headshot head movements

[John Dolva]

here is a simple gif demonstrating a rough 3d model of the upper half of a head that is moved diagonally down in a shallow arc without

being turned or tilted. As can be seen, a wrong reading can be had of the movement on a static screen,, perhaps interpreting an impulse that does not exist. (see animation bottom left with the three heads superimposed.)

just how much did Kennedy's

head move 'forward'? I know

the stock answer is 2 inches...I wonder

an attempt at compensation

as I understand so far, note

shoulder, shadow, angle of

head crown, ear...

_________________________________________

(EDIT:: PS>Bill, forgive me, my fault for mentioning peripheral issues . It has nothing to do with the topic here. I'm not going to be diverted from the main topic here which is to understand the orientations by understanding how things move frame by frame eventually perhaps being able to compensate for such movements. People are free of course to speculate on related matters as they wish. I find related matters interesting and eventually will deal with them.)

Edited May 13, 2006 by John Dolva

[Bill Miller]

(EDIT:: PS>Bill, forgive me, my fault for mentioning peripheral issues . It has nothing to do with the topic here. I'm not going to be diverted from the main topic here which is to understand the orientations by understanding how things move frame by frame eventually perhaps being able to compensate for such movements. People are free of course to speculate on related matters as they wish. I find related matters interesting and eventually will deal with them.)

Most of the discussion has been dealing with frames before the head shot ... now if I understand you correctly - you are implying how fractures seen on an Xray that doesn't even match JFK's head wound fits nicely with the blurred image Z313. I am just trying to rationalize what it is that you think you are saying here.

Bill

[John Dolva]

OK. I do understand, Bill.

I made that attempt at correcting the alignment for the head, remembering that it shifts in three dimensions, and tried to create an example, then being both intrigued by the result and intrigued by implications, I did my usual thing (my mistake) and tacked on a foot note, like 'hey that looks like...".

Because it, in that instance, is something that I obviously am not fully up to speed on and apparently has issues in and of itself, that footnote then threatens to become the main discussion. That's fair enough, However, I find the determination of the topics main question the one that needs attention. Eventually the issue of what one sees and the implications of it can be addressed elsewhere.

For now, I think we are logging a good set of considerations and how to address them, and, as can be seen by that clip, it is important to get it right, for example if what I cobbled together is nearer what happened, then the implications are enormous. I whnt to get it right, some speculation is inevitably thrown in, but I will try to steer thing back to what I feel must come first. I guess I also feel a sense of urgency as there are so many other issues that this may spawn that need addressing.

___________________________

I'm hoping that Craig will put together something addressing the lens, what itdoes and how it affects wehat isseen, and possibly suggest ways of incorporating whatever it is.

I wonder just how much of the widening of the dark edge of the grass as the limo descends is due to the vertical rotation and whether or not there is some movement component in the direction of Zapruder?

___

(also I wonder whether there is some kind of simple logging in some list/ tabl;e format that could be done to locate each frame, so that one could say to someone, 'I think the proper alignment of 380 say is at x, y, z,? just a thought to see if there are any ideas. some kind of coordinate references)

It's interesting that as one gains a deeper understanding of the (any film really) some illusions drop off. Eventually I think it possible to see it in a new way and we'll see how many illusions have been sustained by an incorrect understanding,.

One thing seems certain to me is that a static screen 'lies'. Perhaps the proper screen is a contracting and expanding spherical bubble on to which the scene is projected indide from Z's vantage point in the way he moved. Anyweway that's theoretical, and for the frames in question not necessary

but the rotation both left to right, and up and down are definitely a significant factor between frames. Left right more so of course.

I've done an initial experiment with lowering each frame by a fixed amount (in that instance 4 pixels per frame) and the natural look, feel achieved is nice. Some sense of unrreality drops away.

here is a simple gif demonstrating a rough 3d model of the upper half of a head that is moved diagonally down in a shallow arc without

being turned or tilted. As can be seen, a wrong reading can be had of the movement on a static screen,, perhaps interpreting an impulse that does not exist. (see animation bottom left with the three heads superimposed.)

just how much did Kennedy's

head move 'forward'? I know

the stock answer is 2 inches...I wonder

an attempt at compensation

as I understand so far, note

shoulder, shadow, angle of

head crown, ear...

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...indpost&p=62312 post#104

Edited May 14, 2006 by John Dolva

[Bill Miller]

I'm hoping that Craig will put together something addressing the lens, what itdoes and how it affects wehat isseen, and possibly suggest ways of incorporating whatever it is.

