Missing Nix frames

[Craig Lamson]

Credit Lee Forman for the images below.

Thanks for reposting these images... they clearly show that someone standing on a car bumper would have an excellent vantage point through the first window.

I agree, these latter day photos are indicative of the need to stand on something. One must accept that. Equally the need of a ladder is not there. Like you say the back of a car bumper, or perhaps a pickup truck would do.

But back then the parking lot/rr yard was not much more than a paddock with rails crossing it. It wasn't landscaped. A photo of the day showing the topography/condition of the rear of the pagoda is needed.

Still, apart from establishing how someone could be at the second opening and track Kennedy, the tracking motion remains. It hasn't and wont evaporate by distractions. In fact it won't evapoarate at all. It's there in the film. No one has seen it before because no-one has been able to align the frames correctly to show it happening. And, in order to bring it out you have to increase the gamma to the point that what most would normally want to see is washed out. And finally the timing of the frames and the consequent understanding of the fragment path directions hasn't been done properly before. Now that it has been done, a new place to look at became possible.

And in looking at it there is the movement of a dark line tracking Kennedy's head. Sorry, but there it is. No amount of ignoring it or attempting to divert attention will ever change that.

It shows that the analysis of the evidence available is far from finished. Far from it. The revolution in the electronic world in capabilities and sharing results, has and will continue to bring results not possible before.

post #200:

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...ost&p=85536

You might not like it but that doesn't change it.

What is it?

A ghillie wrapped rifle with a flash cone?

An interesting discovery John. However I think you are seeing it wrong. The "black line" seems not to be moving at all. I suggest it is simply the darkness of the wall. I think what you see moving is the white lines as they trace over the darkness of the wall. This "white lines" seem to extend from the second window clear to the sidewalk level.

So what could the white lines be? I might suggest a reflection of the sun off of some chrome part of the limo. That would explain the "tracking" as the reflections would change position on the wall as the limo moves forward. (it could even be a reflection from one of the motorcyles). I was reminded of this today while playing with the cat by flashing spots of light on the far wall of the room and watching the cat chase them...bright spots of lights created by sunlight through a window reflecting from the crystal of my wristwatch and moving over the wall as I moved my wrist.

[John Dolva]

Craig, I think that's a good suggestion. It's what I'm hoping to hear. However, my answer would be:

There are three basic lines, or bars rather, two lighter ones and a darker one in between. If you look at the first frame where this is visible and the last frame, the fulcrum of the movement doesn't change, the movement is localised and the angle of the bars has changed by some ten degrees, and in between these two frames, the pitch changes to follow Kennedy's head, except as Newman is 'in the way' it jumps and then resumes the smooth tracking and then at the end rapidly changes, then the area is outside the frame. If it was a reflection then one wouldn't expect it to be localised or stay in one place. This is a curved wall curving away from the observer. Also, if you look at the right light bar, it's two white spots in line and the lower spot doesn't only move right to left but also up and down as one might expect a hand to do. There is a darker spot at the end of the dark bar which moves from right to left.

[Craig Lamson]

Craig, I think that's a good suggestion. It's what I'm hoping to hear. However, my answer would be:

There are three basic lines, or bars rather, two lighter ones and a darker one in between. If you look at the first frame where this is visible and the last frame, the fulcrum of the movement doesn't change, the movement is localised and has changed by some ten degrees, and in between these two frames, the pitch changes to follow Kennedy's head, except as Newman is 'in the way' it jumps and then resumes the smooth tracking and then at the end rapidly changes, then the area is outside the frame. If it was a reflection then one wouldn't expect it to be localised or stay in one place. This is a curved wall curving away from the observer. Also, if you look at the right light bar, it's two white spots in line and the lower spot doesn't only move right to left but also up and down as one might expect a hand to do. There is a darker spot at the end of the dark bar which moves from right to left.

I think its a bit of a leap to consider the white bars to be arms. Once you consider the depth of the wall ( around a foot or a bit less IIRC) and the height of the window ( about 9 inches again IIRC) its going to be pretty tough to get a pair of arms and hands to drape almost to the sidewalk from the second window. However it might be a possibility.

I've seen some pretty strange reflections from vehicles I've photographed over the last 20 years or so. In any case the fact that the shapes change when they pass over the Newmans suggests that the Newmans broke or altered the path of the reflections.

I'm afraid this is going to be an area that defies a specfic conclusion.

[Ashton Gray]

The real curiosity occurs halfway down the right side of the image.

There are two lighter bars (red) and in between them a darker bar. (blue)

Keep your eye on them. See how they seem to move smoothly, changing pitch.

Extending the line of this darker bar. It is tracking Kennedy's head, except when Newman s in the way when it jerks a bit and then at the end it quickly in moves off target. This bit is not in this gif, but occurs about 28. Then that area is outside the frame.

This image shows the tracking.

John's animated gif:

John, I've been following this whole discussion with great interest, and actually being able to more or less keep up—until I hit this.

I'm replying to this message instead of your latest message on this because I wanted the animated gif included to refer to. You keep describing things that I simply cannot see at all, and in reality can't even fathom what you're talking about in your most recent posts about this. That isn't to say or suggest that you and others don't see these fine points, just that I don't.

