Findings: On this composite the black lines are the locations of the front edge of the fender on consecutive frames as per available film . The lower single red mark is the frame where the headshot is first visible. The red lines between the black lines are my estimates of missing frames. When the film runs the missing frames give an appearance of smooth continuity. When properly placed in space on the composite the jerky leaps of speed at the missing frames is obvious.
(image)
Full Version: Missing Nix frames
QUOTE (John Dolva @ Nov 27 2006, 01:38 PM) 
Findings: On this composite the black lines are the locations of the front edge of the fender on consecutive frames as per available film . The lower single red mark is the frame where the headshot is first visible. The red lines between the black lines are my estimates of missing frames. When the film runs the missing frames give an appearance of smooth continuity. When properly placed in space on the composite the jerky leaps of speed at the missing frames is obvious.
(image)
(image)
VERY INTERESTING, JOHN! I hope you can figure a way to show this in motion.
Jack
Jack, I've installed some programs that have messed up my film maker. What I can do at this stage is to make up all the frames as jpegs and zip them up into a file I'll send to anyone who can put them together as a gif or a clip to post. Once I have them done in a day or so I'll notify and whoever can PM or email details of where to send them.
Hey John;
Watch out, you have entered David's domain and what he and a few others have been attempting to demonstrate for a long time.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; I might state first that all of the other photographs were reestablished on the basis of the Zapruder film using reference points in the background of the pictures.
As is apparent here from the photograph of the Zapruder frame 313 there are no reference points. There is just a grassy plot. So there is no reference point on which we can reestablish the position of the car in the roadway.
For this reason it was necessary to use the Nix film of the head shot and the Muchmore film of the head shot to establish this position in the road.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Actually! There was already an existing nail in the road at the location of the Z313 headshot, as long ago established during the US Secret Service survey work and re-enactment of December 1963.
Perhaps if the WC/Shaneyfelt had just asked Mr. West, they could have saved a lot more running in circles.
Said Nail happens to be the 3+65 stationing number which Mr. West had assigned during the SS survey work and thereafter utilized again, even though the WC attempted to confuse footages by beginning their survey work at "Station A".
Therefore the term: Sneaky-Yes/Smart-No!
Specter & Company forgot to inform Mr. West NOT to utilize the stationing for Elm St. which he had previously established during the SS Work.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. SHANEYFELT. We obtained from Mr. Zapruder, Mr. Nix, Mrs. Muchmore; their cameras for examination, and in the FBI laboratory exposed film in all three cameras, aiming, focusing the camera on a clock with a large sweep-second hand. We then ran the camera at the speed and conditions as described by the people who used the cameras. We ran through several tests of film, and then after the film was developed it was studied under magnification, and frames were counted for a period of 2 to 3 seconds or for the full running time, and averages were taken.
Mr. Zapruder has stated that his camera was fully wound. Most of the others have stated their cameras were fully wound, so we were able to more or less eliminate the very slow time that occurs when the cameras are approximately run down, and all of these things were taken into consideration and were averaged.
The Zapruder camera was found to run at an average speed of 18.3 frames per second.
The Nix and Muchmore cameras were both found around 18.5 frames per second.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Which should help when one wishes to attempt to compare potentially deleted frames from films.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. SPECTER. Were you able to ascertain the speed of the Presidential limousine at the time of the assassination?
Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; because we were able to determine the speed of the camera, and thereby accurately determine the length of time it takes for a specific number of frames to run through the camera at this 18.3 frames per second, and having located these frame positions in the street, we took the farthest distance point we had in the Zapruder film which was frame 161 through frame 313.
This was found to run elapsed time from the film standpoint which runs at 18.3 frames a second, runs for a total of 8.3 seconds.
This distance is 136.1 feet, and this can be calculated then to 11.2 miles per hour.
Mr. SPECTER. Is that a constant average speed or does that speed reflect any variations in the movement of the car?
Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is the overall average from 161 to 313. It does not mean that it was traveling constantly at 11.2, because it was more than likely going faster in some areas and slightly slower in some areas. It is only an average speed over the entire run.
Mr. DULLES. Over the entire run between what points?
Mr. SHANEYFELT. Between frame 161 and 313.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rates up there about in the same category as calling LHO an "average" shot!
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I do believe that we may be getting close to the point of resolving exactly why/how the WC decided that they had best "fudge" a few frame#'s of the Z-flim onto Mr. West data block.
Watch out, you have entered David's domain and what he and a few others have been attempting to demonstrate for a long time.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; I might state first that all of the other photographs were reestablished on the basis of the Zapruder film using reference points in the background of the pictures.
As is apparent here from the photograph of the Zapruder frame 313 there are no reference points. There is just a grassy plot. So there is no reference point on which we can reestablish the position of the car in the roadway.
For this reason it was necessary to use the Nix film of the head shot and the Muchmore film of the head shot to establish this position in the road.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Actually! There was already an existing nail in the road at the location of the Z313 headshot, as long ago established during the US Secret Service survey work and re-enactment of December 1963.
Perhaps if the WC/Shaneyfelt had just asked Mr. West, they could have saved a lot more running in circles.
Said Nail happens to be the 3+65 stationing number which Mr. West had assigned during the SS survey work and thereafter utilized again, even though the WC attempted to confuse footages by beginning their survey work at "Station A".
Therefore the term: Sneaky-Yes/Smart-No!
Specter & Company forgot to inform Mr. West NOT to utilize the stationing for Elm St. which he had previously established during the SS Work.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. SHANEYFELT. We obtained from Mr. Zapruder, Mr. Nix, Mrs. Muchmore; their cameras for examination, and in the FBI laboratory exposed film in all three cameras, aiming, focusing the camera on a clock with a large sweep-second hand. We then ran the camera at the speed and conditions as described by the people who used the cameras. We ran through several tests of film, and then after the film was developed it was studied under magnification, and frames were counted for a period of 2 to 3 seconds or for the full running time, and averages were taken.
Mr. Zapruder has stated that his camera was fully wound. Most of the others have stated their cameras were fully wound, so we were able to more or less eliminate the very slow time that occurs when the cameras are approximately run down, and all of these things were taken into consideration and were averaged.
The Zapruder camera was found to run at an average speed of 18.3 frames per second.
The Nix and Muchmore cameras were both found around 18.5 frames per second.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Which should help when one wishes to attempt to compare potentially deleted frames from films.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. SPECTER. Were you able to ascertain the speed of the Presidential limousine at the time of the assassination?
Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; because we were able to determine the speed of the camera, and thereby accurately determine the length of time it takes for a specific number of frames to run through the camera at this 18.3 frames per second, and having located these frame positions in the street, we took the farthest distance point we had in the Zapruder film which was frame 161 through frame 313.
This was found to run elapsed time from the film standpoint which runs at 18.3 frames a second, runs for a total of 8.3 seconds.
This distance is 136.1 feet, and this can be calculated then to 11.2 miles per hour.
Mr. SPECTER. Is that a constant average speed or does that speed reflect any variations in the movement of the car?
Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is the overall average from 161 to 313. It does not mean that it was traveling constantly at 11.2, because it was more than likely going faster in some areas and slightly slower in some areas. It is only an average speed over the entire run.
Mr. DULLES. Over the entire run between what points?
Mr. SHANEYFELT. Between frame 161 and 313.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rates up there about in the same category as calling LHO an "average" shot!
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I do believe that we may be getting close to the point of resolving exactly why/how the WC decided that they had best "fudge" a few frame#'s of the Z-flim onto Mr. West data block.
David;
Hope that some of it is starting to either come together and/or make some sense now.
Chuck could not explain what it was all about when he released the altered survey data/vehicle speed info to Fetzer for publication.
Mainly because I did not explain it's significance to him.
Tom.
P.S. And yes, I am that sneaky too!
Hope that some of it is starting to either come together and/or make some sense now.
Chuck could not explain what it was all about when he released the altered survey data/vehicle speed info to Fetzer for publication.
Mainly because I did not explain it's significance to him.
Tom.
P.S. And yes, I am that sneaky too!
QUOTE (John Dolva @ Nov 27 2006, 05:38 AM)
Findings: On this composite the black lines are the locations of the front edge of the fender on consecutive frames as per available film . The lower single red mark is the frame where the headshot is first visible. The red lines between the black lines are my estimates of missing frames. When the film runs the missing frames give an appearance of smooth continuity. When properly placed in space on the composite the jerky leaps of speed at the missing frames is obvious.
