Jack White Posted July 7, 2006 Share Posted July 7, 2006 Three days after the assassination, a barely recognizable Zapruder frame appeared in newspapers. Why was the quality so poor for no reasonable reason? Jack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pat Speer Posted July 7, 2006 Share Posted July 7, 2006 Three days after the assassination, a barely recognizableZapruder 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? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Miller Posted July 7, 2006 Share Posted July 7, 2006 (edited) Three days after the assassination, a barely recognizableZapruder 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 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack White Posted July 7, 2006 Author Share Posted July 7, 2006 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 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Miller Posted July 8, 2006 Share Posted July 8, 2006 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 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Dolva Posted July 8, 2006 Share Posted July 8, 2006 (edited) Three days after the assassination, a barely recognizableZapruder 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 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now