My main lack of understanding, though, arises from what for the life of me seems to be a "skewing" of the whole bottom half of the image, of which the apparent "tracking" motion of the white lines (which makes the dark line follow as the "negative" space between them) is only a more or less consistent part. The bottom part of the large white vertical column on the left of the image also "tracks" along with these smaller obliquely vertical white lines, as does, it seems to me, the whole lower half of the image to some degree.

If the background against which these lines appeared to be "moving" weren't itself moving more or less with them, maybe I could put as much significance in this as you seem to. So far I can't. What am I missing?

Ashton

P.S. My efforts to bring the gif file forward by quoting the original message were all for nought: the attachments don't attach with the quoted text. I've downloaded the gif animation and added it after the quote.

Edited December 21, 2006 by Ashton Gray

[John Dolva]

That's ok , I knew that would happen so the link to post # 200 is there.

I try to speak of them as bars and spots of light and dark. There's a continual flicker of blotches all around.

It's hard to say what is moving and what is uncovered by that which is moving, ie what's in front of what, how is it illuminated and what is shadow?

What is clear (to me) is that there is an independent set of shifts in dark/light location in the middle right hand area that moves differently from the rest of things and the curious thing is that if one extends the lines suggested by the bars they focus on Kennedy's head and seem to be tracking it except when Newman is in the way and at the end before moving out of frame they change pitch quicker. It helps to take the independent frames at the end of the sequence and there are a few that show the area in more definition and compare them. There one can see that the change is of a different order to the skewing you see overall. It's largely because of that difference that the motion stands out.

Meanwhile the Limo has moved many feet in a straight direction, if it was a reflection, particularly here on a curved wall, the reflection would move? Surely? Not stay on one area.

What matters is what the person standing there sees and considers sufficient space, we see a small part of that. There's no need to necessarily insert much of a body. Perhaps the left bar is the illuminated ghillie and the darker is a shded part. The bobbing right lower spot could be a hand reaching to cycle the bolt after the shot, but on seeing it was sufficient, that's it and withdraws.

PS look at the frame Robin posted for example. The bars are fairly well defined there. Line a piece of paper edge up and see.

Edited December 21, 2006 by John Dolva

[Craig Lamson]

That's ok , I knew that would happen so the link to post # 200 is there.

I try to speak of them as bars and spots of light and dark. There's a continual flicker of blotches all around.

It's hard to say what is moving and what is uncovered by that which is moving, ie what's in front of what, how is it illuminated and what is shadow?

What is clear (to me) is that there is an independent set of shifts in dark/light location in the middle right hand area that moves differently from the rest of things and the curious thing is that if one extends the lines suggested by the bars they focus on Kennedy's head and seem to be tracking it except when Newman is in the way and at the end before moving out of frame they change pitch quicker. It helps to take the independent frames at the end of the sequence and there are a few that show the area in more definition and compare them. There one can see that the change is of a different order to the skewing you see overall. It's largely because of that difference that the motion stands out.

Meanwhile the Limo has moved many feet in a straight direction, if it was a reflection, particularly here on a curved wall, the reflection would move? Surely? Not stay on one area.

What matters is what the person standing there sees and considers sufficient space, we see a small part of that. There's no need to necessarily insert much of a body. Perhaps the left bar is the illuminated ghillie and the darker is a shded part. The bobbing right lower spot could be a hand reaching to cycle the bolt after the shot, but on seeing it was sufficient, that's it and withdraws.

PS look at the frame Robin posted for example. The bars are fairly well defined there. Line a piece of paper edge up and see.

I must admit that upon further inspection I concur that the objects have shape and therefore cannot be a reflection.

[John Dolva]

This is a part of the frame where lens distortion is more of a factor. However, in this instance, if you look at say the left edge of the column on the left and on the right edge of the opening below where the suggested bars are, you can see that the distance between the bars and the edges change while the edges remain at same separation. If all movements were due to this distoriton no area would behave differently to others, there would be an overall uniformity of change. It's the difference that makes the movement stand out.

This movement is independent. To theorise, it looks to me like the left light bar is the object, the darker area is shaded part of that object and also a darker area behind the object. The bobbing right hand spot is moving separately but follows.

Ghillied rifle and hand?

I know that's a leap as well, but it's a suggestion that seems reasonable in the context. The truth may be different. Some factor as yet to be brought to attention.

[John Dolva]

Ashton, your comment that you can't see it bit. So I backtracked to the very earliest frames which I deemed too blurred to use and forward tracked to the last and redid by alining the frames (but not with the preciscion of focusing on just that area.) and then choose a broader brush to estimate where I think the bars point.

The exact direction they suggest is open to interpretation.

According to my interpretation this time: while Mrs Newman is between the bars and the limo, and for a few frames after, they point to past Newman and wobble about a bit, this is also where the blur is greater. Then a few frames before Mr Newman they start tracking the head. When Newman is between the bars and the head they swing to just after him and then back to before him and then back to in front where Newman no longer is between and they start to very steadily smoothly track the head.

