Jump to content
The Education Forum

Large Moorman graphic disrupts thread


Jack White
 Share

Recommended Posts

The extremely large Moorman scan posted by Robin has overwhelmed THE PARTY'S OVER

thread by Chris, making further replies impossible. I have a 19" screen and the Moorman

is twice the size of the screen, blocking all access to the thread. Can anything be done

about this?

Jack

PS...great Moorman image, Robin. The resolution is fantastic. Can you provide the

provenance. It appears to be my scan of the Gordon Smith copy from the original,

but my scan is not nearly that good. Can you give details?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Eugene B. Connolly

The extremely large Moorman scan posted by Robin has overwhelmed THE PARTY'S OVER

thread by Chris, making further replies impossible. I have a 19" screen and the Moorman

is twice the size of the screen, blocking all access to the thread. Can anything be done

about this?

Jack

Increase your screen resolution or

decrease font size or both and vice versa.

EBC

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Increase your screen resolution or

decrease font size or both and vice versa.

Jack, EBC has given you some good advice that might be a little too technical for you. If this is the case, then go to a computer store and by screen extensions that will allow the image to be seen in its full glory.

post-1084-1170517041_thumb.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The extremely large Moorman scan posted by Robin has overwhelmed THE PARTY'S OVER

thread by Chris, making further replies impossible. I have a 19" screen and the Moorman

is twice the size of the screen, blocking all access to the thread. Can anything be done

about this?

Jack

PS...great Moorman image, Robin. The resolution is fantastic. Can you provide the

provenance. It appears to be my scan of the Gordon Smith copy from the original,

but my scan is not nearly that good. Can you give details?

Yes that is a great Moorman image Jack, its the Thompson drum scan you usually call trash. Did you get some new glasses?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes that is a great Moorman image Jack, its the Thompson drum scan you usually call trash. Did you get some new glasses?

Jack has a tendency to change his mind depending on his needs at the moment. The drum scan is sharp in Jack's eyes until he has to defend why his recreation Moorman LOS didn't show the gap between the pedestal and the colonnade window ... then all of a sudden it is an altered image. Jack cannot produce any of the other Moorman photos that he claims do not show a gap, but nevertheless ... that's just a small detail in the effort to make everything appear altered. His use of the Altgens 6 photo on the book "Hoax" whereas he called in genuine and can be used to validate other assassination images is another example. Seeing that now he is aware that Moorman and Hill's shadows are coming from the grass, which shows his having them in the street is nonsense, then I am sure that he will now claim that Altgens 6 is altered. Isn't it ironic how in the end it has been these guys own words that has hurt the credibility of their claims.

Bill

Edited by Bill Miller
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Increase your screen resolution or

decrease font size or both and vice versa.

Jack, EBC has given you some good advice that might be a little too technical for you. If this is the case, then go to a computer store and by screen extensions that will allow the image to be seen in its full glory.

post-1084-1170517041_thumb.gif

sit-down! the above from someone who thought increasing screen resolution increased detail in the image..... LMAO! But we won't talk about that, will we?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes that is a great Moorman image Jack, its the Thompson drum scan you usually call trash. Did you get some new glasses?

Jack has a tendency to change is mind depending on his needs at the moment. The drum scan is sharp in Jack's eyes until he has to defend why his recreation Moorman LOS didn't show the gap between the pedestal and the colonnade window ... then all of a sudden it is an altered image. Jack cannot produce any of the other Moorman photos that he claims do not show a gap, but nevertheless ... that's just a small detail in the effort to make everything appear altered. His use of the Altgens 6 photo on the book "Hoax" wehereas he called in genuine and can be used to validate other assassination images is another example. Seeing that now he is aware that Moorman and Hill's shadows are coming from the grass, which shows his having them in the street is nonsense, then I am sure that he will now claim that Altgens 6 is altered. Isn't it ironic how in the end it has been these guys own words that has hurt the credibility of their claims.

Bill

look like this is appropriate response here, too!

dgh: sit-down! the above from someone who thought increasing screen resolution increased detail in the image..... LMAO! But we won't talk about that, will we?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

sit-down! the above from someone who thought increasing screen resolution increased detail in the image..... LMAO! But we won't talk about that, will we?

David, you certainly are the king of spin. it is not the screen resolution that I ever said would increase the detail of an image. It is the resolution that the image was saved at that matters before trying to increase its size.

Edited by Bill Miller
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes that is a great Moorman image Jack, its the Thompson drum scan you usually call trash. Did you get some new glasses?

