-4 years ago] tap-tap-tap!

Confusing investigation details, coupled with the FINAL WC report lead to big, BIG questions... then we can get to; WHY was it deemed necessary to alter the film, in the first place!

/no doubt/

dgh02: be aware -- there are MANY more 1st and 2nd generation optical film prints of the "alledged" Zapruder film camera original, created by comapnies that most have never heard of in relationship to the investigation -- and to the best of my knowledge there is NOT one double 8mm [un-slit] optical print of same in existexce... unless you take into consideration the elusive missing control number fromJjamieson Film Company in Dallas...

DHealy

Welcome to the can of worms, Shanet. I wish you well!

/thanks dgh#1/David Healy

Edited by David G. Healy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[...]

http://www.icp.org/exhibitions/ant_farm/introduction.html

http://www.bavc.org/meet/news/articles/restoring.htm

Those who claim to have seen a "different" film saw only a fake version of the assassination and couldn't tell the difference. It can be the only logical reason for their describing different events in each.

[...]

Amazing, you have no clue as to what film they saw, yet, you claim to know what they saw -- thanks for the unrelated nonsense, btw, would you like a founding members email address from BVAC [bayArea Video Coalition]. Just post your request right here, I'm sure it'll be read.... roflmfao...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Amazing, you have no clue as to what film they saw, yet, you claim to know what they saw -- thanks for the unrelated nonsense, btw, would you like a founding members email address from BVAC [bayArea Video Coalition]. Just post your request right here, I'm sure it'll be read.... roflmfao...

It's really the only choice because when one guy says his "other film" showed a limo stopped for as much as 4 seconds and another guy says his "other film" showed the limo only pausing for a half of a second or one guy says the limo in his "other film" ran over the north curb of Elm Street or another guys says his "other film" showed JFK being shot all to hell as the car rounds the corner onto Elm Street, they obviously are seeing different films and at the very least they all are recreations for there can be only "ONE" other film if one ever existed. Run that by the Bay Area Video people and see if they do not agree.

BTW - do you have any JFK assassination related facts you'd like to share with this forum or are you still keeping them all to yourself?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks David Healey,

That really helped me get up to speed.

I will check out the sites.

Does anyone sell a 8mm of the Dealey films?

I would like to watch them screened AS FILM.

Anyone else have anything on the "MASTER FILM ?"

Scottish television showed it ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BM continued:

It's really the only choice because when one guy says his "other film" showed a limo stopped for as much as 4 seconds and another guy says his "other film" showed the limo only pausing for a half of a second or one guy says the limo in his "other film" ran over the north curb of Elm Street or another guys says his "other film" showed JFK being shot all to hell as the car rounds the corner onto Elm Street, they obviously are seeing different films and at the very least they all are recreations for there can be only "ONE" other film if one ever existed. Run that by the Bay Area Video people and see if they do not agree.

dgh01: mid 70's, mostly in b&w, campy canards -- pure and simple! Reminds me of many queries months ago about a certain image of the assassination from a different camera perspective, a still frame pulled from Stone's Elm Street sequence in JFK

BTW - do you have any JFK assassination related facts you'd like to share with this forum or are you still keeping them all to yourself?

dgh01: - rumor has it something is in the wind, stay tuned -- Little bit of research should fill you in on just what BVAC is, they've come a long way...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Stephen Turner

Question for Mr Healy

Greetings David in your opinion what is the one indisputible fact that

proves that the z film is a fake

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Question for Mr Healy

Greetings David in your opinion what is the one indisputible fact that

proves that the z film is a fake

Stephen,

Unless David Healy has come up with one since the last time he addressed that question - his response has been that he has 'no proof' that the film is a fake. His position is that it has not been proven to be the real film either. This is why many of us stand back and shake our heads at people quickly accepting the idea that the Zapruder film has been altered in ways other than just being spliced. I recall Jack White using the Muchmore film one time to make a case for Moorman and Hill being in the street and when someone showed a better enhancement that proved otherwise, then the Muchmore film was being called suspect. Now this was before it was presented to White and company that Muchmore had her undeveloped film until at least Monday when it was sold to UPI in Dallas who then flew it to NY where it was shown on TV.

I want to make it clear and David can correct me if I am wrong, but his position has stayed focused on the not being able to say the existing Zapruder film is the camera original. That is not to be confused with him jumping on a band wagon that erroneously thought they were seeing things on the Zapruder film that proved it was a fake. As far as I recall - David has maintained that he has not seen anything convincing that proves the Zapruder film is altered other than the splices that he mentioned in another post.

BIll

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Stephen Turner

thanks Bill

Jeez this is deep,(smoke & mirrors)I have spent the last 20 years

Chasing a character called Jack the ripper round London ,just

as you lay hands on his coatails he disappears into the fog.

Thought id start this for some light relief,(oh foolish knave)

but im hooked allready,That sound u here is my Wife weeping

as another obsession takes hold. Anyway I will continue to

ask questions of you all untill I am up to speed (2010 should do it)

by the way whats your take on the photographic evidence all fake

no fake or in between(why do I get the feeling it wont be as simple

as that)if this already exists on other threads please advise thanks

"When all other evidence has been dicarded what is left, however

unlikely must be the truth" Sherlock Holmes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Duncan,

An email was received a few weeks ago by Rich Della Rossa from a source,ex-army,who said they had seen the other film.I do not believe in cross posting from forum to forum.The email in available in full for all to read at www.jfkresearch.com

Is this email in the articles section of jfkresearch, or the forum section?

Steve Thomas

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...