Jump to content
The Education Forum

How tall were Zappy and Sitzy?


Jack White
 Share

Recommended Posts

Today I tried to refine my previous studies of the ZAPRUDER WALTZ

to get a little more accurate estimate of the heights of Zap and Sitz.

This reinforces my opinion that the two figures have been added

by retouching, since the average height of Zappy seems to be

around 5 feet tall, and the image quality is so UNphotographic.

Jack

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 30
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Although I personally have no factual information, I do have some hearsay.

Abraham Zapruder's wife, as well as his son, independently and separately told me that Mr. Z was 5 feet 10 inches tall. Mr. Z was deceased at the time that I spoke with them long ago.

The information was needed to complete the trig work in determination of exactly how much of JFK's head should have been visible to Mr. Zapruder above the road sign, in his film.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Today I tried to refine my previous studies of the ZAPRUDER WALTZ

to get a little more accurate estimate of the heights of Zap and Sitz.

This reinforces my opinion that the two figures have been added

by retouching, since the average height of Zappy seems to be

around 5 feet tall, and the image quality is so UNphotographic.

Jack

PHOTOGRAMERTY

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/jfk-research/message/4128

Jack,

1 - The images here are not clear enough to determine if you accurately marked the tops of their heads. Can you post higher resolution copies?

2 - As I'm sure you are aware the further an object is from the camera the smaller its apparent size. How far back from the edge of the pedestal do you think they were? Did you take this into account? Admittedly this would only make a small difference.

3 - Z has his legs apart and appears to be slouching or leaning forward, this would effectively "shorten" him too.

4 - Even if you were only 10% off that would shave 6 - 7 inches off Z apparent height.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/jfk-research/message/4128

Jack,

1 - The images here are not clear enough to determine if you accurately marked the tops of their heads. Can you post higher resolution copies?

2 - As I'm sure you are aware the further an object is from the camera the smaller its apparent size. How far back from the edge of the pedestal do you think they were? Did you take this into account? Admittedly this would only make a small difference.

3 - Z has his legs apart and appears to be slouching or leaning forward, this would effectively "shorten" him too.

4 - Even if you were only 10% off that would shave 6 - 7 inches off Z apparent height.

Zapruder was not standing errect in Moorman's photograph. The Bell and Nix films, as well as the Bronson slide show the two standing next to one another. Altgens took a photo of Zapruder and Sitzman as they had just gotten off the pedestal. My question is why did Jack not measure from a fixed object to the top of the pedestal so to cut down on error?

Information I obtained from Gary Mack reads as sollows ...

"I measured the pedestal height this morning. Rather than use the grass, as Jack did, I used the top of the bottom and top steps that adjoin the pedestal (there are three steps in all).

The distance from the top of the top step to the top of the pedestal is 40 inches; the distance from the top of the bottom step to the top of the pedestal is 49.5 inches.

I would ignore the "camber" at the top of the pedestal, since Zapruder's shoes would straddle the raised center section. The result would be that his shoes (which would add 1/4-1/2 inch) would be placed very close to the outer edges of the rectangular pedestal. My measurements were made to the outer edge.

Zapruder's daughter has also told me that Z was about 5'10" and, as researchers who knew her confirm, Sitzman was also very tall, almost six feet. FWIW, I met Henry Zapruder and he was almost six feet.

With that information, you should be able to scale the photos accurately to determine Sitzman's height and Zapruder's. Zapruder, of course, was crouching somewhat by the time of the head shot."

Edited by Bill Miller
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Today I tried to refine my previous studies of the ZAPRUDER WALTZ

to get a little more accurate estimate of the heights of Zap and Sitz.

This reinforces my opinion that the two figures have been added

by retouching, since the average height of Zappy seems to be

around 5 feet tall, and the image quality is so UNphotographic.

