The Real Zapruder Question

[Bill Miller]

Has anyone ever considered that Zapruder's camera was running on auto-zoom and that it was his tracking of the limo combinded with the limo's forward advancement that effected how the images looked on his film from frame to frame? I ask this because to achieve the exact same zoom ratio's ... someone would need to be seeing the limo from the same distance while having their camera's auto-zoom to be duplicating Zapruder's ratio's as well or it would be impossible to combine the two films and have all the images match up perfectly. If someone thinks this was not a problem, then please tell me how they reached their conclusion?

Thanks,

Bill Miller

[Terry Mauro]

I believe Zapruder rented out parts of the second, third, and fourth floors of the Dal-Tex. If anyone has a list of all the occupants on the West side of the building, that would be helpful. As far as why he only filmed the one film...well, he had just purchased the camera and was trying iit out, only to have this incredibly pleasant experience with it. Then the government took his camera from him. His reluctance in re-embarking into the cinematic world is understandable.

Largest response, flinch? An unsuspecting, amateur motion picture camerman? Afraid of heights, wearing glasses, had to be talked into filming the event, by a woman (Sitzman) he doesn't even name in his WC testimony, rounds going off, echos everywhere, then the presidents head exploding... That's IT, a tiny flinch? Did the guy have military experience, was he a marksman, use to hearing rounds fired. Plus, he's crying and or crying out while he continues his filming trek down Elm Street? His response to the gunshots are negligible, hardly a blip.... that B&H414 camera at full zoom, panning left to right would need only 3-4 inches of upward/downward or sideways camera movement off-center for the liomo to disappear from the frame....

Zapruder did better than some pro combat photog's I know. When they saw the Z-film, understood who took it, they were amazed [two of the four don't believe it].

Well!

It is somewhat difficult to accept that an individual, who is somewhat balancing on a pedastal to the extent that he requires someone to hold him, can/does thereafter pan a camera across an area which has a downhill slope and in which a vehicle is travelling on this downhill slope, yet the camera is being held and "panned" in such a position as to indicate that the vehicle is actually travelling on an uphill slope, and, during this "panning & filming", hold the camera so completely steady as to maintain the bottom edge of the film exposure in direct and level alignment with the top edge of the car doors.

(Z320 through Z330)

Not to even mention the other virtually perfect horizontal alignment with the car.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The courts regularly accept as an established fact that anything which appears to occurs, yet is for all known human endeavor physically impossible, as being evidence of some form of human tampering.

You are clearly on the right track now David.

Tom

**************************************************

And thank you, Purv [and David] for getting this thread back on the right track.

[David G. Healy]

Has anyone ever considered that Zapruder's camera was running on auto-zoom and that it was his tracking of the limo combinded with the limo's forward advancement that effected how the images looked on his film from frame to frame? I ask this because to achieve the exact same zoom ratio's ... someone would need to be seeing the limo from the same distance while having their camera's auto-zoom to be duplicating Zapruder's ratio's as well or it would be impossible to combine the two films and have all the images match up perfectly. If someone thinks this was not a problem, then please tell me how they reached their conclusion?

Thanks,

Bill Miller

Here's a scenario....Not necessary for another camera (not impossible a second B&H414 camera may of been on the pedestal) in or around the pedestal... matching up *not so perfectly* is a optical printers problem, ask Ray Fielding, that's what Roland has him there for...

Zapruders camera was running on auto-zoom...

Auto-zoom? The B&H414 zoom was manual, don't think any cameras of the day were "auto-zoom" you're a little early there.... so for a scenario...

First, Zapruder's camera was on FULL zoom, the false start in the Z-film (as we know it today) at Z132-133 is interesting to say the least.

Was it possible for someone to make a double 8mm filming pass (from Zapruder's pedestal) down Elm Street after the intial escort car/motorcyle passed down Elm Street? A *clean-no vehicle* left to right pan down Elm Street to the railroad overcrossing, no vehicle traffic. Just a nice smooth pan ... SOME think so...

Sound familiar? The "pilot" film scenario? Does the math work out, was there enough film and wind in Zapruder's camera? Probably. No need for a rewind either...

