Return to Index  

Ok, just one more~

December 15 2010 at 10:53 PM

Vince  (Login MoxiFox)
Von Klumpen

Response to Seoc + Jackie

and the Zapruder film.

I must admit that I've not delved into the JFK assassination much and really never studied it before ... so I'm still a bit "naive" I guess. I mean, I just trusted that Oliver Stone would have checked his source before putting it into the movie JFK. I trusted that the Zapruder film WAS (finally) the evidence that we'd all been waiting to see. It never dawned on me that this film ITSELF might have been severely altered.

I posted before, showing my take on what might have happened with the flesh-toned blob in front of Kennedy's face, the moment he was shot ... that it looked like they might have done a double exposure on it, using one frame turned upside down to position his brain in front of his face.

Well, it turns out that the frames I was using came from a "digitally enhanced" version of the "original" film, or the original copy of the original ... or something 'sort of' original ... and so the actual details don't match precisely in the digital enhancement, with the 'sort of original' film itself. If you look at this frame for example -an actual single frame reproduction from that "original" film- you'll see that the blob in front of his face doesn't look precisely the same as the one I used for my theory!~ It's still possible that they DID do what I suggested but ... it's a bit hard to see that brain in this particular "mess."

(You can use the back and forward buttons on top to look at the sequence in still frames.)

This is a great resource -the entire film broken into individual frames- which I've been trying to find for some truer research.

The original Zapruder film was done with an 8 mm home movie camera and/but these shots, I believe, are an enlarged version of that. This is 35 mm, if I'm not mistaken. These still frames show what was exposed on the original film, inside of the sprocket area (where the sprocket wheel tightly advances the film at just the right speed) ... and adds extra detail which wouldn't be visible in projection of the original film.

Well ... Oliver Stone's photo expert on the JFK film was a guy by the name of Robert Groden and Groden had HAD a copy of the Zapruder film as far back as 1975 already. Groden seems like a nice enough guy and he had a lot of hands on experience with doctoring photos and with photo machinery but he had no formal education on the trade. He relied on his gut instincts to determine whether pictures had been altered or not. He said that his copy had NOT been altered BECAUSE .. there was image in the sprocket area!

Well Groden also testified at the O.J. Simpson trial as an "expert witness" and claimed that the shoes O.J. was wearing in a particular photo HAD BEEN inserted later. When confronted with other photos taken of O.J. at a sporting event, wearing exactly the same kind of shoes he STILL insisted that the photo he was testifying on HAD been doctored! Some peoples' egos have a way of interfering with their reasoning!

So, ok ... Groden based his claim on authenticity of the Zapruder film on the fact that there was content between the sprocket wheels. But now, you tell me ... WHY is the content in the sprocket area to the left of the JFK procession CONSISTENTLY different than the content next to it? Take a look ...

You'll find that in every frame; the stuff matches in the area above the cars and curb but not in the area of the vehicles. The grass is always green behind the limousine!

Another thing that jumped out at me when I copied and pasted these photos into my own editor and placed them side by side ... is that the people on the grass are WAY BIGGER than the people sitting in the car. That girl up in the center there, has been calculated to be around 7'6" tall!

[linked image]

It seems pretty evident to me that the procession from behind the sign (from about frame 222 onward) has been transplanted onto a background of another film strip in order to convey fluid motion from start to finish. I don't know how it was done; what technique was used ... but eyewitnesses of that day said the procession STOPPED at the time Kennedy was shot for the last time ... and this film definitely never has the cars stopping at any time.

I think it's possible that by 1975, government "super computers" could probably have been able to handle digital video manipulation. Using a computer and lots of time ... each single frame could be altered with cut and paste to provide the necessary illusion.

One thing seems clear to me: the people standing on the grass along the roadside are definitely far too large to fit with the perspective of the Kennedys in the car.


 Respond to this message