Bill Miller Posted December 31, 2006 Share Posted December 31, 2006 exactly..... I'll correct your terminology too.... I'll create a illustration for review David, if you do post that illustration, can you please post some of the countless others that you promised, but never came through on? Bill Miller Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Dolva Posted December 31, 2006 Author Share Posted December 31, 2006 Bill all that comes of those sort of comments are disruption. Can't we just stay on track here for a while. Start an other topic for that. Please. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas H. Purvis Posted January 1, 2007 Share Posted January 1, 2007 Thank's for posting those Robin. Very interesting.The question is 'why such a splice that shifts the contents of the frame?' Nothing seems to be missing, everything seems to line up, except the frame becomes less high and wider. Then the sprocket holes would need to be reset. I think the 'splice' is a result of a shift elsewhere on the film. No doubt, various ther explanations exist, I can think of a few. But if you bear with me I'll show something else. So for now perhaps just accept it as acuriosity. There is actually very little missing in the frame. The top and bottom of the spliced area do not register well with the previous frame, as I discovered in my attempt to "repair" the frame. Additionally, there appears to be some warping/non-linear distortion in the area near where the break occurred, but only on the lower half of the frame. I attributed this to heat, but that was merely a theory. I don't really know why the splice is as it is other than "poor workmanship" on the part of the splicer. "I don't really know why the splice is as it is other than "poor workmanship" on the part of the splicer" Quite possibly, it is merely the continuation of the work of the "Master's" of diversion and distraction. It is not what you see, but what you do not see, and if one develops "tunnel vision" from looking at the splice, it is most unlikely that they will see what is not there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David G. Healy Posted January 1, 2007 Share Posted January 1, 2007 exactly..... I'll correct your terminology too.... I'll create a illustration for review David, if you do post that illustration, can you please post some of the countless others that you promised, but never came through on? Bill Miller sitdown Bill -- the boys are taking care of business -- unless of course you'd like to tell us all about film size and dimensions, hot and cold film splicing, wetgate printing, compression video codecs, DVD's MPEG2 progressive and interlaced video, not to mention optical film printing techniques and all that sort of stuff that leaves you speechless..... jump right on in, little guy! And Bill, my donation to the film alteration question is in a published book.... I'm still waiting for you to get something published, your envy is palpable.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Miller Posted January 1, 2007 Share Posted January 1, 2007 And Bill, my donation to the film alteration question is in a published book.... I'm still waiting for you to get something published, your envy is palpable.... Right, David ... that would be the book that told us about the 7' tall woman and the gap that never existed. That would also be the book that described this large window of time that Moorman's photo could have been altered while not knowing that her photo had been filmed not 30 minutes following the assassination having never left Mary's possession. Yes, David .... they were only taking the best of the best for that piece of work! I only hope that if any new prints are ever made that they will include your remarks after the fact about 'never seeing any signs of alteration' or how one can tell even first generation copies from an in-camera original? Now you and the boys can get back to business. Bill Miller Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Dolva Posted January 1, 2007 Author Share Posted January 1, 2007 David, a visualisation based on no hands on experience(image). Were there 'splice clamps' for cement splicing that had serrated edges? If this notion is possible, how would you make sense of the apparent serrations imprints, and straight edges and apparently bevelled ones? I've looked for detailed pics showing the clamp surface to no avail. Some editing machine look like they have two parallel plates the edges of which are swiveled down onto the film surface for the brief glue drie step of the cement splcing process. The dots seem equally spaced and all in line at 90 degrees to the film edge and two rows equally spaced on the two frames. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Dolva Posted January 1, 2007 Author Share Posted January 1, 2007 A close up of the four 'splices'. Are they 'splces' or has the emulsion been scraped off two or one stripes and a replacement glued in? Where does the film which has the emulsion on come from when it's a step joint. From the top or from the bottom? Can one tell from the look of them? The image has the four in sequence from top to bottom. In between these two comes the 'coorecting' splice with the blue stripe and the timing mark. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ashton Gray Posted January 1, 2007 Share Posted January 1, 2007 Bill all that comes of those sort of comments are disruption. Can't we just stay on track here for a while. Start an other topic for that. Please. John, If necessary and it's wanted, I can and will set up a separate forum where such topic sabotage isn't condoned and actively defended so you, Frank Agbat, and any mature and responsible researchers making actual contributions can conduct your collaborations in a safe environment completely free of such pitiable nonsense, then export it wherever you feel it should go. Let me know if and when it gets to that point. Ashton Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Dolva Posted January 2, 2007 Author Share Posted January 2, 2007 Thank you Ashton, I wouldn't want it to come to that. There's a lot more to be learnt in an open forum than the subject matter. I appreciate all the opportunities to become more tolerant to the sensations that arise in my mind and body when provoked. Here's the frame pattern of the M film. The reason for the obvious splice, (the blue line with timing mark) which