Jack has a tendency to change is mind depending on his needs at the moment. The drum scan is sharp in Jack's eyes until he has to defend why his recreation Moorman LOS didn't show the gap between the pedestal and the colonnade window ... then all of a sudden it is an altered image. Jack cannot produce any of the other Moorman photos that he claims do not show a gap, but nevertheless ... that's just a small detail in the effort to make everything appear altered. His use of the Altgens 6 photo on the book "Hoax" wehereas he called in genuine and can be used to validate other assassination images is another example. Seeing that now he is aware that Moorman and Hill's shadows are coming from the grass, which shows his having them in the street is nonsense, then I am sure that he will now claim that Altgens 6 is altered. Isn't it ironic how in the end it has been these guys own words that has hurt the credibility of their claims.

Bill

look like this is appropriate response here, too!

dgh: sit-down! the above from someone who thought increasing screen resolution increased detail in the image..... LMAO! But we won't talk about that, will we?

Actually David, the appropriate response would be for you to show us a Moorman print that doesn't show the gap that I speak of ... so at this time I ask that you provide such a print to show us that Jack is right. You can bet your sweet behind that if what Jack said was true, then he would have posted it long ago when asked to do so. So now that you have trolled your way into the discussion, I ask that you show us such a print.

Bill Miller

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes that is a great Moorman image Jack, its the Thompson drum scan you usually call trash. Did you get some new glasses?

Jack has a tendency to change is mind depending on his needs at the moment. The drum scan is sharp in Jack's eyes until he has to defend why his recreation Moorman LOS didn't show the gap between the pedestal and the colonnade window ... then all of a sudden it is an altered image. Jack cannot produce any of the other Moorman photos that he claims do not show a gap, but nevertheless ... that's just a small detail in the effort to make everything appear altered. His use of the Altgens 6 photo on the book "Hoax" wehereas he called in genuine and can be used to validate other assassination images is another example. Seeing that now he is aware that Moorman and Hill's shadows are coming from the grass, which shows his having them in the street is nonsense, then I am sure that he will now claim that Altgens 6 is altered. Isn't it ironic how in the end it has been these guys own words that has hurt the credibility of their claims.

Bill

look like this is appropriate response here, too!

dgh: sit-down! the above from someone who thought increasing screen resolution increased detail in the image..... LMAO! But we won't talk about that, will we?

Actually David, the appropriate response would be for you to show us a Moorman print that doesn't show the gap that I speak of ... so at this time I ask that you provide such a print to show us that Jack is right. You can bet your sweet behind that if what Jack said was true, then he would have posted it long ago when asked to do so. So now that you have trolled your way into the discussion, I ask that you show us such a print.

Bill Miller

your steel trap memory has somehow failed you... I've been on record (4+years) the street/grass Moorman 5 debate was a non-starter, a waste of time, you know that.... wake-up and keep your seat. Now about your photo resolution issues...

Edited by David G. Healy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The extremely large Moorman scan posted by Robin has overwhelmed THE PARTY'S OVER

thread by Chris, making further replies impossible. I have a 19" screen and the Moorman

is twice the size of the screen, blocking all access to the thread. Can anything be done

about this?

Jack

PS...great Moorman image, Robin. The resolution is fantastic. Can you provide the

provenance. It appears to be my scan of the Gordon Smith copy from the original,

but my scan is not nearly that good. Can you give details?

Yes that is a great Moorman image Jack, its the Thompson drum scan you usually call trash. Did you get some new glasses?

I have to credit Lamson this one time IF that is indeed the famed drum scan, because the

quality is very good for a copy of the original print which has the fingerprint. At first glance

it appeared to be the Gordon Smith copy, which is one of the best that I have, made from

the original. As far as I know I have never seen the FULL UNCROPPED drum scan before.

This image, like the Smith image, includes the notches of the 4x5 film holder on the edges.

I did not know the drum scan had that feature. Previously I had only seen cropped images

from the drum scan, and perhaps inferior copies at that. The image posted by Robin is superior

to the Smith copy by about 10 percent in the Dmin/Dmax densitometer range. I compared

the two side by side full screen. The drum scan density is about 10 percent better; this is

mainly seen in the very dark areas such as the wooden fence, the badgeman tree, etc which

are enough lighter on the drum scan to discern detail, but are more blocked up on the Smith

copy. However, neither the drum scan nor the Smith copy, both made from the faded

original with the fingerprint, can match the high quality of the Thompson Number One print

as I have shown many times.