Clean Elm Street 'pan' pass takes about 7-8 seconds of film at 16fps. After the film is split, cut the clean Elm Street pan from the Z-film in-camera original, after the 'false' start portion [frames to 132] a simple hot splice joining 132 with 133 where Kennedy's limo first appears, the rest is history. Well, till serious changes are needed/required and you have 2 months+ to determine that. Whatever immediate frames you want for LIFE and other pub's, use 'em.

Edited August 10, 2006 by David G. Healy

[Bill Miller]

Here's a scenario....Not necessary for another camera (not impossible a second B&H414 camera may of been on the pedestal) in or around the pedestal... matching up *not so perfectly* is a optical printers problem, ask Ray Fielding, that's what Roland has him there for...

I am finding this hard to buy. A film frame is a 2D image and if an object is filmed from two different angles, then I do not think that an optical printer is going to turn one image to match the filming angle of the other.

Bill Miller

[Thomas H. Purvis]

I believe Zapruder rented out parts of the second, third, and fourth floors of the Dal-Tex. If anyone has a list of all the occupants on the West side of the building, that would be helpful. As far as why he only filmed the one film...well, he had just purchased the camera and was trying iit out, only to have this incredibly pleasant experience with it. Then the government took his camera from him. His reluctance in re-embarking into the cinematic world is understandable.

Largest response, flinch? An unsuspecting, amateur motion picture camerman? Afraid of heights, wearing glasses, had to be talked into filming the event, by a woman (Sitzman) he doesn't even name in his WC testimony, rounds going off, echos everywhere, then the presidents head exploding... That's IT, a tiny flinch? Did the guy have military experience, was he a marksman, use to hearing rounds fired. Plus, he's crying and or crying out while he continues his filming trek down Elm Street? His response to the gunshots are negligible, hardly a blip.... that B&H414 camera at full zoom, panning left to right would need only 3-4 inches of upward/downward or sideways camera movement off-center for the liomo to disappear from the frame....

Zapruder did better than some pro combat photog's I know. When they saw the Z-film, understood who took it, they were amazed [two of the four don't believe it].

Well!

It is somewhat difficult to accept that an individual, who is somewhat balancing on a pedastal to the extent that he requires someone to hold him, can/does thereafter pan a camera across an area which has a downhill slope and in which a vehicle is travelling on this downhill slope, yet the camera is being held and "panned" in such a position as to indicate that the vehicle is actually travelling on an uphill slope, and, during this "panning & filming", hold the camera so completely steady as to maintain the bottom edge of the film exposure in direct and level alignment with the top edge of the car doors.

(Z320 through Z330)

Not to even mention the other virtually perfect horizontal alignment with the car.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The courts regularly accept as an established fact that anything which appears to occurs, yet is for all known human endeavor physically impossible, as being evidence of some form of human tampering.

You are clearly on the right track now David.

Tom

**************************************************

And thank you, Purv [and David] for getting this thread back on the right track.

Anything for a former New Orleans Bunny!

[Thomas H. Purvis]

http://home.earthlink.net/~joejd/jfk/zapho...pson-proof.html

Proof that the Zapruder Film is Authentic

Josiah Thompson

" Both the initial Secret Service and FBI reports on the shooting reported it the same way,"

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Although I personally have great respect for the work of Mr. Thompson, this does not mean that I accept each and every aspect of his work as being the "facts".

The "truth", as told, known, and understood at the time!---------Yes!

Nevertheless, the "truth" is what we either believe or else are lead to believe. It is not however the facts.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/...Vol17_0449a.htm

"A picture was taken at each point from 0+00 to the 6+25 mark, except no picture was taken at the 5+00 mark as this was about 4 feet from impact of the third shot"

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Impact point stationing number for Z-313 headshot:----------------------------------- 4+65.3

http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/...Vol17_0464b.htm

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Last time that I checked, it would be about 34.7 feet farther down Elm St. from stationing 4+65.3 to stationing 5+00 (4 feet from impact of the third shot), as determined by the US Secret Service on December 2/3/& 4th 1963, with their copy of the Z-film.