Jack

Jack, in the future if you are going to make a photo comparison with a test subject like Groden and compare his height to that of those seen in the assassination images - you should do it from the same location and height off the ground that the original photos were taken. The camera height and location in the Groden photo is no where close to that of the comparison photos you referenced, thus any comparisons are doomed to fail before you ever got started. For instance, had you of shot the Groden photo from the same angle and location to the pedestal as Moorman did, then you could compare Robert's height against the background of the colonnade in relation to Zapruder and Sitzman's in Moorman's photograph. That would allow anyone to see if they were within the norm or not.

Bill

Edited by Bill Miller
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Today I tried to refine my previous studies of the ZAPRUDER WALTZ

to get a little more accurate estimate of the heights of Zap and Sitz.

This reinforces my opinion that the two figures have been added

by retouching, since the average height of Zappy seems to be

around 5 feet tall, and the image quality is so UNphotographic.

Jack

Jack, so let me see if I understand you right ... are you saying that no one was atop the pedestal in all those images or are you saying that Sitzman and Zapruder WERE atop the pedestal, but someone retouched their heights? If the latter is the case, then do you care to speculate why in God's name someone would need to retouch Zapruder and Sitzman's heights? One other thing too, have you considered having your process of figuring their heights from photo to photo peer reviewed?

Bill

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks, Duncan! Great idea I wish I had thought of!

Here is another study, using Nix (two different frames).

Nix is the only film showing Zappy with a hat.

These studies were done because of a suggestion that

the corner of the pedestal was a CONSTANT in all photos

at a known height of fifty inches.

Jack

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Today I tried to refine my previous studies of the ZAPRUDER WALTZ

to get a little more accurate estimate of the heights of Zap and Sitz.

This reinforces my opinion that the two figures have been added

by retouching, since the average height of Zappy seems to be

around 5 feet tall, and the image quality is so UNphotographic.

Jack

Jack, so let me see if I understand you right ... are you saying that no one was atop the pedestal in all those images or are you saying that Sitzman and Zapruder WERE atop the pedestal, but someone retouched their heights? If the latter is the case, then do you care to speculate why in God's name someone would need to retouch Zapruder and Sitzman's heights? One other thing too, have you considered having your process of figuring their heights from photo to photo peer reviewed?

Bill

Miller is not paying attention. I have been saying this for five years. It has been

published in two books and presented at major symposiums of researchers.

Dr. John Costella says of it:

QUOTE:

I believe Jack's work (the graphic he attached) is the best we are likely to attain for some of those photographs. His source material is far

superior to anything else we now have (e.g. his exposures from the Bronson slide).

Jack's use of the pedestal height is sound. The height of the pedestal is a fixed, vertical distance, at almost exactly the same distance from

each camera as the (purported) people that were (purportedly) photographed on top of the pedestal. The error involved in the difference

in distance is negligible on this scale. I find no geometrical effects that would distort his measurements, to the degree of accuracy we are

talking about here.

My feeling (and Jack may disagree; I was not certain of this point) was that in some cases a small amount of uncertainty is involved in

determining the precise bottom of the pedestal, from the quality of the photographic evidence available. Even though the uncertainty is

small, it is significant because the "baseline" or "reference" distance (the 51.5 inches) is not a large one.

I was also unsure whether Jack corrected for the fact that, in some of the photos, the "people" (as far as they can be made out)

sometimes have e.g. slightly bent knees.

To try to overcome the first problem, I recently made use of rather high quality prints of the Betzner and Willis photos published in LIFE

in 1967, and used photogrammetric techniques on the wider pergola shelter and "retaining" wall structures to get a more precise fix on

angles and distances, based on the HSCA topographic survey and the known positions of Betzner and Willis. I also estimated the

uncertainties in performing these calculations, as well as uncertainties in the true heights of the "people" because of possible slight

crouching positions (for "Zapruder", in any case). I also reviewed, more briefly, the other frames Jack used in his comparison, from the

same photogrammetric point of view.