(image)
(image)
John,
Nice work -- was the source for your above work a videotape-DVD presentation (based on a 23.97PAL - 29.97NTSC fps)?
David
'Thomas H. Purvis' wrote:
David;
Hope that some of it is starting to either come together and/or make some sense now.
dgh: yes, coming together, reinforcing early recreations.
Chuck could not explain what it was all about when he released the altered survey data/vehicle speed info to Fetzer for publication.
Mainly because I did not explain it's significance to him.
Tom.
P.S. And yes, I am that sneaky too!
dgh: you, *sneaky* Pete?
David;
Hope that some of it is starting to either come together and/or make some sense now.
dgh: yes, coming together, reinforcing early recreations.
Chuck could not explain what it was all about when he released the altered survey data/vehicle speed info to Fetzer for publication.
Mainly because I did not explain it's significance to him.
Tom.
P.S. And yes, I am that sneaky too!
dgh: you, *sneaky* Pete?
David, thank you. I used the Nix assassination sequence clip from
http://jfkmurderphotos.bravehost.com/photos.html
and extracted the frames with xnview. The first frame was very blurred so I left that out. Calling the first used frame frame one, it seems (to me) that frames
5, 11, 20, (21?), 22, 23, 25, 34, 38, 45
of the first 48 frames are missing. Four of these are bunched at the headshot, and there could be even another frame again missing. If this is correct then likely the full clip shows the limo stopping or nearly stopping at the headshot. It would be good if someone could check and confirm or debunk please.
http://jfkmurderphotos.bravehost.com/photos.html
and extracted the frames with xnview. The first frame was very blurred so I left that out. Calling the first used frame frame one, it seems (to me) that frames
5, 11, 20, (21?), 22, 23, 25, 34, 38, 45
of the first 48 frames are missing. Four of these are bunched at the headshot, and there could be even another frame again missing. If this is correct then likely the full clip shows the limo stopping or nearly stopping at the headshot. It would be good if someone could check and confirm or debunk please.
QUOTE (John Dolva @ Nov 27 2006, 07:44 PM)
David, thank you. I used the Nix assassination sequence clip from
http://jfkmurderphotos.bravehost.com/photos.html
and extracted the frames with xnview. The first frame was very blurred so I left that out. Calling the first used frame frame one, it seems (to me) that frames
5, 11, 20, (21?), 22, 23, 25, 34, 38, 45
of the first 48 frames are missing. Four of these are bunched at the headshot, and there could be even another frame again missing. If this is correct then likely the full clip shows the limo stopping or nearly stopping at the headshot. It would be good if someone could check and confirm or debunk please.
http://jfkmurderphotos.bravehost.com/photos.html
and extracted the frames with xnview. The first frame was very blurred so I left that out. Calling the first used frame frame one, it seems (to me) that frames
5, 11, 20, (21?), 22, 23, 25, 34, 38, 45
of the first 48 frames are missing. Four of these are bunched at the headshot, and there could be even another frame again missing. If this is correct then likely the full clip shows the limo stopping or nearly stopping at the headshot. It would be good if someone could check and confirm or debunk please.
Good catch, John.
While I admit that my "alteration jury" is still out, the prospect of removing frames is one that seems *very* plausible and could certainly have been done.
I have individual frames of the Nix film. I'm going to attempt to repeat your test and see if I get the same result.
For those that care, my source is 29.97 NTSC interleaved (DVD source). I have, by hand, removed the interlaced frames as well as duplicate (i.e. telecined) frames necessary to match frame rates. What remains are individual, full frames (aka Progressive video) that I can play at any framerate I choose.
What was the framerate of Nix's original camera? 16fps?
QUOTE (Frank Agbat @ Nov 27 2006, 07:02 PM)
QUOTE (John Dolva @ Nov 27 2006, 07:44 PM)
David, thank you. I used the Nix assassination sequence clip from
http://jfkmurderphotos.bravehost.com/photos.html
and extracted the frames with xnview. The first frame was very blurred so I left that out. Calling the first used frame frame one, it seems (to me) that frames
5, 11, 20, (21?), 22, 23, 25, 34, 38, 45
of the first 48 frames are missing. Four of these are bunched at the headshot, and there could be even another frame again missing. If this is correct then likely the full clip shows the limo stopping or nearly stopping at the headshot. It would be good if someone could check and confirm or debunk please.
Good catch, John.
While I admit that my "alteration jury" is still out, the prospect of removing frames is one that seems *very* plausible and could certainly have been done.
I have individual frames of the Nix film. I'm going to attempt to repeat your test and see if I get the same result.
For those that care, my source is 29.97 NTSC interleaved (DVD source). I have, by hand, removed the interlaced frames as well as duplicate (i.e. telecined) frames necessary to match frame rates. What remains are individual, full frames (aka Progressive video) that I can play at any framerate I choose.
What was the framerate of Nix's original camera? 16fps?
If any of you guys can prove FRAME REMOVAL, no more proof of alteration is needed.
Jack
QUOTE (Jack White @ Nov 27 2006, 08:03 PM)
If any of you guys can prove FRAME REMOVAL, no more proof of alteration is needed.
Jack
Jack
Agreed. As Ed O'Hagan said in another thread, either the film is altered or it isn't. I didn't agree with some of his other points, but I certainly agreed on this one.
One possible complication:
Using the front fender may bring too much perspective into play. That is to say, the fender starts to "vanish" as the limo moves out of his panning area toward the end of the sequence.
I'm going to attempt to use both the front fender *and* the centerpoint of the front wheel as a positional guide.
For those who know: In addition to the framerate of the Nix camera, what is the proper parlance for numbering the Nix frames? Is the very first frame (shot on Houston) N1, or is "N1" the Elm street sequence?
Frank, I used the front of the fender at the line beween the dark panel and the light chrome bumper. As its blurry I used the thicker dark lines to mark this point. I understand from what Tom posted that the fully wound frame rate was about the same as the Z-camera. I don't know the usual numbering.
QUOTE (John Dolva @ Nov 27 2006, 08:24 PM)
Frank, I used the front of the fender at the line beween the dark panel and the light chrome bumper. As its blurry I used the thicker dark lines to mark this point. I understand from what Tom posted that the fully wound frame rate was about the same as the Z-camera. I don't know the usual numbering.
John -
Two questions:
1) What software are you using to make the panorama-style combined view?
2) How are you eliminating pan-tracking problems from skewing the results?
Frank, any software that supports layering, transparencies and fine rotation will do the trick. I'm not sure what you mean with pan tracking problems. If this doesn't answer it please rephrase.
Place the first frame on the bottom of the pile. Make it opaque. Select the rest of the frames and hide them. Then select all frames and rotate so that the visible first frame is with the concrete thing Z stands on is level. Then deselect the bottom frame and make all the rest 50% transparent. The invert their colors.
Unhide frame two. Select all frames except the bottom one.
Where you have two colors, one of which is the inverse of the other and it's placed over each other with the bottom one opaque and the top 50% transparency you end up with a particular grey. This means that when you have the two images correctly aligned only that which is different will show as color. Credit me with this 'discovery' or technique development. When you have fine rotation capabilities it allows very exact alignment.
Place the stack with the second frame visible, inverted and 50% transparent over the bottom one. Use the more obvious lines like the concrete and the street to rotate (I find about 0.2 degree increments sufficient)By continually deselecting the visible one, hiding it, selecting the next one, making it visible, selecting it and all the ones above it and repeating thus for all the frames you end up with all the frames aligned as the first frame. Then the static objects like the ground and structures stay put and the moving ones go where they belong in relation to them.
Hope this answers the question. If you want more detail or followups don't hesitate to ask. I have logged the IDEA of using this process to create a new kind of security system where a continuous alternate digitised film frame using software to duplicate this process continuously in real time to create an extremely sensitive motion detector where as soon as a variable (set by operator) is flagged an alarm is activated. IOW a 'dumb' scalable system. No signals. This means that motion per se is not necessarily detected but differences, which no amount of crawling, blanking or jamming should overcome.
Place the first frame on the bottom of the pile. Make it opaque. Select the rest of the frames and hide them. Then select all frames and rotate so that the visible first frame is with the concrete thing Z stands on is level. Then deselect the bottom frame and make all the rest 50% transparent. The invert their colors.
Unhide frame two. Select all frames except the bottom one.