And, unless failing memory has me further confused, the FBI, during their work of February 1964, thereafter moved the second shot to just after JFK & JBC came out from behind the Stemmons Freeway sign, and thereafter made Z313/stationing 4+65.3 the last/third shot fired.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Too bad that the WC did not deem it of any necessity in determination of the facts to provide us with the "motion pictures" as taken from the Zapruder position by the US Secret Service, during their December 1963 assassination re-enactment.

Perhaps, we may have learned something from comparison of these/this motion pictures with the WC versions.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/...Vol17_0449a.htm

"The photographs in this album are to be viewed in their relationship with the attached survey report dated December 5, 1963"

"Photographs showing the camera arrangements used to take the pictures and the moving pictures of these scenes are included in this album."

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[John Dolva]

these few frames have been aligned by the sprocket holes (the way they would be in a projector) showing some flinch after shot

[Steve Thomas]

Pat,

If anyone has a list of all the occupants on the West side of the building, that would be helpful.

Here's a list of the Dal-Tex occupants.

In a biographical summary of Andy Armstrong's life, it says that in 1962, he worked for the Marilyn Belt Factory.

In January 1962, he got a job at the Marilyn Belt Factory. While working there, he also took a part-time job at the Carousel Club for Jack Ruby. During June 1962, Armstrong began working full time for Ruby who employed him as a bartender and general maintenance man for a salary of approximately per week plus tips.

Notice it has the same phone number as the Dallas Uranium&Oil Co.

Steve Thomas

[Jack White]

Do I remember correctly that H.L. Hunt was involved with Dallas Uranium Co.?

Jack

[David G. Healy]

Here's a scenario....Not necessary for another camera (not impossible a second B&H414 camera may of been on the pedestal) in or around the pedestal... matching up *not so perfectly* is a optical printers problem, ask Ray Fielding, that's what Roland has him there for...

I am finding this hard to buy. A film frame is a 2D image and if an object is filmed from two different angles, then I do not think that an optical printer is going to turn one image to match the filming angle of the other.

Bill Miller

Then don't buy it, ask a professional image film/video composer, a Hollywood optical effects film printing tech (if you can find one these day's) -- hell, ask Ray Fielding. IF a [pilot] film was shot from the same pedestal that Zapruder filmed from-within a minute or so of the killing, at 15-20% LESS than full zoom. or wider field of view - the filming "angle", lens fov [field-of-view] IS close enough.

The dead giveaway in a bad comp is LIGHTING, even the inexperienced eye notices.

And yes, some film process cameras do 'rotate around the z* (axis) see Ray Fielding's book. Basic stuff!

[Guest John Gillespie]

how and why did Abe Zapruder and Ms. Sitzman continue to stand erect on a prominent raised platform in the middle of the likely firing zone with Zapruder resolutely locked on the Presidential limousine until it disappeared under the overpass?

Um, because he's not a big wuss like you?

you are the atypical Washington desk jockey, right?

I have intentionally stayed out of the Zapruder debate for many reasons. But for the life of me I can't believe how oblivious some researchers are to the fact that the Oswald's were in up to their neck in the White Russian Community, of which Abe Zapruder was a member. Whatever position someone takes on the Zapruder Fil re 'alteration pro or con' I would hope they would at least let that soak in. See Zapruder worked with Jeanne Legon at Nardis of Dallas. Not all of these Solidarist's were benign entities.

__________________________

Guys,

Mr. Z's alleged connections and quickie profile:

"Abraham Zapruder-White Russian affiliation, 32nd degree Mason, active MEMBER of 2 CIA Proprietary Organizations: The Dallas Council On World Affairs and The Crusade For A Free Europe;

These two organizations were CIA (backed) Domestic Operations in Dallas whose membership included:

Abraham Zapruder, Clint Murchison (owner of the Dallas Cowboys at that time) , Mr. Byrd, (owner of the Texas School Book Depository), Sarah Hughes, who swore LBJ in as the 36th President while Air Force One was still on the ground in Dallas, George DeMohrenschildt, (CIA contract agent AND best friend of LHO), George Bush (also close friend of George DeMohrenschildt), Neil Mallon, (mentor that Bush named his son, Neil, after), H.L. Hunt, & Demitri Von Mohrenschildt (George D´s brother).

