Stemmon's Sign

[Chris Davidson]

Earlier I posted this photo and stated it wasn't taken from the pedestal.

I believe I was wrong.

It appears to be very cose to the Z film, with the full Stemmon's sign in view.

The animation shows it layered over Dr.Costella's panorama. (Thank you John).

Chris

[Jack White]

Chris...your animation flashes about 10X too fast to be comprehensible. It is

hard to see what you are trying to show.

Jack

[Chris Davidson]

Chris...your animation flashes about 10X too fast to be comprehensible. It is

hard to see what you are trying to show.

Jack

Sorry Jack,

Just trying to show the difference in position of camera by speeding it up.

My question would be:

Should the concrete pillar in the background move the same as the Stemmon's sign in the foreground? They are pretty much in line with each other.

Also, should the roadsigns attached to the Thornton Sign pole stay in the same location with the different camera position?

Lastly, I'd never seen the Stemmon's sign photographed from the pedestal besides the Z film.

chris

[Jack White]

Chris...your animation flashes about 10X too fast to be comprehensible. It is

hard to see what you are trying to show.

Jack

Sorry Jack,

Just trying to show the difference in position of camera by speeding it up.

My question would be:

Should the concrete pillar in the background move the same as the Stemmon's sign in the foreground? They are pretty much in line with each other.

Also, should the roadsigns attached to the Thornton Sign pole stay in the same location with the different camera position?

Lastly, I'd never seen the Stemmon's sign photographed from the pedestal besides the Z film.

chris

Much better, Chris...but the best way to show it would be a SLOW DISSOLVE between the images, so that

one fades in as the other fades out.

Thanks.

Jack

[Chris Davidson]

Chris...your animation flashes about 10X too fast to be comprehensible. It is

hard to see what you are trying to show.

Jack

Sorry Jack,

Just trying to show the difference in position of camera by speeding it up.

My question would be:

Should the concrete pillar in the background move the same as the Stemmon's sign in the foreground? They are pretty much in line with each other.

Also, should the roadsigns attached to the Thornton Sign pole stay in the same location with the different camera position?

Lastly, I'd never seen the Stemmon's sign photographed from the pedestal besides the Z film.

chris

Much better, Chris...but the best way to show it would be a SLOW DISSOLVE between the images, so that

one fades in as the other fades out.

Thanks.

Jack

No problem

A little slower.

chris

[Jack White]

Chris...your animation flashes about 10X too fast to be comprehensible. It is

hard to see what you are trying to show.

Jack

Sorry Jack,

Just trying to show the difference in position of camera by speeding it up.

My question would be:

Should the concrete pillar in the background move the same as the Stemmon's sign in the foreground? They are pretty much in line with each other.

Also, should the roadsigns attached to the Thornton Sign pole stay in the same location with the different camera position?

Lastly, I'd never seen the Stemmon's sign photographed from the pedestal besides the Z film.

chris

Much better, Chris...but the best way to show it would be a SLOW DISSOLVE between the images, so that

one fades in as the other fades out.

Thanks.

Jack

No problem

A little slower.

chris

PERFECT! IMPORTANT!

Jack

[Jack White]

Chris...your animation flashes about 10X too fast to be comprehensible. It is

hard to see what you are trying to show.

Jack

Sorry Jack,

Just trying to show the difference in position of camera by speeding it up.

My question would be:

Should the concrete pillar in the background move the same as the Stemmon's sign in the foreground? They are pretty much in line with each other.

Also, should the roadsigns attached to the Thornton Sign pole stay in the same location with the different camera position?

Lastly, I'd never seen the Stemmon's sign photographed from the pedestal besides the Z film.

chris

Much better, Chris...but the best way to show it would be a SLOW DISSOLVE between the images, so that

one fades in as the other fades out.

Thanks.

Jack

No problem

A little slower.

chris

PERFECT! IMPORTANT!

Jack

Chris...I could not figure how to save your latest animated gif. Can you

convert it to QUICKTIME format and email it to me?

Thanks.

NEVER MIND....I HAD JUST FORGOTTEN HOW TO DO IT. THANKS ANYWAY!

Jack

Edited February 26, 2007 by Jack White

[Thomas H. Purvis]

Chris;

Although there are multiple aspects of the sign relocation and removal that are compoundingly confusing, there is sufficient photographic evidence to resolve much of the issues.

1. Although the alignment of two items in the background would change slightly merely from panning the camera, this happens with just the human eye as well.

Therefore, it is best to find objects located as far in the background as is possible.