Where you have two colors, one of which is the inverse of the other and it's placed over each other with the bottom one opaque and the top 50% transparency you end up with a particular grey. This means that when you have the two images correctly aligned only that which is different will show as color. Credit me with this 'discovery' or technique development. When you have fine rotation capabilities it allows very exact alignment.
Place the stack with the second frame visible, inverted and 50% transparent over the bottom one. Use the more obvious lines like the concrete and the street to rotate (I find about 0.2 degree increments sufficient)By continually deselecting the visible one, hiding it, selecting the next one, making it visible, selecting it and all the ones above it and repeating thus for all the frames you end up with all the frames aligned as the first frame. Then the static objects like the ground and structures stay put and the moving ones go where they belong in relation to them.
Hope this answers the question. If you want more detail or followups don't hesitate to ask. I have logged the IDEA of using this process to create a new kind of security system where a continuous alternate digitised film frame using software to duplicate this process continuously in real time to create an extremely sensitive motion detector where as soon as a variable (set by operator) is flagged an alarm is activated. IOW a 'dumb' scalable system. No signals. This means that motion per se is not necessarily detected but differences, which no amount of crawling, blanking or jamming should overcome.
QUOTE (John Dolva @ Nov 27 2006, 10:06 PM)
Frank, any software that supports layering, transparencies and fine rotation will do the trick. I'm not sure what you mean with pan tracking problems. If this doesn't answer it please rephrase.
Place the first frame on the bottom of the pile. Make it opaque. Select the rest of the frames and hide them. Then select all frames and rotate so that the visible first frame is with the concrete thing Z stands on is level. Then deselect the bottom frame and make all the rest 50% transparent. The invert their colors.
Unhide frame two. Select all frames except the bottom one.
Where you have two colors, one of which is the inverse of the other and it's placed over each other with the bottom one opaque and the top 50% transparency you end up with a particular grey. This means that when you have the two images correctly aligned only that which is different will show as color. Credit me with this 'discovery' or technique development. When you have fine rotation capabilities it allows very exact alignment.
Place the stack with the second frame visible, inverted and 50% transparent over the bottom one. Use the more obvious lines like the concrete and the street to rotate (I find about 0.2 degree increments sufficient)By continually deselecting the visible one, hiding it, selecting the next one, making it visible, selecting it and all the ones above it and repeating thus for all the frames you end up with all the frames aligned as the first frame. Then the static objects like the ground and structures stay put and the moving ones go where they belong in relation to them.
Hope this answers the question. If you want more detail or followups don't hesitate to ask. I have logged the IDEA of using this process to create a new kind of security system where a continuous alternate digitised film frame using software to duplicate this process continuously in real time to create an extremely sensitive motion detector where as soon as a variable (set by operator) is flagged an alarm is activated. IOW a 'dumb' scalable system. No signals. This means that motion per se is not necessarily detected but differences, which no amount of crawling, blanking or jamming should overcome.
Place the first frame on the bottom of the pile. Make it opaque. Select the rest of the frames and hide them. Then select all frames and rotate so that the visible first frame is with the concrete thing Z stands on is level. Then deselect the bottom frame and make all the rest 50% transparent. The invert their colors.
Unhide frame two. Select all frames except the bottom one.
Where you have two colors, one of which is the inverse of the other and it's placed over each other with the bottom one opaque and the top 50% transparency you end up with a particular grey. This means that when you have the two images correctly aligned only that which is different will show as color. Credit me with this 'discovery' or technique development. When you have fine rotation capabilities it allows very exact alignment.
Place the stack with the second frame visible, inverted and 50% transparent over the bottom one. Use the more obvious lines like the concrete and the street to rotate (I find about 0.2 degree increments sufficient)By continually deselecting the visible one, hiding it, selecting the next one, making it visible, selecting it and all the ones above it and repeating thus for all the frames you end up with all the frames aligned as the first frame. Then the static objects like the ground and structures stay put and the moving ones go where they belong in relation to them.
Hope this answers the question. If you want more detail or followups don't hesitate to ask. I have logged the IDEA of using this process to create a new kind of security system where a continuous alternate digitised film frame using software to duplicate this process continuously in real time to create an extremely sensitive motion detector where as soon as a variable (set by operator) is flagged an alarm is activated. IOW a 'dumb' scalable system. No signals. This means that motion per se is not necessarily detected but differences, which no amount of crawling, blanking or jamming should overcome.
Hello John,
Yes. It answers my question quite nicely. You are, in effect, stabilizing the frames -- you do this by keeping the background stuff in the same alignment. This takes camera panning out of the equation.
(p.s. I like your security system idea. Your idea has given me another idea, but I need to understand how it could be used to measure relative "rate" of motion. Might have applications in a traffic monitoring system.)
It would mean that one security guard can monitor a huge bank of displays in miniature and the moment one defects a difference the monitor switches to full color prominence and draws attention to be dealt with. It would as you already see have numerous other applications.
In this case (nix and other films and photos) it allows comparative analysis which detects even minor changes in photos and also changes frame by frame. Features such as blood spray can be separated out from the background noise.
In this case (nix and other films and photos) it allows comparative analysis which detects even minor changes in photos and also changes frame by frame. Features such as blood spray can be separated out from the background noise.
QUOTE (Frank Agbat @ Nov 27 2006, 07:17 PM)
QUOTE (Jack White @ Nov 27 2006, 08:03 PM)
If any of you guys can prove FRAME REMOVAL, no more proof of alteration is needed.
Jack
Agreed. As Ed O'Hagan said in another thread, either the film is altered or it isn't. I didn't agree with some of his other points, but I certainly agreed on this one.
One possible complication:
Using the front fender may bring too much perspective into play. That is to say, the fender starts to "vanish" as the limo moves out of his panning area toward the end of the sequence.
I'm going to attempt to use both the front fender *and* the centerpoint of the front wheel as a positional guide.
For those who know: In addition to the framerate of the Nix camera, what is the proper parlance for numbering the Nix frames? Is the very first frame (shot on Houston) N1, or is "N1" the Elm street sequence?
I have found that the roll bar separating the front and back seats
is an ideal reference point, since it has both vertical and horizontal
components to judge perspective, and is high enough to be in all
frames of all films, and is the same on both sides of the car.
Jack
QUOTE (John Dolva @ Nov 27 2006, 08:44 PM)
David, thank you. I used the Nix assassination sequence clip from
http://jfkmurderphotos.bravehost.com/photos.html
and extracted the frames with xnview. The first frame was very blurred so I left that out. Calling the first used frame frame one, it seems (to me) that frames
5, 11, 20, (21?), 22, 23, 25, 34, 38, 45
of the first 48 frames are missing. Four of these are bunched at the headshot, and there could be even another frame again missing. If this is correct then likely the full clip shows the limo stopping or nearly stopping at the headshot. It would be good if someone could check and confirm or debunk please.
http://jfkmurderphotos.bravehost.com/photos.html
and extracted the frames with xnview. The first frame was very blurred so I left that out. Calling the first used frame frame one, it seems (to me) that frames
5, 11, 20, (21?), 22, 23, 25, 34, 38, 45
of the first 48 frames are missing. Four of these are bunched at the headshot, and there could be even another frame again missing. If this is correct then likely the full clip shows the limo stopping or nearly stopping at the headshot. It would be good if someone could check and confirm or debunk please.
Well that sure would be an interesting find if those were the events in the missing frames. I'm leaning towards believing that zapruger frames were tampered with to hide the incriminating limo slowdown (or stop) you mentioned, and to show a burst of blood shooting forward from the President's head to support the bullet from behind theory. Discussed here:
http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...=8579&st=75
It looks like the Nix stretch shown here is approximately z312-334, based on the positions of people I think are Mary Moorman, woman in light coat still running, and first guy in dark suit.
http://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/
I'm going by the zapruder tape used here:
http://www.assassinationscience.com/johncostella/jfk/intro/
They gave many examples of supposed alteration flaws that I couldn't see. But I thought the head motions of Mrs Connelly and Greer were impossible, and the blood dissipation occuring in 1/16 of a second was beyond impossible. There would have to be many frame missing or tampered with to disguise those two events.
John,
I repeated your experiment, albeit using different software, but attempted to match your registration/stabilization technique (which is quite slick, by the way). The only problem I ran into was a minor procedural error regarding how I marked the actual wheel-center location on each frame.
Anyway -- here are the results. The small vertical markers (which due to my procedural error got a bit too light in the final version) track the center of the wheel. As you can see by some minor blurring in the background, my registration was not 100% perfect, but it isn't bad for a quick evaluation.
