Earliest reproduction of Z frame

[Jack White]

Three days after the assassination, a barely recognizable

Zapruder frame appeared in newspapers. Why was the

quality so poor for no reasonable reason?

Jack

[Pat Speer]

Three days after the assassination, a barely recognizable

Zapruder frame appeared in newspapers. Why was the

quality so poor for no reasonable reason?

Jack

Jack, I make it a point to try to read every early article on the medical evidence. Cany you post the article itself?

As to why the photo is so blurry, could the transfer from color to black and white have something to do with it?

[Bill Miller]

Three days after the assassination, a barely recognizable

Zapruder frame appeared in newspapers. Why was the

quality so poor for no reasonable reason?

Jack

The quality of the Zfilm image on the newspaper reminds of those images Ed O'Hagen post ... maybe he can give you the recipe. There are several factors at play here just as the WC printed muddy versions of the same frames. To think that the original film was tah bad is the same as being ignorant of the testim ony of those who saw it and spoke of the clear images contained on it.

All one needs to do is adjust the contrast and the image starts to wash out. Next is the copy that was sent over the wire. It would not be the only poor quality print ever known to be sent over a news wire for some of Moorman's prints were not very good either. And how good was the machine that recieved the print? Then the scan of the newspaper itself is so poor that one cannot read anything but the largest letters. If such detail is lost in the text, then would it not also be lost in the picture quality ... of course it would. Has anyone not also considered how much detail was lost in the extreme enlarging of the image?

BTW, I believe Gary Mack has told me that the newspaper in question was dated 11/27/63 ... not 11/25/63.

Bill Miller

Edited July 7, 2006 by Bill Miller

[Jack White]

Three days after the assassination, a barely recognizable

Zapruder frame appeared in newspapers. Why was the

quality so poor for no reasonable reason?

Jack

Jack, I make it a point to try to read every early article on the medical evidence. Cany you post the article itself?

As to why the photo is so blurry, could the transfer from color to black and white have something to do with it?

Pat...sorry the text is not visible, as this scan is greatly enlarged,

and I do not have the original.

Jack

[Bill Miller]

Pat...sorry the text is not visible, as this scan is greatly enlarged,

and I do not have the original.

Jack

The enlarging of the photo greatly explains away much of the original question. But on a side note ... if that newspaper scan has been greatly enlarged ... that had to be the smallest newspaper in the world.

Bill Miller

[John Dolva]

Three days after the assassination, a barely recognizable

Zapruder frame appeared in newspapers. Why was the

quality so poor for no reasonable reason?

Jack

I read something about this sort of thing. (The following is just a description of it as I remember). Apparently when you make a copy of an original film like this the colors/luminance tend to become more solid. This is the primary degradation of the first generation copies. The FBI had at least one first generation copy by this time and at least three second generation copies. Presumably the degradation of the second generatioon is not as big. So, as there were a number of people who had access to the film and an unknown number of copies, and there were some who had direct connections to Chicago like Harry and the FBI, unless the newspaper disclosed its source, one can only speculate there, however it is unlikely to be a copy of a frame from the original, but has the attributes of a reproduction of a copy. The number one indicates that there may be more frames printed inside?

Edited July 8, 2006 by John Dolva