In the, shall we call it "Memorial Photo", one should look directly back up the center of Elm St. to the extreme end where one sees a white building which has three extremely distinctive windows.

Located in Elm St. in front of this building are two well defined vertical posts. One is a portion of the support for the two overhead signs, and the other contains a redlight.

These posts and their relationship to the edge of the windows in the background building are at the far ends of the photographic image (far away) and thus the relatinship of the post to the edge of the window would demonstrate the least change due to merely panning of the camera.

Now, when one backs up to the Zapruder Film in comparison:

http://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z050.jpg

In the background can be seen the post with the redlight on it (directly behind the woman in bright red), as well as the overhead sign supporting post, as well as the relationship of these posts to the windows in the white building in the backgound.

The comparisons of these photographs demonstrates that although there is in fact a slight difference in the alignment of the camera positon, it is extremely small, and in fact, the Zapruder photo was taken just slightly farther right, than was the "Memorial Photo"

Edited February 26, 2007 by Thomas H. Purvis

[Thomas H. Purvis]

Chris;

Although there are multiple aspects of the sign relocation and removal that are compoundingly confusing, there is sufficient photographic evidence to resolve much of the issues.

1. Although the alignment of two items in the background would change slightly merely from panning the camera, this happens with just the human eye as well.

Therefore, it is best to find objects located as far in the background as is possible.

In the, shall we call it "Memorial Photo", one should look directly back up the center of Elm St. to the extreme end where one sees a white building which has three extremely distinctive windows.

Located in Elm St. in front of this building are two well defined vertical posts. One is a portion of the support for the two overhead signs, and the other contains a redlight.

These posts and their relationship to the edge of the windows in the background building are at the far ends of the photographic image (far away) and thus the relatinship of the post to the edge of the window would demonstrate the least change due to merely panning of the camera.

Now, when one backs up to the Zapruder Film in comparison:

http://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z050.jpg

In the background can be seen the post with the redlight on it (directly behind the woman in bright red), as well as the overhead sign supporting post, as well as the relationship of these posts to the windows in the white building in the backgound.

The comparisons of these photographs demonstrates that although there is in fact a slight difference in the alignment of the camera positon, it is extremely small, and in fact, the Zapruder photo was taken just slightly farther right, than was the "Memorial Photo"

The "key" if you will, which relatively well establishes that both the Memorial Photo as well as the Zapruder photo were taken from within an extremely short distance, (one or two feet) of each other, is actually the elevation.

From utilization of some of the exact same reference alignments (the roof of the white building which is in the backgound and has the three windows, and the vertical post on the right which is a part of the overhead freeway sign support, to include the horizontal pole which runs to the left, above the street, and holds the actual signs).

In the Memorial photograph, one can see that the horizontal pole which holds the signs, runs exactly parallel to the roof of the white building which has the three distinctive windows.

Similarly,: http://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z020.jpg

Z-20 demonstrates this exact same horizontal alignment. Thus indicating that within an extremely close tolerance, the Memorial Photo and the Zapruder photo were taken at virtually the exact same elevation.

Since the Pedastal on which Zapruder stood is relatively high, had the Memorial photo been taken from anywhere other than from the Pedastal, one would have had to be standing on a stepladder to get as high as was Mr. Zapruder.

Another item of verification which others should have found long ago is the comparative elevation of the tree in the background, to the right side of the sign.

The limbs of this tree come down and due to the camera height elevation looking down, the tree limbs extend slightly lower than the top of the concrete wall in the background.

Actually, the image of the tree limbs extends down to about the elevation of the bottom of the top row of holes in the elevation of the wall.

http://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z211.jpg

If one will look at Z209/210/&211, they will find the exact same image, thus again indicating the closeness of the photographic elevation of the Memorial Photo as compared with the Zapruder Film.

Thus, it would appear that both photographs are taken from the exact same elevation, and the Memorial Photo is most probably taken from the Pedastal also.

Just that Mr. Zapruder may have been standing slightly more forward on the pedastal, while the Memorial Photo was taken from the rearward area of the pedastal, which would be in reality slightly left of the Z-position when looking straight back up Elm St. towards the buildings and those posts utilized as reference against background items.

[Thomas H. Purvis]

Although difficult to place an actual EEI rating on each and every piece of photographic evidence, the "Memorial Sign", if you will, is one of the single-most important pieces of evidence in regards to an attempt to resolve the mystery of the "Stemmons Road Sign".

The time frame of this photograph is relatively well established, which places it well prior to anyone attempting to obscure the facts of the assassination, and it's source, from previously established integrity, demonstrated no attempt or intent to obscure these facts.