My version of Nix doesn't seem to show missing frames. I'm going to use the same AVI that you used, reduce it to individual frames and see if, perhaps, the source is the problem.
Click to view attachment
I repeated your experiment, albeit using different software, but attempted to match your registration/stabilization technique (which is quite slick, by the way). The only problem I ran into was a minor procedural error regarding how I marked the actual wheel-center location on each frame.
Anyway -- here are the results. The small vertical markers (which due to my procedural error got a bit too light in the final version) track the center of the wheel. As you can see by some minor blurring in the background, my registration was not 100% perfect, but it isn't bad for a quick evaluation.
My version of Nix doesn't seem to show missing frames. I'm going to use the same AVI that you used, reduce it to individual frames and see if, perhaps, the source is the problem.
Click to view attachment
It could very well be the source. We'll see. The edges of the concrete pedestal look a bit more blurred than I got. Perhaps recheck the alignments? If you take the biggest gap on the pic I posted (count the black lines) and compare the frames at that place you should be able to see if there are more frames in the version you have. Particularly the grouping at the headshot.
Click to view attachment
Click to view attachment
QUOTE (John Dolva @ Nov 28 2006, 12:06 AM)
It could very well be the source. We'll see. The edges of the concrete pedestal look a bit more blurred than I got. Perhaps recheck the alignments? If you take the biggest gap on the pic I posted (count the black lines) and compare the frames at that place you should be able to see if there are more frames in the version you have. Particularly the grouping at the headshot.
Click to view attachment
Click to view attachment
Hi John,
My alignment isn't as crisp as yours. I certainly can probably crisp it up a bit with some fine tuning and a more relaxed hand on the mouse (I've had a rather, um, interesting and nerve-rattling day). I also might have used a slightly different procedure than you, upon further review. I attempted to optimize the alignment of each frame with its predecessor, not the first frame. That might lead to some progressive error creeping in to the process.
Another possible issue is that I might have screwed up on reversing the telecine process. I would expect mucking up in this area, though, would have yielded some duplicate frames *or* some skipped frames. That did not appear to be the case. Also in the mix was the disappointingly poor quality of the source, even though it was a DVD. All DVDs are not created equally, and this one stinks!
I'm going to download the avi file that you used and play with it for a while...
Well, I have to admit, I'm a bit puzzled about a couple of things.
I ran the same process against the Nix avi from the site you indicated. Here are the results:
Click to view attachment
I also re-did my previous one, in an attempt to improve the registration:
Click to view attachment
On your source AVI, I was never able to achieve the level of clarity you achieved, but there are some irregularities in the frame spacing.
On my source, I think the results are slightly improved. I blame some of the fuzziness on MPEG-2 block distortion, as the DVD "chops" a bit. The frame spacing seems quite good, with no indication of missing frames.
But there is another problem...
When I play these frames at 18.5fps (the speed of the Nix camera) the film seems to be in slow motion. I'm at a bit of a loss to explain this at the moment. I'm going to have to go back and look at the source again... When something looks to be in slow-mo, there are usually duplicate frames present, but there are clearly no dupes in the film. There also don't appear to be any missing... (there is probably a simple explanation that I'm missing... it has been a LONG day).
I ran the same process against the Nix avi from the site you indicated. Here are the results:
Click to view attachment
I also re-did my previous one, in an attempt to improve the registration:
Click to view attachment
On your source AVI, I was never able to achieve the level of clarity you achieved, but there are some irregularities in the frame spacing.
On my source, I think the results are slightly improved. I blame some of the fuzziness on MPEG-2 block distortion, as the DVD "chops" a bit. The frame spacing seems quite good, with no indication of missing frames.
But there is another problem...
When I play these frames at 18.5fps (the speed of the Nix camera) the film seems to be in slow motion. I'm at a bit of a loss to explain this at the moment. I'm going to have to go back and look at the source again... When something looks to be in slow-mo, there are usually duplicate frames present, but there are clearly no dupes in the film. There also don't appear to be any missing... (there is probably a simple explanation that I'm missing... it has been a LONG day).
QUOTE (Frank Agbat @ Nov 27 2006, 07:57 PM)
Well, I have to admit, I'm a bit puzzled about a couple of things.
I ran the same process against the Nix avi from the site you indicated. Here are the results:
Click to view attachment
I also re-did my previous one, in an attempt to improve the registration:
Click to view attachment
On your source AVI, I was never able to achieve the level of clarity you achieved, but there are some irregularities in the frame spacing.
On my source, I think the results are slightly improved. I blame some of the fuzziness on MPEG-2 block distortion, as the DVD "chops" a bit. The frame spacing seems quite good, with no indication of missing frames.
But there is another problem...
When I play these frames at 18.5fps (the speed of the Nix camera) the film seems to be in slow motion. I'm at a bit of a loss to explain this at the moment. I'm going to have to go back and look at the source again... When something looks to be in slow-mo, there are usually duplicate frames present, but there are clearly no dupes in the film. There also don't appear to be any missing... (there is probably a simple explanation that I'm missing... it has been a LONG day).
I ran the same process against the Nix avi from the site you indicated. Here are the results:
Click to view attachment
I also re-did my previous one, in an attempt to improve the registration:
Click to view attachment
On your source AVI, I was never able to achieve the level of clarity you achieved, but there are some irregularities in the frame spacing.
On my source, I think the results are slightly improved. I blame some of the fuzziness on MPEG-2 block distortion, as the DVD "chops" a bit. The frame spacing seems quite good, with no indication of missing frames.
But there is another problem...
When I play these frames at 18.5fps (the speed of the Nix camera) the film seems to be in slow motion. I'm at a bit of a loss to explain this at the moment. I'm going to have to go back and look at the source again... When something looks to be in slow-mo, there are usually duplicate frames present, but there are clearly no dupes in the film. There also don't appear to be any missing... (there is probably a simple explanation that I'm missing... it has been a LONG day).
unless the source utilized in your study can be certified/guaranteed at 18.5fps your wasting your time... Most, if not ALL of these JFK related reference films on the internet are at 30fps DF (drop frame) version of 18.3 or 18.5 fps in-camera originals. For these 30fps clips to be used accurately 3:2 pulldown is required in order to get the frames back to their original frame rate... Adobe After Effects will accomplish same...
3:2 pulldown? go to
http://www.dvdfile.com/news/special_report..._2_pulldown.htm
for more information
Interesting, David, thank you for that. How I understand it then (please correct) is that the process creates frames that didn't exist in two ways. By mixing half interleavs from consecutive frames and by dupliucation. This would be the case with the dvd clip and removing dupes doesn't solve it. The avi clip on the other hand is not necessarily like that. It depends on how the frames for it were derived. The large spaced group around the headshot which Frank seems to have also found (Frank, could you mark the line that is from the headshot frame) I'm betting it is the same, if so then that indicates an intent as the pattern of missing frames is not at all regular?
QUOTE (John Dolva @ Nov 27 2006, 03:51 PM)
Jack, I've installed some programs that have messed up my film maker. What I can do at this stage is to make up all the frames as jpegs and zip them up into a file I'll send to anyone who can put them together as a gif or a clip to post. Once I have them done in a day or so I'll notify and whoever can PM or email details of where to send them.
John,
It is possible to create a Flash video using Macromedia Flash MX 6 and SwishStudio 2.
Use Macromedia Flash MX 6 (or any other version) to assemble all the relevant jpeg images
and convert the assembled jpegs into a viewable Flash file (.swf) these can be then zipped, sent
and posted on web pages and viewed on computers which have Macromedia Flash Player installed.
Swishstudio 2 converts video to Flash files (.swf).
Macromedia Flash MX 6 is especially geared to convert sequential jpegs into viewable Flash movies.
Please note Macromedia Flash is now owned by Adobe.
EBC
QUOTE (David G. Healy @ Nov 28 2006, 06:37 AM)
unless the source utilized in your study can be certified/guaranteed at 18.5fps your wasting your time... Most, if not ALL of these JFK related reference films on the internet are at 30fps DF (drop frame) version of 18.3 or 18.5 fps in-camera originals. For these 30fps clips to be used accurately 3:2 pulldown is required in order to get the frames back to their original frame rate... Adobe After Effects will accomplish same...