should be referred to as a correction, rather than a normal splice, is becoming apparent. The original frames filled a certain area. This area has been reduced by a mask with rounded corners, or jig. This is so that frames can be shifted within that smaller area and still fill the frame. Still, this has shifted some of the frames so that the edges of those frames appear in the new frame. In fact there are only a small number of oversize frames that delienate the mask. The cluster of the mix of normal (or median), oversize, undersize and smallest (one) frames around M42 tells us what has happened. The two frames that have parallel dark joints running across them are composites. This shifts the contents of the frames, and the other frames around there are shifted within the mask to compensate and give a continuity look. The blue timing splice is a major correction, without which the abrupt shift in content caused by the two composites would draw attention to the composites which are very deceptively good workmanship. The first composite shifts the contents of all following frames to the right. The second composite shifts the following frames further to the right. The blue timing splice brings the frames following it back into the mask frame area. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Miller Posted January 2, 2007 Share Posted January 2, 2007 If necessary and it's wanted, I can and will set up a separate forum where such topic sabotage isn't condoned and actively defended so you, Frank Agbat, and any mature and responsible researchers making actual contributions can conduct your collaborations in a safe environment completely free of such pitiable nonsense, then export it wherever you feel it should go. Let me know if and when it gets to that point.Ashton From the amount of personal messages and emails I have gotten concerning the quality of your research and the tone of your responses ... many here would prefer that you did start your own forum. As far as the Muchmmore film goes .. the film was broken and merely had the two ends put back together. Bill Miller Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ashton Gray Posted January 2, 2007 Share Posted January 2, 2007 The first composite shifts the contents of all following frames to the right.The second composite shifts the following frames further to the right. The blue timing splice brings the frames following it back into the mask frame area. That is startling, John, and an extraordinary deductive find. Is there any way to compute what area of the scene someone apparently went to a great deal of trouble to nudge out of frame? Ashton Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Miller Posted January 2, 2007 Share Posted January 2, 2007 (edited) This shifts the contents of the frames, and the other frames around there are shifted within the mask to compensate and give a continuity look. The blue timing splice is a major correction, without which the abrupt shift in content caused by the two composites would draw attention to the composites which are very deceptively good workmanship.The first composite shifts the contents of all following frames to the right. The second composite shifts the following frames further to the right. The blue timing splice brings the frames following it back into the mask frame area. John ... what can you tell us from the Muchmore film that wasn't broken and merely taped back together ... I mean, are these shifts present on the undamaged copies in your view? Bill Edited January 2, 2007 by Bill Miller Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David G. Healy Posted January 2, 2007 Share Posted January 2, 2007 (edited) If necessary and it's wanted, I can and will set up a separate forum where such topic sabotage isn't condoned and actively defended so you, Frank Agbat, and any mature and responsible researchers making actual contributions can conduct your collaborations in a safe environment completely free of such pitiable nonsense, then export it wherever you feel it should go. Let me know if and when it gets to that point.Ashton From the amount of personal messages and emails I have gotten concerning the quality of your research and the tone of your responses ... many here would prefer that you did start your own forum. As far as the Muchmmore film goes .. the film was broken and merely had the two ends put back together. Bill Miller Edited January 2, 2007 by David G. Healy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David G. Healy Posted January 2, 2007 Share Posted January 2, 2007 (edited) This shifts the contents of the frames, and the other frames around there are shifted within the mask to compensate and give a continuity look. The blue timing splice is a major correction, without which the abrupt shift in content caused by the two composites would draw attention to the composites which are very deceptively good workmanship.The first composite shifts the contents of all following frames to the right. The second composite shifts the following frames further to the right. The blue timing splice brings the frames following it back into the mask frame area. John ... what can you tell us from the Muchmore film that wasn't broken and merely taped back together ... I mean, are these shifts present on the undamaged copies in your view? Bill perhaps you can tell us where one can view the Muchmore in-camera original, for that matter ALL the DP-JFK assassination related in-camera *original* films, especially the ones you seem to have access too! Nothing like an even playing field, eh? Edited January 2, 2007 by David G. Healy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Miller Posted January 2, 2007 Share Posted January 2, 2007 perhaps you can tell us where one can view the Muchmore in-camera original, for that matter ALL the DP-JFK assassination related in-camera *original* films, especially the ones you seem to have access too! Nothing like an even playing field, eh? David ... there can never be an even playing field for a xxxxx. As far as Muchmore's film ... I would contact the Muchmore family if you really want to see it for as I recall .... I read or heard that when the UPI division that had it closed down, it was said to have been given back to the Muchmore family. I hope that helps - now don't ask me to go and actually retrieve it for you. Bill Miller 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