By frame 26 27 the tracking moves rapidly to where, by 29, the bars point towards the underpass way over the head. then they are outside the frame completely by 30.

[Robin Unger]

John.

This may be of some use, i beleive it is similar to the frame you posted. !

Edited December 21, 2006 by Robin Unger

[Robin Unger]

[John Dolva]

general reply to PM: ghilled rifle is rifle wrapped in camouflage, it could be sack, cheese cloth or a net which have things sown into them. They help to hide reflective surfaces of the rifle. A flash cone is a WWII version of a muzzle flash suppressor.

Robin, thank you, I'll take a good look at them. Where can one get a full set of frames of that quality?

PS... thank you, yes Robin. I'll PM e-dress. I'd like to redo a few times and see if same results occur, hopefully someone is checking the results and will post their results.

Edited December 21, 2006 by John Dolva

[Robin Unger]

general reply to PM: ghilled rifle is rifle wrapped in camouflage, it could be sack, cheese cloth or a net which have things sown into them. They help to hide reflective surfaces of the rifle. A flash cone is a WWII version of a muzzle flash suppressor.

Robin, thank you, I'll take a good look at them. Where can one get a full set of frames of that quality?

Hi John.

The frames i posted were frame grabs from a DVD. Not sure which one i would have to go back and have a look ?

I only have a few frames, not the full set. !

I can email you the ones i have if you like, i have never seen a full set in this resolution.

[John Dolva]

Much gratitude to Robin for the three images this one is put together from.

To explain. The opening and head pairs are from three frames, this one and two others, an earlier one and a later one.

In order to illustrate, the opening and head pairs are offset but a copy (pointed to by blue arrow) of the head is placed where it would be if all openings are centered.

The red line between opening and head is drawn from the head to the opening. You can see for yourself whether you think the pich of the bars of light and dark in the opening points towards the head. Except for the centre pair when Newman is in the way. This is what I see for the frames. The head is being tracked and when there are obstacles the tracking wavers and a few frames after the headshot the tracking ends.

Edited December 21, 2006 by John Dolva

[John Dolva]

I've never paid an enormous amount of attention to the witness statements as they are such diverging interpretations of what exacly they mean. Now it surprises me that it appears very little interpretation is needed. They just about all mean exactly what they say. Simple.

BN: No, we were halfway between the TUP and we were at the curb when the

> incident happened...but the President was some 50 feet still yet in front

> of us, coming toward us and we heard the first shot and the President, I

> don't know who was hit first, but the President jumped up in his seat and

> I thought it scared him, thought it was a firecracker because he looked

> fear and as the car got directly in front of us, well a gunshot,

> apparently from behind us hit the President in the side of the temple.

http://ourworld-top.cs.com/mikegriffith1/id83.htm

"Some of the Witnesses

Abraham Zapruder: Zapruder was standing on the knoll itself and made the famous home movie of the assassination called the Zapruder film. He told the Secret Service on the day of the shooting that the assassin had fired from behind him.

James Tague: Tague was standing near the triple underpass and was in an excellent position to hear the shots. Tague stated that he heard shots fired from the grassy knoll. When counsel suggested he might have heard echoes, he replied, "there was no echo."

Jean Hill: Hill was standing on the south side of Elm Street and had an excellent view of the limousine and the grassy knoll in the background. "The shots," she said less than an hour after the shooting, "came from the hill--it was just east of the underpass."

Charles Brehm: Brehm was standing on the south side of Elm Street and was behind and to the left of the limousine when the fatal head shot occurred. Brehm saw a piece of Kennedy's skull blown backward and to the left by the fatal head shot. He told newsmen on November 22 that "the shots came from in front or beside the President."

William Newman: Newman and his wife were standing at the base of the grassy knoll and was therefore between the knoll and the limousine during the shooting. Both said the shots came from behind them.

Mary Woodward: She was to the left front of the grassy knoll. She said the shots came "from behind us and a little to the right," which would have been the knoll.

Maggie Brown: She, too, was standing to the left front of the knoll. The shots, she said, came from behind and to her right, i.e., from the knoll.

Jean Newman: Newman was standing between the Stemmons Freeway sign on Elm Street and the TSBD. She said, "The first impression I had was that the shots came from my right." The grassy knoll was on her right.

Aurelia Lorenzo: Like Brown and Woodward, she was standing to the left front of the knoll. She said shots came from a point to her right rear."

All these have been interpreted as meaning the knoll/fence area. They are more precicely interpreted as exactly what they say. Behind, and behind and a little to the right ,and behind and to the right, or beside which is exactly where the suggested position can be said to be depending on who said it and where they were and where they were facing.

[Ashton Gray]

All these have been interpreted as meaning the knoll/fence area. They are more precicely interpreted as exactly what they say. Behind, and behind and a little to the right ,and behind and to the right, or beside which is exactly where the suggested position can be said to be depending on who said it and where they were and where they were facing.

Assuming, arguendo, that there were no diversionary reports, and that no silenced (sound suppressed) shots were fired, yes, the accounts all could be interpreted to conform.

Ashton

P.S. Who is BN and what is the TUP?