3:2 pulldown? go to
http://www.dvdfile.com/news/special_report..._2_pulldown.htm
for more information
3:2 pulldown? go to
http://www.dvdfile.com/news/special_report..._2_pulldown.htm
for more information
Hi David,
Yeah, I know all about telecining, 3:2 pulldown, interlacing/de-interlacing and the like... (A few years ago, in the early days of burnable DVDs, I produced a crazy "torture test" dvd that included such nifty things as MP2 audio tracks, incorrectly telecined sequences, incorrect 3:2 pulldown flag, non-standard GOPs, wrong DVD book-type and the like. It was really fun to watch poorly designed DVD players try to play some of the stuff. It was even more fun to watch the befuddled salesmen...)
I was reasonably certain that my source was purely progressive last night, but I was so darn tired I really couldn't think straight. This morning, I noticed my computer wasn't playing *anything* at the correct speed... One reboot later and all is good. Unfortunately, immediately thereafter I had to head to work. I suspect the problem is a memory leak in a program I've been writing.
QUOTE (John Dolva @ Nov 28 2006, 09:10 AM)
Interesting, David, thank you for that. How I understand it then (please correct) is that the process creates frames that didn't exist in two ways. By mixing half interleavs from consecutive frames and by dupliucation. This would be the case with the dvd clip and removing dupes doesn't solve it. The avi clip on the other hand is not necessarily like that. It depends on how the frames for it were derived. The large spaced group around the headshot which Frank seems to have also found (Frank, could you mark the line that is from the headshot frame) I'm betting it is the same, if so then that indicates an intent as the pattern of missing frames is not at all regular?
John,
Yes, it sounds like you've got the basic pattern correct. If your source is film shot at a rate BELOW the rate of the target (i.e. 24 fps, 18.5 fps, etc), then something must be done to make the film appear to run at the correct speed when played on a video device. If you merely did a 1:1 frame transfer, the video would appear to run too quickly. (For example, if you watch footage shot in the early days of motion pictures, it frequently appears that everyone is moving a bit too quickly. This is because older cameras operated at a frame rate below 24 fps, but the people who produced the video telecined it as if the source was 24...)
The nature of the target video device also has something to say about how these frame-rate corrections must be made. If the target follows the PAL (European) standard, then the target is 25 fps. If NTSC, 29.97 fps (frequently noted as 30fps).
So, for example, if you're dealing with an NTSC target, you need 29.97 fps to appear to be running at 24fps. This is the telecining process, and it is accomplished by creating duplicates of each original frame in a 3:2 pattern. So, for movie frames 1-4, you would end up with video frames in the pattern: 111 22 333 44
The important thing to note is that at no point in the telecining process (there the source film is at a frame rate BELOW the target device) are frames lost. Copies are made.
The secondary process, which may or may not be necessary depending on the target, is interlacing. In the case of NTSC devices, the spec calls for 59.94 fields per second. This is comprised of "odd" and "even" frames. In essence, the device draws the odd numbered lines in the picture, then backs up and draws the even ones. Each half is drawn at 59.94, but it takes two fields to represent a frame... The effective rate becomes 29.97...
These numbers are not coincidence, by the way. The NTSC (~30fps/~60 fields/sec) standards were a by-product of North American power generation standards which have a line frequency of 60hz. The standard designers could use this frequency to help synchronize the field/frame events. Thus, standard TVs in North America draw a new field every (approx) 1/60th of a second - right in sync with the power standard. Also note that the European standard (PAL) is 25fps, which just so happens to be a multiple of their power generation frequency (50Hz)... For those that remember the days of TVs having a Vertical Hold knob, that if misadjusted would cause the picture to "roll", what you were doing when you turned that knob was 'fine tuning' the vertical synchronization of your TV to the broadcast -- necessary if there were slight differences in power frequency/phase.
Unlike television, the output from computers is progressive. This means that interleaving is not taking place. Each frame sent to the monitor is a full frame, not half. (Not to confuse matters, but some computer *monitors* actual interleave internally. However, the video card's output is progressive). When we start with a source that is interleaved and want to display it on a computer monitor, then the fun begins... David's article went into this in a fairly superficial way, but did explain the issue. If your computer contains DVD playback software, it contains an algorithm to deal with the ugly interlaced frames so they look decent on a computer monitor. The algorithms vary, but many use a technique known as "bob and weave". The key is to make the video look good at full speed. If you want to take interlaced video and display it as an AVI, for example, your computer will NOT automatically remove the interlacing effect. This requires de-interlacing the video. (This, too, is a subject with many opinions and methods. Everyone seems to have their favorite way to do this, and that's not necessarily a bad thing.) There are numerous tools that will do this to varying degrees of success. Once you've de-interlaced the video, if you want progressive frames, you then must un-do the telecining process. This is called "inverse telecine" (IVTC).
If the telecining process has been done correctly (and this is NOT always the case, by the way), one can assume which frames to remove. Many software packages accomplish this automatically, simply by assuming a perfect 3:2 pattern. However, it is NOT always flawless, and sometimes in the IVTC process, a frame will get lost here and there (and/or a duplicate frame might survive the process). In the course of a two-hour movie, or something that isn't being looked-at frame by frame, this is not a big deal. On the other hand, when we're attempting to analyze a film source and are hoping to get progressive frames, an incorrect IVTC process that loses a frame is unacceptable.
This is what I *think* has happened in the AVI that you're looking at. For my stuff, I did the IVTC process by hand. This made certain that I ended up with progressive frames. Obviously, for a large number of frames, this is an unworkable proposition.
I'll try to post some examples of frames, interlacing, and the rest if time permits...
[quote name='John Dolva' date='Nov 27 2006, 07:44 PM' post='82776']
David, thank you. I used the Nix assassination sequence clip from
http://jfkmurderphotos.bravehost.com/photos.html
and extracted the frames with xnview. The first frame was very blurred so I left that out. Calling the first used frame frame one, it seems (to me) that frames
5, 11, 20, (21?), 22, 23, 25, 34, 38, 45
of the first 48 frames are missing. Four of these are bunched at the headshot, and there could be even another frame again missing. If this is correct then likely the full clip shows the limo stopping or nearly stopping at the headshot. It would be good if someone could check and confirm or debunk please.
[/quote]
It would be good if someone could check and confirm or debunk please.
[/quote]
One could accept that the rapid movememt of JFK's head (the famous "jet" effect) pretty well does this for you John.
As for myself, I had gotten quite tired of how others had beat this dead horse without a clear understanding of what it represented.
Methinks you are about to make a contribution of extreme significance in understanding of the WC obfuscation.
[quote name='Frank Agbat' post='82785' date='Nov 27 2006, 08:17 PM']
[quote name='Jack White' post='82782' date='Nov 27 2006, 08:03 PM']
If any of you guys can prove FRAME REMOVAL, no more proof of alteration is needed.
Jack
[/quote]
Agreed. As Ed O'Hagan said in another thread, either the film is altered or it isn't. I didn't agree with some of his other points, but I certainly agreed on this one.
One possible complication:
Using the front fender may bring too much perspective into play. That is to say, the fender starts to "vanish" as the limo moves out of his panning area toward the end of the sequence.
I'm going to attempt to use both the front fender *and* the centerpoint of the front wheel as a positional guide.
For those who know: In addition to the framerate of the Nix camera, what is the proper parlance for numbering the Nix frames? Is the very first frame (shot on Houston) N1, or is "N1" the Elm street sequence?
[/quote]
Although I most certainly do not have the expertise with computer programs to accomplish any of this, it would appear that John does.
Therefore, if there is any "absolute" proof that can be found, then the "Running & Jumping Man" would be the one to tell it.
David, thank you. I used the Nix assassination sequence clip from
http://jfkmurderphotos.bravehost.com/photos.html
and extracted the frames with xnview. The first frame was very blurred so I left that out. Calling the first used frame frame one, it seems (to me) that frames
5, 11, 20, (21?), 22, 23, 25, 34, 38, 45
of the first 48 frames are missing. Four of these are bunched at the headshot, and there could be even another frame again missing. If this is correct then likely the full clip shows the limo stopping or nearly stopping at the headshot. It would be good if someone could check and confirm or debunk please.
[/quote]
It would be good if someone could check and confirm or debunk please.
[/quote]
One could accept that the rapid movememt of JFK's head (the famous "jet" effect) pretty well does this for you John.
As for myself, I had gotten quite tired of how others had beat this dead horse without a clear understanding of what it represented.
Methinks you are about to make a contribution of extreme significance in understanding of the WC obfuscation.
