Thomas Graves Posted September 24, 2006 Share Posted September 24, 2006 (edited) (In response to James' post #32 on this thread): Interesting question, James. He seems to be "on a mission," doesn't he, bow tie and all? Also, I wonder who the "suit" is in the background, and for reference purposes, who the two motorcycle policemen are. --Thomas _______________________________________________ Edited September 24, 2006 by Thomas Graves Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maarten Coumans Posted September 24, 2006 Share Posted September 24, 2006 Jack wrote: "Is my photo-analysis faulty?" YES. Please correct, edit your posts. Mark........ Maarten Sorry. Apologies. Sometimes photos are deceptive. And a previous poster addressed you as Ms. I think. Jack Haha, Jack, this is EXACTLY how you misinterprete all pictures concerning JFK, for instance the Moorman picture and your "Badgeman-phantasy"! Gr. Paul. Jack, Paul has no idea WHAT HE IS TALKING ABOUT!... Maarten Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Dolva Posted September 24, 2006 Share Posted September 24, 2006 (edited) Robin, thats an interesting photo. It looks like a double exposure (see the trees etc) with the first exposure taken from the entrnace of looking towards the limo with a group of people clustered around it. Who took it and do you have baetter copy to post or email? The white lines on the right enlargement outlines what to me looks like the raised sunshades of the limo. Edited September 24, 2006 by John Dolva Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Choor Posted September 24, 2006 Share Posted September 24, 2006 Jack wrote: "Is my photo-analysis faulty?" YES. Please correct, edit your posts. Mark........ Maarten Sorry. Apologies. Sometimes photos are deceptive. And a previous poster addressed you as Ms. I think. Jack Haha, Jack, this is EXACTLY how you misinterprete all pictures concerning JFK, for instance the Moorman picture and your "Badgeman-phantasy"! Gr. Paul. Jack, Paul has no idea WHAT HE IS TALKING ABOUT!... Maarten Yeah right Maarten, believe whatever you want! Sweet dreams.... Gr. Paul. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack White Posted September 24, 2006 Share Posted September 24, 2006 Jack wrote: "Is my photo-analysis faulty?" YES. Please correct, edit your posts. Mark........ Maarten Sorry. Apologies. Sometimes photos are deceptive. And a previous poster addressed you as Ms. I think. Jack Haha, Jack, this is EXACTLY how you misinterprete all pictures concerning JFK, for instance the Moorman picture and your "Badgeman-phantasy"! Gr. Paul. Jack, Paul has no idea WHAT HE IS TALKING ABOUT!... Maarten Thanks, Maarten! My list of provocateurs grows. No rational person spends time SUPPORTING the WC without a motive. Jack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Choor Posted September 25, 2006 Share Posted September 25, 2006 So Jack, Just because I don't believe your Badgeman-BS and other poor photo-analysis I'm a provocateur? WOW! And that makes you think I'm a WC supporter? JEEE... No Jack, I am definately NOT a WC supporter, or WC must be "Wim dankbaar's Commission"! Gr. Paul. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robin Unger Posted September 25, 2006 Share Posted September 25, 2006 (edited) Robin, thats an interesting photo. It looks like a double exposure (see the trees etc) with the first exposure taken from the entrnace of looking towards the limo with a group of people clustered around it. Who took it and do you have baetter copy to post or email?The white lines on the right enlargement outlines what to me looks like the raised sunshades of the limo. Ratio corrected: Edited September 25, 2006 by Robin Unger Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pat Speer Posted September 25, 2006 Author Share Posted September 25, 2006 Robin, thats an interesting photo. It looks like a double exposure (see the trees etc) with the first exposure taken from the entrnace of looking towards the limo with a group of people clustered around it. Who took it and do you have baetter copy to post or email? Could the photo have been taken through a car window? And could the trees have been the reflection of some trees behind the car? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robin Unger Posted September 25, 2006 Share Posted September 25, 2006 Robin, thats an interesting photo. It looks like a double exposure (see the trees etc) with the first exposure taken from the entrnace of looking towards the limo with a group of people clustered around it. Who took it and do you have baetter copy to post or email? Could the photo have been taken through a car window? And could the trees have been the reflection of some trees behind the car? The images are frames from a movie taken at Parkland, possibly Atkins. ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Dolva Posted September 25, 2006 Share Posted September 25, 2006 As far as I understand, it is possible to rewind some of these movie cameras and double expose. The second frame there doesn't seem to have the same 'double'. The problem I have with through a vehicle window reflection (It's a good idea though) is the field of view (width,height). Hopefully an expert on these things could offer some insight to help? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shanet Clark Posted September 26, 2006 Share Posted September 26, 2006 (edited) Looks like he is carrying a silk pillow, a wool suit, a seersucker shirt and a pair of chinos........... Edited September 26, 2006 by Shanet Clark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David G. Healy Posted September 26, 2006 Share Posted September 26, 2006 (edited) 'John Dolva' wrote: As far as I understand, it is possible to rewind some of these movie cameras and double expose. dgh: Wiegman's camera is a 16mm Filmo 70 made by Bell & Howell (I have 3 of these cameras), its been said he used a fixed 10mm lens that day, the camera records NO sound. In order to "re-wind" exposed film, a handcrank needs to be utilized. I'm not so sure Weigman had one of those on his person, nor did he have the time, his habit was to have at least 5 unexposed reels (16mm on his person) film ready-to-go... The second frame there doesn't seem to have the same 'double'. The problem I have with through a vehicle window reflection (It's a good idea though) is the field of view (width,height). Hopefully an expert on these things could offer some insight to help? Edited September 26, 2006 by David G. Healy 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