My overall conclusion was that a reasonable estimate is that the "Zapruder" character depicted in these images is most probably

somewhere between about 5'0" and 5'5" in height, with some possibly depicting a height slightly below 5'.

I agree completely with Jack that some or all of these photographs and film frames have been fabricated or altered, and so it is not

assured at all that they represent true depictions of the "real" people on the Zapruder pedestal at the time of the assassination. Indeed, I

do not trust any of the extant photographic evidence to be a faithful representation; as a family friend (who works for the Australian

Government in forensic investigations) once expressed to me, "none of the evidence [in the JFK assassination] was properly preserved",

which in the case of the photographic evidence is blatantly obvious to any serious scholar of the case.

However, as a point of logic, Jack's work (supplemented, I guess, by my slightly more scientific double-checking, which, however, in the

end, adds little to Jack's original work) does have huge ramifications vis a vis the height of the true Abraham Zapruder, REGARDLESS

of whether the photographic evidence is genuine or not. Namely, the logical statement

"The non-Zapruder-film photographic evidence has not been tampered with" AND "Abraham Zapruder was filming from the pedestal"

is disproved, if it is established that Mr Zapruder was significantly taller than 5' to 5'5". This logical statement is central to the question of

whether the photographic evidence in the case in toto is authentic. If the first part of the statement is false, then the photographic

evidence is not authentic, because the non-Zapruder part of it is not authentic. If, to the contrary, the first part is assumed to be true, then

the measurements establish that the second part of the statement is false, which in turn implies that the "Zapruder film" was not filmed by

Mr Abraham Zapruder, which itself implies that the Zapruder film is not authentic. Either way, there is something rotten in the state of

Denmark.

UNQUOTE

I SHOULD EXPLAIN THAT COSTELLA'S USE OF 51.5 INCHES INCLUDED THE CAMBER OF THE

TOP OF THE PEDESTAL. I AT FIRST USED "51.5 INCHES", BUT DECIDED THAT WAS TOO

CONFUSING TO EXPLAIN, SINCE THE EDGES ARE WHAT IS BEING USED, AND THE CAMBER

IS HIGHEST ONLY AT THE TOP CENTER OF THE SURFACE, FURTHER ELEVATING THE HEIGHTS

OF PEOPLE UP THERE. FOR SIMPLICITY, I CHOSE NOT TO TRY TO MEASURE THE CAMBER

IN THE STUDIES, BUT ONLY MENTION IT BRIEFLY.

Edited by Jack White
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What I am doing in these studies is....gasp....PHOTOGRAMMETRY.

And I do not have a degree in it. Lawdy, don't tell Blakey, or

he will get after me for PRACTICING PHOGRAMMETRY WITHOUT

A LICENSE!

Jack

Today I tried to refine my previous studies of the ZAPRUDER WALTZ

to get a little more accurate estimate of the heights of Zap and Sitz.

This reinforces my opinion that the two figures have been added

by retouching, since the average height of Zappy seems to be

around 5 feet tall, and the image quality is so UNphotographic.

Jack

Jack, in the future if you are going to make a photo comparison with a test subject like Groden and compare his height to that of those seen in the assassination images - you should do it from the same location and height off the ground that the original photos were taken. The camera height and location in the Groden photo is no where close to that of the comparison photos you referenced, thus any comparisons are doomed to fail before you ever got started. For instance, had you of shot the Groden photo from the same angle and location to the pedestal as Moorman did, then you could compare Robert's height against the background of the colonnade in relation to Zapruder and Sitzman's in Moorman's photograph. That would allow anyone to see if they were within the norm or not.

Bill

Again, Miller is not paying attention. The photo of Groden on top of the pedestal

WAS taken with a normal lens (not telephoto), from the alleged location of Moorman

ON THE GRASS across Elm. That is why the quality is not very good. I have stated

this numerous times over the past five years.

Miller's speculation that I shot Groden from some OTHER location is...well, bullxxxx.

Jack

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...