[quote name='Frank Agbat' post='82785' date='Nov 27 2006, 08:17 PM']
[quote name='Jack White' post='82782' date='Nov 27 2006, 08:03 PM']
If any of you guys can prove FRAME REMOVAL, no more proof of alteration is needed.
Jack
[/quote]
Agreed. As Ed O'Hagan said in another thread, either the film is altered or it isn't. I didn't agree with some of his other points, but I certainly agreed on this one.
One possible complication:
Using the front fender may bring too much perspective into play. That is to say, the fender starts to "vanish" as the limo moves out of his panning area toward the end of the sequence.
I'm going to attempt to use both the front fender *and* the centerpoint of the front wheel as a positional guide.
For those who know: In addition to the framerate of the Nix camera, what is the proper parlance for numbering the Nix frames? Is the very first frame (shot on Houston) N1, or is "N1" the Elm street sequence?
[/quote]
Although I most certainly do not have the expertise with computer programs to accomplish any of this, it would appear that John does.
Therefore, if there is any "absolute" proof that can be found, then the "Running & Jumping Man" would be the one to tell it.
[quote name='John Dolva' date='Nov 28 2006, 09:10 AM' post='82856']
Interesting, David, thank you for that. How I understand it then (please correct) is that the process creates frames that didn't exist in two ways. By mixing half interleavs from consecutive frames and by dupliucation. This would be the case with the dvd clip and removing dupes doesn't solve it. The avi clip on the other hand is not necessarily like that. It depends on how the frames for it were derived. The large spaced group around the headshot which Frank seems to have also found (Frank, could you mark the line that is from the headshot frame) I'm betting it is the same, if so then that indicates an intent as the pattern of missing frames is not at all regular?
[/quote]
if so then that indicates an intent as the pattern of missing frames is not at all regular?
[/quote]
I do believe that would be claassified as some form of "selective editing".
And, were I to be given two/three/or even four frames of any of the films in which the sprocket holes consecutively followed in sequence (no frames missing), then I would no doubt be convinced that the film was a "complete original".
Interesting, David, thank you for that. How I understand it then (please correct) is that the process creates frames that didn't exist in two ways. By mixing half interleavs from consecutive frames and by dupliucation. This would be the case with the dvd clip and removing dupes doesn't solve it. The avi clip on the other hand is not necessarily like that. It depends on how the frames for it were derived. The large spaced group around the headshot which Frank seems to have also found (Frank, could you mark the line that is from the headshot frame) I'm betting it is the same, if so then that indicates an intent as the pattern of missing frames is not at all regular?
[/quote]
if so then that indicates an intent as the pattern of missing frames is not at all regular?
[/quote]
I do believe that would be claassified as some form of "selective editing".
And, were I to be given two/three/or even four frames of any of the films in which the sprocket holes consecutively followed in sequence (no frames missing), then I would no doubt be convinced that the film was a "complete original".
'John Dolva' wrote:
Interesting, David, thank you for that. How I understand it then (please correct) is that the process creates frames that didn't exist in two ways. By mixing half interleavs from consecutive frames and by dupliucation.
dgh: essentially correct
This would be the case with the dvd clip and removing dupes doesn't solve it.
dgh: correct
The avi clip on the other hand is not necessarily like that. It depends on how the frames for it were derived.
dgh: .avi, .mov makes no difference what motion file gets to DVD or video, when its on tape or DVD disc (sold commercially) in most cases it will formatted at 30/29.97 NTSC or 25/24.96fps PAL. the giveaway is; as one single frame 'advances' through the piece, you'll see multiple frames (up to 2-3) of each frame and of course sometimes a single frame. The MPI DVD full screen version (not the cropped version) of theZapruder film demonstrates the above clearly.
The large spaced group around the headshot which Frank seems to have also found (Frank, could you mark the line that is from the headshot frame) I'm betting it is the same, if so then that indicates an intent as the pattern of missing frames is not at all regular?
dgh: there's more than one 3:2 pulldown pattern, I believe there's 3 or 4 . I can't remember, I'll be on After Effects this weekend, I'll let you know then...
note: PAL is progressive scan, frames will more than likely clearer or appear "sharper", NTSC on the other hand is interleaved, two fields (upper-lower/odd-even) make one frame, as a result the frames will appear slightly "softer" than the PAL frames, all things considered, including the original quality of the imagery
Interesting, David, thank you for that. How I understand it then (please correct) is that the process creates frames that didn't exist in two ways. By mixing half interleavs from consecutive frames and by dupliucation.
dgh: essentially correct
This would be the case with the dvd clip and removing dupes doesn't solve it.
dgh: correct
The avi clip on the other hand is not necessarily like that. It depends on how the frames for it were derived.
dgh: .avi, .mov makes no difference what motion file gets to DVD or video, when its on tape or DVD disc (sold commercially) in most cases it will formatted at 30/29.97 NTSC or 25/24.96fps PAL. the giveaway is; as one single frame 'advances' through the piece, you'll see multiple frames (up to 2-3) of each frame and of course sometimes a single frame. The MPI DVD full screen version (not the cropped version) of theZapruder film demonstrates the above clearly.
The large spaced group around the headshot which Frank seems to have also found (Frank, could you mark the line that is from the headshot frame) I'm betting it is the same, if so then that indicates an intent as the pattern of missing frames is not at all regular?
dgh: there's more than one 3:2 pulldown pattern, I believe there's 3 or 4 . I can't remember, I'll be on After Effects this weekend, I'll let you know then...
note: PAL is progressive scan, frames will more than likely clearer or appear "sharper", NTSC on the other hand is interleaved, two fields (upper-lower/odd-even) make one frame, as a result the frames will appear slightly "softer" than the PAL frames, all things considered, including the original quality of the imagery
QUOTE (David G. Healy @ Nov 28 2006, 06:26 PM)
note: PAL is progressive scan, frames will more than likely clearer or appear "sharper", NTSC on the other hand is interleaved, two fields (upper-lower/odd-even) make one frame, as a result the frames will appear slightly "softer" than the PAL frames, all things considered, including the original quality of the imagery[/color]
Correct. PAL systems typically do not bother with the telecine process the same way as NTSC has to. They usually just do a 1:1 frame transfer and let the movie run slightly fast (25fps vs. 24fps). PAL also has much more true color reproduction...
Here are some sample frames. The source in this case is NTSC.
Frame 1: (Non-Interlaced Frame)
Click to view attachment
Frame 2: (Interlaced Frame - contains frame 1 and frame 3 on alternating lines - i.e. odd/even fields)
Click to view attachment
Frame 3: (Non-Interlaced)
Click to view attachment
The interlaced frames, along with duplicate frames "correct" the frame rate. Notice the telltale horizontal lines in the interlaced frame. This is very noticeable when these frames pop up on a progressive device (like a computer monitor).
QUOTE (John Dolva @ Nov 28 2006, 12:06 AM)
It could very well be the source. We'll see. The edges of the concrete pedestal look a bit more blurred than I got. Perhaps recheck the alignments? If you take the biggest gap on the pic I posted (count the black lines) and compare the frames at that place you should be able to see if there are more frames in the version you have. Particularly the grouping at the headshot.
Click to view attachment
Click to view attachment
John;
Might want to recheck your reference angles on that headshot location.
Zapruder to JFK with reference to the woman running across the grassy area in the background, as compared with your Nix film.
http://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z313.jpg
I've looked at the various files in question regarding NIX frames.
I believe in both cases, the NFV video (Groden) was the source of the clip.
I took a look at the telecine/interleaving pattern that was used on this DVD. In general, the pattern used seems to be:
AA BB B+C CC DD D+E EE FF F+G
That is to say:
Frame A (full frame)
Frame A (duplicate, full frame)
Frame B (full frame)
Frame B (duplicate)
Interlaced (Frame B interlaced with frame C)
etc...
I believe in both cases, the NFV video (Groden) was the source of the clip.
I took a look at the telecine/interleaving pattern that was used on this DVD. In general, the pattern used seems to be:
AA BB B+C CC DD D+E EE FF F+G
That is to say:
Frame A (full frame)
Frame A (duplicate, full frame)
Frame B (full frame)
Frame B (duplicate)
Interlaced (Frame B interlaced with frame C)
etc...
QUOTE (Thomas H. Purvis @ Nov 29 2006, 12:36 AM)
QUOTE (John Dolva @ Nov 28 2006, 12:06 AM)
It could very well be the source. We'll see. The edges of the concrete pedestal look a bit more blurred than I got. Perhaps recheck the alignments? If you take the biggest gap on the pic I posted (count the black lines) and compare the frames at that place you should be able to see if there are more frames in the version you have. Particularly the grouping at the headshot.