The drumscan exposure was very likely made using an electronic densitometer, which

takes a reading of the lightest area and darkest area and calculates a precise exposure

for minimum and maximum density. When I formerly owned three photostat cameras,

that is how my camera operators turned out high quality halftones...by using the densitometer

to set the camera exposure.

Jack

Edited by Jack White
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The extremely large Moorman scan posted by Robin has overwhelmed THE PARTY'S OVER

thread by Chris, making further replies impossible. I have a 19" screen and the Moorman

is twice the size of the screen, blocking all access to the thread. Can anything be done

about this?

Jack

PS...great Moorman image, Robin. The resolution is fantastic. Can you provide the

provenance. It appears to be my scan of the Gordon Smith copy from the original,

but my scan is not nearly that good. Can you give details?

Yes that is a great Moorman image Jack, its the Thompson drum scan you usually call trash. Did you get some new glasses?

I have to credit Lamson this one time IF that is indeed the famed drum scan, because the

quality is very good for a copy of the original print which has the fingerprint. At first glance

it appeared to be the Gordon Smith copy, which is one of the best that I have, made from

the original. As far as I know I have never seen the FULL UNCROPPED drum scan before.

This image, like the Smith image, includes the notches of the 4x5 film holder on the edges.

I did not know the drum scan had that feature. Previously I had only seen cropped images

from the drum scan, and perhaps inferior copies at that. The image posted by Robin is superior

to the Smith copy by about 10 percent in the Dmin/Dmax densitometer range. I compared

the two side by side full screen. The drum scan density is about 10 percent better; this is

mainly seen in the very dark areas such as the wooden fence, the badgeman tree, etc which

are enough lighter on the drum scan to discern detail, but are more blocked up on the Smith

copy. However, neither the drum scan nor the Smith copy, both made from the faded

original with the fingerprint, can match the high quality of the Thompson Number One print

as I have shown many times.

The drumscan exposure was very likely made using an electronic densitometer, which

takes a reading of the lightest area and darkest area and calculates a precise exposure

for minimum and maximum density. When I formerly owned three photostat cameras,

that is how my camera operators turned out high quality halftones...by using the densitometer

to set the camera exposure.

Jack

Actually the file that came off the the drum was very flat, as was requested. We asked the scanner tech to add no level or curve correction, nor any sharpening. The goal was to simply get the contents of the negative into a digital form without inducing artifacts, ringing or density changes which might effect the measurements on the pedestal area which was the entire reason for having the scan made.

The image Robin has posted was downsampled for the original 109 mb 8 bit file which is simply too large to post on the net. The original

scan was about 4"x5" at 2400 dpi or 32"x40" at 300dpi. At this resolution the negative was scanned down to film grain level.

I made the following adjustments to the image Robin has posted:

I downsampled the image to around 11x14 at 300 dpi IIRC, (Robin may have reduced it further)

I adjusted the levels to bring the flat tonal range of the image to a more normal level.

I created a duplicate layer and darkend that layer a bit more using levels, then I erased about half of that layer with a large, soft edge brush. I did this to even out the image from right to left, as the right side was quite a bit lighter than the left. This in essence is a digital "burning" similar to doing the same inthe darkroom. I then flattened the image.

Finally I saved the image in a lossless compresssed format, PNG and placed it on a pubilc photosite and made it available for download.

The goal was simply to adjust the master file to produce an image that included a full tonal range

There are many copies of the original, un-adjusted drum scan file in the wild. Tink sent me the one to the two master disks (one went directly to Gary Mack) and I made about two dozen duplicates of the master cd. SOme of htese were sent to the members of the group I was part of that was working on the Moorman in the Street issue. The rest I made available to anyone who requested it via the JFKResearch forum. This included a number of folks who were on the opposite side of the issue. I think I even sent a cd to Jack but I'm not sure.

In any case, I am willing to make the original file available for download. If you PM me with your email address I will sent you a username and passsword for my ftp site. I will make the file available on Monday and keep the ftp account open during the rest of the working week.

Edited by Craig Lamson
Link to comment
Share on other sites

your steel trap memory has somehow failed you... I've been on record (4+years) the street/grass Moorman 5 debate was a non-starter, a waste of time, you know that.... wake-up and keep your seat. Now about your photo resolution issues...

Sorry, David .... you flip flop around so much like a carp laying on a river bank trying to get back in the water that its hard to say what your position is at any given moment. I offer an example below.