Therefore, one can place considerable trust in the images observed.

And, since it is absolutely necessary to recognize and understand the critical evidence which is presented within this photograph, it would need to be placed up for all to see (again) in order that the comparisons with other photographic evidence is made as simple as possible.

Edited February 26, 2007 by Thomas H. Purvis

[Thomas H. Purvis]

Perhaps this time?

[Chris Davidson]

Although difficult to place an actual EEI rating on each and every piece of photographic evidence, the "Memorial Sign", if you will, is one of the single-most important pieces of evidence in regards to an attempt to resolve the mystery of the "Stemmons Road Sign".

The time frame of this photograph is relatively well established, which places it well prior to anyone attempting to obscure the facts of the assassination, and it's source, from previously established integrity, demonstrated no attempt or intent to obscure these facts.

Therefore, one can place considerable trust in the images observed.

And, since it is absolutely necessary to recognize and understand the critical evidence which is presented within this photograph, it would need to be placed up for all to see (again) in order that the comparisons with other photographic evidence is made as simple as possible.

Thomas/Jack and others,

Could it be that the Limo was proportionately shrunk or am I missing something with this comparison.

The Stemmon's sign cuts off each vehicle's wheel well approx. at the same spot, but notice the difference in position/size of the tire/car between each photo.

I also think the limo would be longer on the front end than almost any other car.

I believe I have everything else pretty much to size except for camera shift, left to right.

The animation repeats the first two frames purposely, to show the difference in tire position between the two.

thanks

chris

[Jack White]

Although difficult to place an actual EEI rating on each and every piece of photographic evidence, the "Memorial Sign", if you will, is one of the single-most important pieces of evidence in regards to an attempt to resolve the mystery of the "Stemmons Road Sign".

The time frame of this photograph is relatively well established, which places it well prior to anyone attempting to obscure the facts of the assassination, and it's source, from previously established integrity, demonstrated no attempt or intent to obscure these facts.

Therefore, one can place considerable trust in the images observed.

And, since it is absolutely necessary to recognize and understand the critical evidence which is presented within this photograph, it would need to be placed up for all to see (again) in order that the comparisons with other photographic evidence is made as simple as possible.

Thomas/Jack and others,

Could it be that the Limo was proportionately shrunk or am I missing something with this comparison.

The Stemmon's sign cuts off each vehicle's wheel well approx. at the same spot, but notice the difference in position/size of the tire/car between each photo.

I also think the limo would be longer on the front end than almost any other car.

I believe I have everything else pretty much to size except for camera shift, left to right.

The animation repeats the first two frames purposely, to show the difference in tire position between the two.

thanks

chris

Chris...your animated gif is very useful in showing SOMETHING...I just haven't figured WHAT yet.

The two images correspond exactly VERTICALLY, but not horizontally. This is easily seen by

placing your cursor arrow on any point while the animation shifts between images. It is clear

that background objects between images are on the precise line of sight vertically. Because

you have perfectly aligned the Stemmons sign posts, the sign stays motionless. But as the

image dissolves, the background shifts horizontally; the tree moves; the holes in the wall

move; the windows move. The background displacement is so significant that, given the

small area atop the pedestal, it seems unlikely that both images were shot from there. This is

very difficult to determine without actual experimentation and calculation. Looking only at the

two images overlaid, my expectation would be that both lenses were at the exact same

height, but that ONE image was from the pedestal and the OTHER IMAGE WAS NOT.

This raises the question of a ladder being used for one of the photos...BUT IT MAKES NO SENSE

FOR SOMEONE TO TOTE A LADDER TO THE PLAZA TO TAKE A PHOTO WHEN THEY CAN JUST

CLIMB ATOP THE PEDESTAL. Someone needs to plot this on a very large plat to try and

locate the two lines of sight. It looks like one is from the pedestal, and the other is from

BESIDE the pedestal, but at the same height. Very odd. I have no idea whether this is

significant or not. Do you?

Jack

[Jack White]

Although difficult to place an actual EEI rating on each and every piece of photographic evidence, the "Memorial Sign", if you will, is one of the single-most important pieces of evidence in regards to an attempt to resolve the mystery of the "Stemmons Road Sign".

The time frame of this photograph is relatively well established, which places it well prior to anyone attempting to obscure the facts of the assassination, and it's source, from previously established integrity, demonstrated no attempt or intent to obscure these facts.

Therefore, one can place considerable trust in the images observed.

And, since it is absolutely necessary to recognize and understand the critical evidence which is presented within this photograph, it would need to be placed up for all to see (again) in order that the comparisons with other photographic evidence is made as simple as possible.