Click to view attachment
John;
Might want to recheck your reference angles on that headshot location.
Zapruder to JFK with reference to the woman running across the grassy area in the background, as compared with your Nix film.
http://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z313.jpg
Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; there are. There are six photographs selected at random from the Nix film, including frame 24, which is a frame depicting the shot to the head of the President,
http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk...Vol18_0048a.htm
Approximately what speed is the Presidential Limo travelling at
between Nix 10 to Nix 24? (14 frames of 18.5 frames per second)
http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk...Vol18_0048a.htm
between Nix 10 to Nix 24? (14 frames of 18.5 frames per second)
http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk...Vol18_0048a.htm
That's interesting. The WC published ones start with what they have numbered 24 and call the headshot, whereas the clip has the headshot showing on the frame previous to this(assuming no missing). (I'll try to match their numberings) but their headshot frame IS in the clip and I estimate there is one frame between the clip headshot and the WC headshot. Now, they have that one numbered 24. I left out number 1 so if there are no missing frames then, according to the clip, their 24 is the clips 21 so there are two frames missing(from the clip). As the 'spacial analysis' indicates there are six frames missing prior to this I'm more confused than before.
(FRank:: I wonder if you could zip up the first 50 assassination sequence nix groden frames and send them to me please?)
(FRank:: I wonder if you could zip up the first 50 assassination sequence nix groden frames and send them to me please?)
the first 49 frames
QUOTE (John Dolva @ Nov 29 2006, 06:42 AM)
That's interesting. The WC published ones start with what they have numbered 24 and call the headshot, whereas the clip has the headshot showing on the frame previous to this(assuming no missing). (I'll try to match their numberings) but their headshot frame IS in the clip and I estimate there is one frame between the clip headshot and the WC headshot. Now, they have that one numbered 24. I left out number 1 so if there are no missing frames then, according to the clip, their 24 is the clips 21 so there are two frames missing(from the clip). As the 'spacial analysis' indicates there are six frames missing prior to this I'm more confused than before.
(FRank:: I wonder if you could zip up the first 50 assassination sequence nix groden frames and send them to me please?)
(FRank:: I wonder if you could zip up the first 50 assassination sequence nix groden frames and send them to me please?)
John;
I keep attempting to inform as well as guide through the maze!
And rest assured, it is a masterpiece, and only the best of "Puzzlemasters" should enter.
Otherwise, one ends up quite lost and chasing multiple assassins and body snatchers.
Anyone got that vehicle speed yet?????
We'll get there, Tom. meanwhile here's a gif (Thank you Eugene, in chasing up Flash I found a good prog that does both gifs and avi's so thanks for the motivator) that shows the clip with the jerks at the missing frames running at 18.5 fps. I see what you mean about slowness, Frank.
QUOTE (John Dolva @ Nov 29 2006, 03:45 PM)
We'll get there, Tom. meanwhile here's a gif (Thank you Eugene, in chasing up Flash I found a good prog that does both gifs and avi's so thanks for the motivator) that shows the clip with the jerks at the missing frames running at 18.5 fps. I see what you mean about slowness, Frank.
As you are no doubt aware!
I am well known for frequently grabbing one by the hair and thereafter yanking their head up out of the rabbit hole and attempting to "point" to the fox.
Therefore, if the calculated vehicle speed in the Nix film is either faster, or slower, than the calculated vehicle speed, through the same area, as seen in the Z-film.
Then, as the old saying goes, something ain't right!
But! Your work is also a critical element of the WHY?
And, one must ask the correct questions if they wish to get the correct information, and thus gain knowledge.
You're right, Tom. It's very important. At this point I have doubt about the correct frame rate. Frank has probably something to say on that. We'll see. I'm going to put together a gif with madeup frames put in where I think they are missing to see what that looks like.
QUOTE (John Dolva @ Nov 29 2006, 04:09 PM)
You're right, Tom. It's very important. At this point I have doubt about the correct frame rate. Frank has probably something to say on that. We'll see. I'm going to put together a gif with madeup frames put in where I think they are missing to see what that looks like.
John;
Being well aware that you are one of the "problem solvers", the "hint" is that others should also follow suit and perhaps make an effort to begin to work on specific areas in which perhaps even they may have expertise.
There are a great deal of various "specializations" in life, and this is a primary reason that civilization has progressed to this stage.
Until each little obfuscation (specific problem) of the WC's quite masterful deception is placed into it's proper perspective, the overall picture of the puzzle will not come into sight.
If nothing else, a math major knows that one can not resolve the entire equation until they accurately resolve each sub-part of the equation.
Guess that is why our college physics professor would not allow us to merely right down the answer.
http://www.acorn.net/jfkplace/07/Daeron/.03-2faq.html
"Reference has been made to Martin Shackelford commenting that "it seems
like a skull fragment flying through the air would be in more than one
frame" (3, p76, 77) - but it is clear to this observer that what
Shackelford was looking at was *not* the original - intact Nix film, but
rather a doctored substitute that emerged after "the original film was
lost during the HSCA investigations"(3, p78)
Certainly, the version of the Nix film I have (on 'The Two Kennedys')
shows more than 'one frame' and, as I indicated, it is tracked with
the aid of a reference circle (estimated duration: 0.5-0.6s or 8-10
frames). It is evident to me that more than one version of the Nix film
is in circulation, and that there is no assurance that anyone looking at
a copy will see the intact version. ('The Two Kennedys' is dated 1976,
or two years before the HSCA investigations where "original copies were
lost")
Orville Nix himself (interview, 'Rush to Judgment') notes that there
was an original of his film (which went to UPI) and a copy of that -
which went to the federal investigators. When his film was returned to
him (the gov't version) Nix pointedly noted that it was *not* the same
as what he had originally given them. In fact, he observed "a frame here
and there was missing". Assuming that no one knows his film better than
Nix himself, this leads one to suspect that at least three versions of
the Nix film are in circulation:
- The original (UPI) unedited version (also in 'The Two Kennedys')
- The tampered version returned to Nix (frames missing)
- A 2nd tampered version - after a copy 'disappeared' during the HSCA
In his book 'Killing the Truth', Harrison Livingstone notes (2, p77):
"Doug Mizzer reports evidence of forgery with this film, with a frame
having been removed following the headshot."
and I see also frames removed before the headshot.
A copy of "The Two Kennedy's" Italian 1976 would be a good thing to have.
"Reference has been made to Martin Shackelford commenting that "it seems
like a skull fragment flying through the air would be in more than one
frame" (3, p76, 77) - but it is clear to this observer that what
Shackelford was looking at was *not* the original - intact Nix film, but
rather a doctored substitute that emerged after "the original film was
lost during the HSCA investigations"(3, p78)
Certainly, the version of the Nix film I have (on 'The Two Kennedys')
shows more than 'one frame' and, as I indicated, it is tracked with
the aid of a reference circle (estimated duration: 0.5-0.6s or 8-10
frames). It is evident to me that more than one version of the Nix film
is in circulation, and that there is no assurance that anyone looking at
a copy will see the intact version. ('The Two Kennedys' is dated 1976,
or two years before the HSCA investigations where "original copies were
lost")
Orville Nix himself (interview, 'Rush to Judgment') notes that there
was an original of his film (which went to UPI) and a copy of that -
which went to the federal investigators. When his film was returned to
him (the gov't version) Nix pointedly noted that it was *not* the same
as what he had originally given them. In fact, he observed "a frame here
and there was missing". Assuming that no one knows his film better than
Nix himself, this leads one to suspect that at least three versions of
the Nix film are in circulation:
- The original (UPI) unedited version (also in 'The Two Kennedys')
- The tampered version returned to Nix (frames missing)
- A 2nd tampered version - after a copy 'disappeared' during the HSCA
In his book 'Killing the Truth', Harrison Livingstone notes (2, p77):
"Doug Mizzer reports evidence of forgery with this film, with a frame
having been removed following the headshot."
and I see also frames removed before the headshot.
A copy of "The Two Kennedy's" Italian 1976 would be a good thing to have.