In 1953 and 1954 a woman named, Jeanne LeGon worked SIDE by SIDE with Abraham Zapruder at a high end clothing design firm called, Nardis of Dallas. Jeanne LeGon designed the clothing and Abraham Zapruder cut the patterns and the material for her.

Incidentally, Abraham Zapruder´s obituary mis-states the date/year that he departed Nardis of Dallas, incorrectly citing 1949. The correct year was 1959, [the same year that his "partner in design" Jeanne LeGon became known as, Jean LeGon DeMohrenschildt... She had married Lee Oswald´s BEST FRIEND (to be), CIA Contract Agent, George DeMohrenschildt!]

Lyndon Baines Johnson´s personal secretary, Marie Fehmer, who flew back to Washington on Air Force One with LBJ on 11-22-1963, just happens to be the daughter of Olga Fehmer, currently living in Tyler, Texas. Olga Fehmer ALSO worked at Nardis of Dallas with Abraham Zapruder and Jean LeGon DeMohrenshildt."

Aside to Jack White:

Jack,

Is there a way to determine whether Mr. Z's camera was shut off as he panned to the right following the limo (and ending his filming right at the picket fence) or if the film was edited that way?

Also, there is a rumor that Abe had made dresses for Clay Bertrand...

Regards,

JG

Edited August 10, 2006 by John Gillespie

[Jack White]

"Aside to Jack White: is there a way to determine whether Mr. Z's camera was shut off as he panned to the right following the limo (and ending his filming right at the picket fence) or if the film was edited that way?"

I do not know. I am not familiar with 8mm movie camera operation.

I examine images, not cameras.

Jack

[David G. Healy]

Here's a scenario....Not necessary for another camera (not impossible a second B&H414 camera may of been on the pedestal) in or around the pedestal... matching up *not so perfectly* is a optical printers problem, ask Ray Fielding, that's what Roland has him there for...

I am finding this hard to buy. A film frame is a 2D image and if an object is filmed from two different angles, then I do not think that an optical printer is going to turn one image to match the filming angle of the other.

Bill Miller

Then don't buy it, ask a professional image film/video composer, a Hollywood optical effects film printing tech (if you can find one these day's) -- hell, ask Ray Fielding. IF a [pilot] film was shot from the same pedestal that Zapruder filmed from-within a minute or so of the killing, at 15-20% LESS than full zoom. or wider field of view - the filming "angle", lens fov [field-of-view] IS close enough.

The dead giveaway in a bad comp is LIGHTING, even the inexperienced eye notices. The inexperienced eyes in this case may of been the WC.

And yes, some film process cameras do 'rotate around the z* (axis) see Ray Fielding's book. Basic stuff!

[Guest John Gillespie]

"Aside to Jack White: is there a way to determine whether Mr. Z's camera was shut off as he panned to the right following the limo (and ending his filming right at the picket fence) or if the film was edited that way?"

I do not know. I am not familiar with 8mm movie camera operation.

I examine images, not cameras.

Jack

____________

So, can one tell this by examining the image?

JG

[Guest John Gillespie]

Pat,

If anyone has a list of all the occupants on the West side of the building, that would be helpful.

Here's a list of the Dal-Tex occupants.

In a biographical summary of Andy Armstrong's life, it says that in 1962, he worked for the Marilyn Belt Factory.

In January 1962, he got a job at the Marilyn Belt Factory. While working there, he also took a part-time job at the Carousel Club for Jack Ruby. During June 1962, Armstrong began working full time for Ruby who employed him as a bartender and general maintenance man for a salary of approximately per week plus tips.

Notice it has the same phone number as the Dallas Uranium&Oil Co.

Steve Thomas

__________________________

That's the good stuff, Steve. A few of us Mike Hammer types dug into the Cole's and Polk City Directories for Dallas in the late sixties just for a lark, but it's good to see this done in this context. Names and numbers; the Internet and The Forum. Lots of leads there. Thanks.

Is that a 1963 Cole's? As you probably realize, a 1964 version may reveal even more, in terms of proper names and numbers, because the information would have been compiled right up to and during the latter months of '63.

Many Thanks,

JohnG