The Real Zapruder Question

[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

____________

So, can one tell this by examining the image?

JG

I can't. Maybe some can.

Jack

[Chris Davidson]

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

Bill, perhaps if shot from a slightly different angle, and then a method similar to this small film sequence.

http://70.95.198.200:4944/JFK/

chris

[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

____________

Ok then, can one tell this by examining the image?

JG

___________________________________

I give the resident curmudgeon a mulligan; but, why couldn't there be some answer to the original question.?

My God, I've seen the most tedious, hair-splitting-for-its-own-sake tedium analyzed to paralysis on these pages (hello, Clint Hill's 'shoe' and, oh yes, those ladies with the mysterious brown things, not to mention those blurry guys walking upwind somewhere and being given a sidelong glance by David MacNeill in the area where Gordon Arnold has yet to be seen - all of whom are black but look like Oswald or Ruby).

Was the original question, as above, something offensive ("...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?")?

C'mon, guys, we've waded through a lot. Can't ya gimme this one? Hasn't anyone thought about how that film ends JUST as the camera pans to the picket fence?

I'm not asking for you to speculate, but merely to address whether it can be determined - chemically, mechanically or otherwise - if that film was cut or if the camera fortuitously was shut off at that precise, crucial and exquisitely coincidental moment.

JG

Edited August 10, 2006 by John Gillespie

[David G. Healy]

"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

____________

Ok then, can one tell this by examining the image?

JG

___________________________________

I give the resident curmudgeon a mulligan; but, why couldn't there be some answer to the original question.?

My God, I've seen the most tedious, hair-splitting-for-its-own-sake tedium analyzed to paralysis on these pages (hello, Clint Hill's 'shoe' and, oh yes, those ladies with the mysterious brown things, not to mention those blurry guys walking upwind somewhere and being given a sidelong glance by David MacNeill in the area where Gordon Arnold has yet to be seen - all of whom are black but look like Oswald or Ruby).

Was the original question, as above, something offensive ("...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?")?

C'mon, guys, we've waded through a lot. Can't ya gimme this one? Hasn't anyone thought about how that film ends JUST as the camera pans to the picket fence?

I'm not asking for you to speculate, but merely to address whether it can be determined - chemically, mechanically or otherwise - if that film was cut or if the camera fortuitously was shut off at that precise, crucial and exquisitely coincidental moment.

JG

I can't tell you John..... What I can say is, if the Z-film ended up on a optical film printer after 11/25 the final frame in the Z-film as we see it today may have been selected... -or- the last frame is indeed as we see it today.... how is that for covering all the bases.?

[Bill Miller]

My God, I've seen the most tedious, hair-splitting-for-its-own-sake tedium analyzed to paralysis on these pages (hello, Clint Hill's 'shoe' and, oh yes, those ladies with the mysterious brown things, not to mention those blurry guys walking upwind somewhere and being given a sidelong glance by David MacNeill in the area where Gordon Arnold has yet to be seen - all of whom are black but look like Oswald or Ruby).

Was the original question, as above, something offensive ("...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?")?

C'mon, guys, we've waded through a lot. Can't ya gimme this one? Hasn't anyone thought about how that film ends JUST as the camera pans to the picket fence?

I'm not asking for you to speculate, but merely to address whether it can be determined - chemically, mechanically or otherwise - if that film was cut or if the camera fortuitously was shut off at that precise, crucial and exquisitely coincidental moment.

JG

Ok - here is your answer even though it may not be conspiratorial enough for some peoples liking ....

Zapruder panned the President's car and he stopped filming when that car left the plaza by way of the triple underpass tunnel. Did Zapruder film any more than what is seen on the Zapruder film ... not likely. Why? Because within the next 11 seconds we can see Zapruder hopping down from the pedestal in Paschall's film. That left 11 seconds from the time he stopped his camera for both he and Sitzman to have climbed off the pedestal ... Then within hours Zapruder is having the film duplicated where it was also shown at the lab. No one who was present at the showing (including the lap personnel who projected the film) has ever said the film as we know it today didn't end where we see it each time we view it.

Bill Miller

Edited August 11, 2006 by Bill Miller

[Ashton Gray]

I can't answer John's question, either, and some questions are unanswerable. What follows may be one of them, but I sure am curious about this, which I think is the next to last frame of the Zap Wonder DivX version I have:

Anybody know any way to account for a skewed frame?

Ashton

Edited August 11, 2006 by Ashton Gray

[Bill Miller]

I can't answer John's question, either, and some questions are unanswerable. What follows may be one of them, but I sure am curious about this, which I think is the next to last frame of the Zap Wonder DivX version I have:

Anybody know any way to account for a skewed frame?

Ashton

It appears that you are looking at an MPI generated frame. MPI's Zfilm is nothing more than photos taken of each Zframe. MPI made mistakes and is why their film shows irregularities that the original film does not.

Bill Miller

[Tom Marchand]

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

I am assuming that the phone # is in the right column. If this is correct, there are other companies who share the same phone #.

[David G. Healy]

'Bill Miller' wrote

[...]