I am certain that some of the varying shadow thickness of the grass along the south curb is caused by the degree of blurring between the frames. I also think that because MPI photographed each film frame ... that somehow they caused some movement of the limo and its occuopants that is not on the Groden version. One such thing that comes to mind is the north to south and back again rocking of the limo as it travels across Zapruder's field of view. If my memory serves me right - the MPI film is the only version that created this appearence.

Bill

[John Dolva]

(also I wonder whether there is some kind of simple logging in some list/ table format that could be done to locate each frame, so that one could say to someone, 'I think the proper alignment of 380 say is at x, y, z,? just a thought to see if there are any ideas. some kind of coordinate references)

It's interesting that as one gains a deeper understanding of the (any film really) some illusions drop off. Eventually I think it possible to see it in a new way and we'll see how many illusions have been sustained by an incorrect understanding,.

One thing seems certain to me is that a static screen 'lies'. Perhaps the proper screen is a contracting and expanding spherical bubble on to which the scene is projected indide from Z's vantage point in the way he moved. Anywway that's theoretical, and for the frames in question not necessary

but the rotation both left to right, and up and down are definitely a significant factor between frames.

Edited May 15, 2006 by John Dolva

[Bill Miller]

I wonder just how much of the widening of the dark edge of the grass as the limo descends is due to the vertical rotation and whether or not there is some movement component in the direction of Zapruder?

In many frames the top of the curb can be seen over the limo, so I don't think the limo descending down the 3% grade is a factor at that point.

Bill

[John Dolva]

repeat

Edited May 16, 2006 by John Dolva

[John Dolva]

Tackling the assassins head on, and smashing some mirrors...

Simply applying the principles outlined in this thread and an understanding of principles of perspective distortions and attendant optical illusions to z312 through 317 for the area immediately around Kennedy results in the following film..

When viewing the zfilm on a static screen with the standard types of alignments it does indeed look like a forward snap (which the LN'rs like) followed by a back and to the left movement which the GK mob likes. This is an illusion caused by a misunderstanding of the principles, or an understandable unawareness of their existance.

The correction I've made here goes a long way towards rectifying this problem. It needs refining as I can see that it will be possible to be very exact about the direction of the forces applied to his head, including that of the bullet.

The application of these principles as I understand them has been without regard for the outcome and I'm as startled as anyone. I didn't set out to create this particular version because it shows Kennedy's head snap to HIS right back, striking his right shoulder struture of muscles which acted as a trampoline (try it, it's very bouncy) and ended up in the following movements.. I slowly create a group of frames that I have to wait for the finish to see the result.

There are conclusions to be drawn that will be very controversial. I hesitate to mention them because they then become the item for discussion, which should be

the process, the theory, verification and refinement.

the application of the principles has been uniform, consistent and documented. Thus explainable and reproducible.

This could be 'the key'. Not my conclusions and interpretations.

I will mention a couple of things I see as teasers. Some derived from the meticulous application of the principles, some from observation of the results. And a couple that move into hypothesising, yet to be verified, but hinted at along the way.

1.The limousine came to a near stop.

2. Connally reacted significantly and instantly, indication possibly a hit from fragments.

3. Kennedy HAS been hit in 312.

4. the back and to the left movement is largely caused by speed and direction changes (and possibly by the seat springs rebounding from absorbing the knockdown power of a strike from the left while his trunk is kept from changing shape to absorb impact becuse of the back brace.)

There's more, so members and visitors may be able to see the critical importance of this. On the other hand I can understand an internalisation of resistance. So while there are results, the development of the process is not finished.

Discussion helps. Refining the technique is THE important thing, people can draw their own conclusion from the eventual result.

once again::

an attempt at compensation

as I understand so far

in memory of Pvt W.Hudson

dropped on to LV-426

Ripley: How many drops is this for you, Lieutenant?

Gorman: Thirty eight... simulated.

Vasquez: How many *combat* drops?

Gorman: Uh, two. Including this one.

Drake: xxxx.

Hudson: Oh, man...

Ferro: Stand by to initiate release sequencer. On my mark. Five. Four.

Hudson: We're on an express elevator to hell; going down!

Ferro: Three. Two. One. Mark.

interesting simultaneous reaction from Connally

PS

a good compact free floating media viewer is 'Classic' at

http://prdownloads.sourceforge.net/guliver...82.zip?download

it has very nice keystroke zoom and pan feautres and the clip is best studied on continuous loop and full screen with all toolbars etc hidden, a simple double click (left) will toggle fullscreen, and a right click for menu.