FLIP:

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...c=5959&st=0

Post #8

David Healy: Of course there's NO proof of film alteration, something I've stated for years

FLOP:

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...=8579&st=15

post #19

David Healy: I go with the Z-film is altered ...

Edited by Bill Miller
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The extremely large Moorman scan posted by Robin has overwhelmed THE PARTY'S OVER

thread by Chris, making further replies impossible. I have a 19" screen and the Moorman

is twice the size of the screen, blocking all access to the thread. Can anything be done

about this?

Jack

PS...great Moorman image, Robin. The resolution is fantastic. Can you provide the

provenance. It appears to be my scan of the Gordon Smith copy from the original,

but my scan is not nearly that good. Can you give details?

Yes that is a great Moorman image Jack, its the Thompson drum scan you usually call trash. Did you get some new glasses?

I have to credit Lamson this one time IF that is indeed the famed drum scan, because the

quality is very good for a copy of the original print which has the fingerprint. At first glance

it appeared to be the Gordon Smith copy, which is one of the best that I have, made from

the original. As far as I know I have never seen the FULL UNCROPPED drum scan before.

This image, like the Smith image, includes the notches of the 4x5 film holder on the edges.

I did not know the drum scan had that feature. Previously I had only seen cropped images

from the drum scan, and perhaps inferior copies at that. The image posted by Robin is superior

to the Smith copy by about 10 percent in the Dmin/Dmax densitometer range. I compared

the two side by side full screen. The drum scan density is about 10 percent better; this is

mainly seen in the very dark areas such as the wooden fence, the badgeman tree, etc which

are enough lighter on the drum scan to discern detail, but are more blocked up on the Smith

copy. However, neither the drum scan nor the Smith copy, both made from the faded

original with the fingerprint, can match the high quality of the Thompson Number One print

as I have shown many times.

The drumscan exposure was very likely made using an electronic densitometer, which

takes a reading of the lightest area and darkest area and calculates a precise exposure

for minimum and maximum density. When I formerly owned three photostat cameras,

that is how my camera operators turned out high quality halftones...by using the densitometer

to set the camera exposure.

Jack

Actually the file that came off the the drum was very flat, as was requested. We asked the scanner tech to add no level or curve correction, nor any sharpening. The goal was to simply get the contents of the negative into a digital form without inducing artifacts, ringing or density changes which might effect the measurements on the pedestal area which was the entire reason for having the scan made.

The image Robin has posted was downsampled for the original 109 mb 8 bit file which is simply too large to post on the net. The original

scan was about 4"x5" at 2400 dpi or 32"x40" at 300dpi. At this resolution the negative was scanned down to film grain level.

I made the following adjustments to the image Robin has posted:

I downsampled the image to around 11x14 at 300 dpi IIRC, (Robin may have reduced it further)

I adjusted the levels to bring the flat tonal range of the image to a more normal level.

I created a duplicate layer and darkend that layer a bit more using levels, then I erased about half of that layer with a large, soft edge brush. I did this to even out the image from right to left, as the right side was quite a bit lighter than the left. This in essence is a digital "burning" similar to doing the same inthe darkroom. I then flattened the image.

Finally I saved the image in a lossless compresssed format, PNG and placed it on a pubilc photosite and made it available for download.

The goal was simply to adjust the master file to produce an image that included a full tonal range

There are many copies of the original, un-adjusted drum scan file in the wild. Tink sent me the one to the two master disks (one went directly to Gary Mack) and I made about two dozen duplicates of the master cd. SOme of htese were sent to the members of the group I was part of that was working on the Moorman in the Street issue. The rest I made available to anyone who requested it via the JFKResearch forum. This included a number of folks who were on the opposite side of the issue. I think I even sent a cd to Jack but I'm not sure.

In any case, I am willing to make the original file available for download. If you PM me with your email address I will sent you a username and passsword for my ftp site. I will make the file available on Monday and keep the ftp account open during the rest of the working week.

Thanks for all the information. There are some who would call all that you did ALTERATION. :lol:

I would call it the equivalent of dodging and burning in, or OPTIMIZING.

If you have ever seen an Ansel Adams instruction print to his darkroom technicians, it was

filled with dozens of handwritten instructions for dodging and burning, some very elaborate.

It is far different than a straight print from a negative. The information is all in the image,

but it may be printed in many different ways.

The "drum scan" is still much poorer quality than Thompson #1.

Jack

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...