Then within hours Zapruder is having the film duplicated where it was also shown at the lab. No one who was present at the showing (including the lap personnel who projected the film) has ever said the film as we know it today didn't end where we see it each time we view it.

Bill Miller

were these folks ever asked?

[Stephen Roy]

Just a few observations from someone who worked with film (mostly 16mm, but also 8mm) and later tape for many years.

Engaging a film camera involves several mechanical processes, and disengaging (that is, stopping filming) also involves mechanical processes. In many cameras, this results in a final frame that is imperfect, which may exhibit blurring and slight mechanical misframing. The film editing process, on the other hand, also often exhibits certain characteristics, depending on the nature of the splice technique. The final frame might be non-blurry and normally framed, but there may also be visible indications of splice tape (as we can see in the famous Life magazine splice).

Looking at an optical print of the Z-film (8mm, probably sourced from Groden's 16mm copy), the last frame appears to me more like a disengagement than an edit.

As for Zapruder's filming, it is certainly notable that he continued to film as the shooting took place, but such a thing occurs often enough for it not to be suspicious. I, myself, was videotaping an event when a shooting broke out, and I am still amazed that I continued to roll on it. (In retrospect, it was a foolhardy thing to do, but it was news instinct)

[Bill Miller]

'Bill Miller' wrote

[...]

Then within hours Zapruder is having the film duplicated where it was also shown at the lab. No one who was present at the showing (including the lap personnel who projected the film) has ever said the film as we know it today didn't end where we see it each time we view it.

Bill Miller

were these folks ever asked?

David, have you, Jack, Fetzer, Lifton, or anyone else that has been involved in the alteration side of the coin ever bothered to ask anyone?

Bill Miller

Just a few observations from someone who worked with film (mostly 16mm, but also 8mm) and later tape for many years.

Engaging a film camera involves several mechanical processes, and disengaging (that is, stopping filming) also involves mechanical processes. In many cameras, this results in a final frame that is imperfect, which may exhibit blurring and slight mechanical misframing. The film editing process, on the other hand, also often exhibits certain characteristics, depending on the nature of the splice technique. The final frame might be non-blurry and normally framed, but there may also be visible indications of splice tape (as we can see in the famous Life magazine splice).

Looking at an optical print of the Z-film (8mm, probably sourced from Groden's 16mm copy), the last frame appears to me more like a disengagement than an edit.

As for Zapruder's filming, it is certainly notable that he continued to film as the shooting took place, but such a thing occurs often enough for it not to be suspicious. I, myself, was videotaping an event when a shooting broke out, and I am still amazed that I continued to roll on it. (In retrospect, it was a foolhardy thing to do, but it was news instinct)

Stephen, you and Peter mentioned a couple of things that would surely offer some answers to the authenticity concerning the Zapruder film and I am in disbelief that Jack or David Healy hasn't mentioned the following link for the answers to some of these questions ....

www.jfk-info.com/zreport.htm

Bill Miller

[David G. Healy]

'Bill Miller' wrote

[...]

Then within hours Zapruder is having the film duplicated where it was also shown at the lab. No one who was present at the showing (including the lap personnel who projected the film) has ever said the film as we know it today didn't end where we see it each time we view it.

Bill Miller

were these folks ever asked?

David, have you, Jack, Fetzer, Lifton, or anyone else that has been involved in the alteration side of the coin ever bothered to ask anyone?

Bill Miller

Just a few observations from someone who worked with film (mostly 16mm, but also 8mm) and later tape for many years.

Engaging a film camera involves several mechanical processes, and disengaging (that is, stopping filming) also involves mechanical processes. In many cameras, this results in a final frame that is imperfect, which may exhibit blurring and slight mechanical misframing. The film editing process, on the other hand, also often exhibits certain characteristics, depending on the nature of the splice technique. The final frame might be non-blurry and normally framed, but there may also be visible indications of splice tape (as we can see in the famous Life magazine splice).

Looking at an optical print of the Z-film (8mm, probably sourced from Groden's 16mm copy), the last frame appears to me more like a disengagement than an edit.

As for Zapruder's filming, it is certainly notable that he continued to film as the shooting took place, but such a thing occurs often enough for it not to be suspicious. I, myself, was videotaping an event when a shooting broke out, and I am still amazed that I continued to roll on it. (In retrospect, it was a foolhardy thing to do, but it was news instinct)

Stephen, you and Peter mentioned a couple of things that would surely offer some answers to the authenticity concerning the Zapruder film and I am in disbelief that Jack or David Healy hasn't mentioned the following link for the answers to some of these questions ....

www.jfk-info.com/zreport.htm

Bill Miller

Appears SRoy does ENG, good to have other shooters around, especially those willing to post.

So, what can Groden tell us? Did he see a un-split camera original/print being projected on 11/22-24/63? Has he EVER seen a *unsplit* Z-film projected...

Appropriate to point out the Zavada report (regarding the Z-film) has been challenged by author Harry Livingston. Enough so, that Roland Zavada has seen fit to re-do his report, of which we await.