Thomas/Jack and others,

Could it be that the Limo was proportionately shrunk or am I missing something with this comparison.

The Stemmon's sign cuts off each vehicle's wheel well approx. at the same spot, but notice the difference in position/size of the tire/car between each photo.

I also think the limo would be longer on the front end than almost any other car.

I believe I have everything else pretty much to size except for camera shift, left to right.

The animation repeats the first two frames purposely, to show the difference in tire position between the two.

thanks

chris

Chris...your animated gif is very useful in showing SOMETHING...I just haven't figured WHAT yet.

The two images correspond exactly VERTICALLY, but not horizontally. This is easily seen by

placing your cursor arrow on any point while the animation shifts between images. It is clear

that background objects between images are on the precise line of sight vertically. Because

you have perfectly aligned the Stemmons sign posts, the sign stays motionless. But as the

image dissolves, the background shifts horizontally; the tree moves; the holes in the wall

move; the windows move. The background displacement is so significant that, given the

small area atop the pedestal, it seems unlikely that both images were shot from there. This is

very difficult to determine without actual experimentation and calculation. Looking only at the

two images overlaid, my expectation would be that both lenses were at the exact same

height, but that ONE image was from the pedestal and the OTHER IMAGE WAS NOT.

This raises the question of a ladder being used for one of the photos...BUT IT MAKES NO SENSE

FOR SOMEONE TO TOTE A LADDER TO THE PLAZA TO TAKE A PHOTO WHEN THEY CAN JUST

CLIMB ATOP THE PEDESTAL. Someone needs to plot this on a very large plat to try and

locate the two lines of sight. It looks like one is from the pedestal, and the other is from

BESIDE the pedestal, but at the same height. Very odd. I have no idea whether this is

significant or not. Do you?

Jack

[Chris Davidson]

Although difficult to place an actual EEI rating on each and every piece of photographic evidence, the "Memorial Sign", if you will, is one of the single-most important pieces of evidence in regards to an attempt to resolve the mystery of the "Stemmons Road Sign".

The time frame of this photograph is relatively well established, which places it well prior to anyone attempting to obscure the facts of the assassination, and it's source, from previously established integrity, demonstrated no attempt or intent to obscure these facts.

Therefore, one can place considerable trust in the images observed.

And, since it is absolutely necessary to recognize and understand the critical evidence which is presented within this photograph, it would need to be placed up for all to see (again) in order that the comparisons with other photographic evidence is made as simple as possible.

Thomas/Jack and others,

Could it be that the Limo was proportionately shrunk or am I missing something with this comparison.

The Stemmon's sign cuts off each vehicle's wheel well approx. at the same spot, but notice the difference in position/size of the tire/car between each photo.

I also think the limo would be longer on the front end than almost any other car.

I believe I have everything else pretty much to size except for camera shift, left to right.

The animation repeats the first two frames purposely, to show the difference in tire position between the two.

thanks

chris

Chris...your animated gif is very useful in showing SOMETHING...I just haven't figured WHAT yet.

The two images correspond exactly VERTICALLY, but not horizontally. This is easily seen by

placing your cursor arrow on any point while the animation shifts between images. It is clear

that background objects between images are on the precise line of sight vertically. Because

you have perfectly aligned the Stemmons sign posts, the sign stays motionless. But as the

image dissolves, the background shifts horizontally; the tree moves; the holes in the wall

move; the windows move. The background displacement is so significant that, given the

small area atop the pedestal, it seems unlikely that both images were shot from there. This is

very difficult to determine without actual experimentation and calculation. Looking only at the

two images overlaid, my expectation would be that both lenses were at the exact same

height, but that ONE image was from the pedestal and the OTHER IMAGE WAS NOT.

This raises the question of a ladder being used for one of the photos...BUT IT MAKES NO SENSE

FOR SOMEONE TO TOTE A LADDER TO THE PLAZA TO TAKE A PHOTO WHEN THEY CAN JUST

CLIMB ATOP THE PEDESTAL. Someone needs to plot this on a very large plat to try and

locate the two lines of sight. It looks like one is from the pedestal, and the other is from

BESIDE the pedestal, but at the same height. Very odd. I have no idea whether this is

significant or not. Do you?

Jack

Jack,

I don't know if this will help, but when I did the original animation (first post) with Dr.Costella's frame, the aspect ratio enlargement of the Memorial photo was (239%).

In this latest animation, I had to change the aspect ratio to 235%(width)x@215%(height) to get it this close.

chris