BM testing the waters re RZavada update?

[Craig Lamson]

'Bill Miller'

dgh01: LURKERS please note: If this was so easy why have we NOT seen a detailed sturdy of a "alledged Z-frame, ANY Z-frame? Just more noise, simply NOISE

dgh01: Rollie isn't going to post anything, anymore than KODAK is going to post, WHY? You have to deliver the in-camera Zapruder film in order to make comparispons, to dispel alteration scenarios... Now, if you can't deliver to this forum those whom your speaking for, how in the hell are you going to deliver the Zapruder? film. time to go home, Bill. You fought the good fight -- We need Groden and Gary and Rollie and Ray...

dgh01: post us some Z-film examples of this UNIQUE emulsion...time to deliver bucko!

David, I think the noise you are talking about was happening when you asked me to show where Costella had ever said that Life Magazine had printed altered Zapruder film images. How irionic that you didn't even know enough about the facts to intelligently discuss this matter.

The problems I have described apply to any film being altered, but even more so to Kodachrome II film and you have yet to show any signs of understanding those points. Groden said that he has examined the Zapruder film for sharpness and color balance, among other things. Zavada has described the things he had done when examining not only the original Zfilm, but the three copies, as well. You have continuously come across as someone who is trying to salvage a poorly thought out theory that you people have formulated by demanding that someone produce an original Zfilm frame example on this forum, which wouldn't even accurately replicate how the film image looked before all the changes that putting it on the Internet would have caused. If you want to see how grains build up on film transfers - go view the copies made from the camera original. You will find that they are much grainer than the original and it occurred for the reasons that the experts stated.

I have presented the information presented by the experts, some of them who have actually examined the Zapruder film first hand. If you or any of the other 'alteration' cult leaders would like to get an expert to go examine the Zapruder film and its copies, then do so and post their findings here as well.

dgh02: here's what YOU need to do champ.... you need to demonstrate (on a Z-frame example) what said Z-film frame has gone through during the 8mm - 35mm 8mm" blowup - blowdown process, simulating the KodachromeII emulsion-grain problem.

LIFE magazine thought Mo's 8mm to 16mm blowup looked great (its in the testimony), he said he could do it from 8mm direct to 35mm,and DID (its in the testimony) I suspect he used 35mm Ektachrome film, he did state he didn't use Eastman Film for blowups (its in the testimony) some here know what those 35mm blowup frames look like. In fact, Mo bragged about how good the 8mm blowup to 35mm looked like - kept a few prints around to show off that very fact (its in the testimony) ... Groden's intimate with these films, if he can't comment in public, he's useless when it comes to the debate -- why do you need a 78 year old guy to do the debating for your side...? So let's can the bullxxxx about 8mm film emulsion, that is until you can provide a first generation Z-film frame to compare problem your emnulsion to....

How difficult do YOU think it would be to go from 35mm to 8mm?

Until then, you have nothing to bring to the table. So far you haven't even presented an expert to refute the data presented to you concerning the grain transfers.

dgh02: read the above then re-read the above, there is NO argument here Bill Miller, you haven't a clue, you and Rollie and everyone else on the Lone Neuter side of the equation propound a theory then provide not one ounce of proof to support that theory --- your emulsion argument is a joke, how long are they expecting you to tread water....., you taking one for the ole gipper, here? LMAO...

<rest of nonsense snipped>

LOL! Its always entertaing when Squealy writes...oink oink.

You have a lot of nerve demanding someone else provide ANYTHING when your proof of concept work (you know that enlarging 8mm to 35mm and then doing some "optical printing" magic is a simple task) is still MISSING IN ACTION after what THREE YEARS?

OF course we ALL know what a failure your computer composites were, so I'm not suprised you have done nothing "film based".

Talk about no argument! LOL! Of course it is Squealy we are talking about....oink oink!

Yor speaking for Miller now? Typical Lone Neuter tactic: one that doesn't know anything is subbing for one who even knows less... One of these day's one of you overblown experts, in nothing, might post something constructive. Here I thought you'd of found another bus to photograph or is this a slow time of year???? lmao!

Nice backstroke through the hog trough there Squealy...now where is that "optical printing" proof of concept you say is so easy to produce? Oh yea..nowhere...later hog....