Edited May 16, 2006 by John Dolva

[John Dolva]

I realise this has little to do with the assassination of Kennedy, (and members are more interested in other things) , but nevertheless...

a shot from the left(not Castro)

Edited May 17, 2006 by John Dolva

[Shanet Clark]

I realise this has little to do with the assassination of Kennedy, (and members are more interested in other things) , but nevertheless...

a shot from the left(not Castro)

Good work on this model John -

and I think you are right about the

seatsprings and acceleration playing a large part in the motion.....

[Bill Miller]

4. the back and to the left movement is largely caused by speed and direction changes (and possibly by the seat springs rebounding from absorbing the knockdown power of a strike from the left while his trunk is kept from changing shape to absorb impact becuse of the back brace.)

If I live to be 100, I will never understand someone justifying a bullet hitting JFK's with such force to somehow bring his seat springs into play and yet have his head turn back to its original position in less than 1/18th of a second. I only wish Sherry was still around to address this for I am certain what has been suggested is impossible.

Bill

[John Dolva]

I realise this has little to do with the assassination of Kennedy, (and members are more interested in other things) , but nevertheless...

a shot from the left(not Castro)

Good work on this model John -

and I think you are right about the

seatsprings and acceleration playing a large part in the motion.....

look at the hair, probably permed, you know that fluffy lightness a womans hair can have ..., see it flopp back as she follows the strike from the left*(Kennedy's left and then as his head rebounds, she recoils and her hair flops the other way, see Kennedy's arm jerk to the (his ) rihgtback as the head hits the shoulder, then his body follows the head to the left, not towards the back yet!!!,

look at the perspectives that determine the size of the heads.

all flows...as it should do.

EDIT:: PS *I'm here talking of Kennedy's left, ie opposite the cameraman.

_______

Bill, the back and to the left happened later, and it was split into two components that correspond to the speed and direction changes of the limousine.

Edited May 17, 2006 by John Dolva

[John Dolva]

I realise this has little to do with the assassination of Kennedy, (and members are more interested in other things) , but nevertheless...

a shot from the left(not Castro)

Good work on this model John -

and I think you are right about the

seatsprings and acceleration playing a large part in the motion.....

look at the hair, probably permed, you know that fluffy lightness a womans hair can have ..., see it flopp back as she follows the strike from the left*(Kennedy's left and then as his head rebounds, she recoils and her hair flops the other way, see Kennedy's arm jerk to the (his ) rihgtback as the head hits the shoulder, then his body follows the head to the left, not towards the back yet!!!,

look at the perspectives that determine the size of the heads.

all flows...as it should do.

EDIT:: PS *I'm here talking of Kennedy's left, ie opposite the cameraman.

_______

Bill, the back and to the left happened later, and it was split into two components that correspond to the speed and direction changes of the limousine.

Could someone please post photo and/or link of the RIGHT (her right) side of Jackie before she had a chance to clean the hat. Pref color

Also a detailed account by her of the headshot moment seems hard to find.

Also, if anyone has a photo/link to the inner right side rear door etc of the limousine.

[John Dolva]

I realise this has little to do with the assassination of Kennedy, (and members are more interested in other things) , but nevertheless...

a shot from the left(not Castro)

Good work on this model John -

and I think you are right about the

seatsprings and acceleration playing a large part in the motion.....

look at the hair, probably permed, you know that fluffy lightness a womans hair can have ..., see it flopp back as she follows the strike from the left*(Kennedy's left and then as his head rebounds, she recoils and her hair flops the other way, see Kennedy's arm jerk to the (his ) rihgtback as the head hits the shoulder, then his body follows the head to the left, not towards the back yet!!!,

look at the perspectives that determine the size of the heads.

all flows...as it should do.

EDIT:: PS *I'm here talking of Kennedy's left, ie opposite the cameraman.

_______

Bill, the back and to the left happened later, and it was split into two components that correspond to the speed and direction changes of the limousine.

Could someone please post photo and/or link of the RIGHT (her right) side of Jackie before she had a chance to clean the hat. Pref color

Also a detailed account by her of the headshot moment seems hard to find.

Also, if anyone has a photo/link to the inner right side rear door etc of the limousine.

[Bill Miller]

Bill, the back and to the left happened later, and it was split into two components that correspond to the speed and direction changes of the limousine.

Now I am really lost for the head exploded with the limo at a crawling speed and it didn't accelerate until after the head had already started going backwards. The rear motion of the head starts at Z315 ... two frames following the impact.

The Nix film shows the cycles gaining on the limo as it advances forward at a very steady slow rate and the head can already be seen moving backwards before any speed changes took place.

Bill

Edited May 18, 2006 by Bill Miller