QUOTE (John Dolva @ Nov 29 2006, 04:28 PM)
http://www.acorn.net/jfkplace/07/Daeron/.03-2faq.html
"Reference has been made to Martin Shackelford commenting that "it seems
like a skull fragment flying through the air would be in more than one
frame" (3, p76, 77) - but it is clear to this observer that what
Shackelford was looking at was *not* the original - intact Nix film, but
rather a doctored substitute that emerged after "the original film was
lost during the HSCA investigations"(3, p78)
Certainly, the version of the Nix film I have (on 'The Two Kennedys')
shows more than 'one frame' and, as I indicated, it is tracked with
the aid of a reference circle (estimated duration: 0.5-0.6s or 8-10
frames). It is evident to me that more than one version of the Nix film
is in circulation, and that there is no assurance that anyone looking at
a copy will see the intact version. ('The Two Kennedys' is dated 1976,
or two years before the HSCA investigations where "original copies were
lost")
Orville Nix himself (interview, 'Rush to Judgment') notes that there
was an original of his film (which went to UPI) and a copy of that -
which went to the federal investigators. When his film was returned to
him (the gov't version) Nix pointedly noted that it was *not* the same
as what he had originally given them. In fact, he observed "a frame here
and there was missing". Assuming that no one knows his film better than
Nix himself, this leads one to suspect that at least three versions of
the Nix film are in circulation:
- The original (UPI) unedited version (also in 'The Two Kennedys')
- The tampered version returned to Nix (frames missing)
- A 2nd tampered version - after a copy 'disappeared' during the HSCA
In his book 'Killing the Truth', Harrison Livingstone notes (2, p77):
"Doug Mizzer reports evidence of forgery with this film, with a frame
having been removed following the headshot."
and I see also frames removed before the headshot.
A copy of "The Two Kennedy's" Italian 1976 would be a good thing to have.
"Reference has been made to Martin Shackelford commenting that "it seems
like a skull fragment flying through the air would be in more than one
frame" (3, p76, 77) - but it is clear to this observer that what
Shackelford was looking at was *not* the original - intact Nix film, but
rather a doctored substitute that emerged after "the original film was
lost during the HSCA investigations"(3, p78)
Certainly, the version of the Nix film I have (on 'The Two Kennedys')
shows more than 'one frame' and, as I indicated, it is tracked with
the aid of a reference circle (estimated duration: 0.5-0.6s or 8-10
frames). It is evident to me that more than one version of the Nix film
is in circulation, and that there is no assurance that anyone looking at
a copy will see the intact version. ('The Two Kennedys' is dated 1976,
or two years before the HSCA investigations where "original copies were
lost")
Orville Nix himself (interview, 'Rush to Judgment') notes that there
was an original of his film (which went to UPI) and a copy of that -
which went to the federal investigators. When his film was returned to
him (the gov't version) Nix pointedly noted that it was *not* the same
as what he had originally given them. In fact, he observed "a frame here
and there was missing". Assuming that no one knows his film better than
Nix himself, this leads one to suspect that at least three versions of
the Nix film are in circulation:
- The original (UPI) unedited version (also in 'The Two Kennedys')
- The tampered version returned to Nix (frames missing)
- A 2nd tampered version - after a copy 'disappeared' during the HSCA
In his book 'Killing the Truth', Harrison Livingstone notes (2, p77):
"Doug Mizzer reports evidence of forgery with this film, with a frame
having been removed following the headshot."
and I see also frames removed before the headshot.
A copy of "The Two Kennedy's" Italian 1976 would be a good thing to have.
John;
The "progression" of ever so slight changes and manipulations and deletions is evident throughout the history of the films as well as the stills.
As technology has increased it's ability to observe problems, "new" versions of the documents appear.
It is now to the extent that one must track the history of any version of anything, as so much has progressively been trimmed and/or deleted.
Unfortunately, the WC/aka Specter & Company, could never have envisioned the ability of the internet to share information among those who have the "specialization" necessary to ultimately shoot the WC solution full of holes.
I do believe that the "Phoenix" has arisen!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoenix_(mythology)
QUOTE (Thomas H. Purvis @ Nov 29 2006, 11:03 AM)
Unfortunately, the WC/aka Specter & Company, could never have envisioned the ability of the internet to share information among those who have the "specialization" necessary to ultimately shoot the WC solution full of holes.
Those that had the "specialization necessary" shot the Warren Commission solution full of holes 40 years ago.
I maintain skepticism even with regards to my own work until it has rigorous scrutiny and confirmation . If this can be confirmed then relating it to the zfilm, limo speeds etc certainly promises exciting things. However it's not there yet.
In this gif the missing frames are replaced with a mix of the frames on either side. If you look at the woman walking her movements are now smoother. The limo looks a bit choppy as the replaced frames are composites of two which blurs them and the wheels and fender contrast stands out. However the limo seems to stop momentarily and it looks like the front of the limo 'dips'. By reinserting the frames this stretches the timeframe making this more noticable.
In this gif the missing frames are replaced with a mix of the frames on either side. If you look at the woman walking her movements are now smoother. The limo looks a bit choppy as the replaced frames are composites of two which blurs them and the wheels and fender contrast stands out. However the limo seems to stop momentarily and it looks like the front of the limo 'dips'. By reinserting the frames this stretches the timeframe making this more noticable.
QUOTE (John Dolva @ Nov 29 2006, 05:41 PM)
I maintain skepticism even with regards to my own work until it has rigorous scrutiny and confirmation . If this can be confirmed then relating it to the zfilm, limo speeds etc certainly promises exciting things. However it's not there yet.
In this gif the missing frames are replaced with a mix of the frames on either side. If you look at the woman walking her movements are now smoother. The limo looks a bit choppy as the replaced frames are composites of two which blurs them and the wheels and fender contrast stands out. However the limo seems to stop momentarily and it looks like the front of the limo 'dips'. By reinserting the frames this stretches the timeframe making this more noticable.
In this gif the missing frames are replaced with a mix of the frames on either side. If you look at the woman walking her movements are now smoother. The limo looks a bit choppy as the replaced frames are composites of two which blurs them and the wheels and fender contrast stands out. However the limo seems to stop momentarily and it looks like the front of the limo 'dips'. By reinserting the frames this stretches the timeframe making this more noticable.
And I am in total agreement!
Many times in attempting to unravel the various obfuscations, I thought one specific item was related to something.
However, when another item was unraveled, it presented a completely different light on the subject, as well as continued to open other doors of understanding.
Therefore, film alteration/potentially omitted frames, and vehicle speeds are an integral part of each other.
And, for that reason, others hopefully will determine the means to evaluate vehicle speed(s), and then a comparison of data can be made between seperate thought processes and how the answers were derived.
QUOTE (John Dolva @ Nov 29 2006, 08:41 AM)
I maintain skepticism even with regards to my own work until it has rigorous scrutiny and confirmation . If this can be confirmed then relating it to the zfilm, limo speeds etc certainly promises exciting things. However it's not there yet.
In this gif the missing frames are replaced with a mix of the frames on either side. If you look at the woman walking her movements are now smoother. The limo looks a bit choppy as the replaced frames are composites of two which blurs them and the wheels and fender contrast stands out. However the limo seems to stop momentarily and it looks like the front of the limo 'dips'. By reinserting the frames this stretches the timeframe making this more noticable.
In this gif the missing frames are replaced with a mix of the frames on either side. If you look at the woman walking her movements are now smoother. The limo looks a bit choppy as the replaced frames are composites of two which blurs them and the wheels and fender contrast stands out. However the limo seems to stop momentarily and it looks like the front of the limo 'dips'. By reinserting the frames this stretches the timeframe making this more noticable.
John,
Can you replace the frames you duplicated with black and/or white frames? Post same?
David
Yes, I'll do that. Meanwhile, ramping the rate up to the 40 fps that Orville said* he had the camera set to run at, the movement of the girl looks more normal, it takes away the floaty quality and just looks better. and then calculating the speed of the limousine in the 8 frame period after the headshot a preliminary speed of 3.2 mph is arrived at. As distance measurement I estimate tyre width which has a error, also there is blur which has an error. More double checking (by others as well) will reveal errors and make an estimate more reliable.
* http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/...Vol24_0279a.htm
EDIT a few calcualtions later and widely differing end results. I have to start afresh after sleep. For now discount speed finding from me. Hopefully someone else will attempt as well.
* http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/...Vol24_0279a.htm
EDIT a few calcualtions later and widely differing end results. I have to start afresh after sleep. For now discount speed finding from me. Hopefully someone else will attempt as well.
QUOTE (John Dolva @ Nov 29 2006, 09:07 PM)
Yes, I'll do that. Meanwhile, ramping the rate up to the 40 fps that Orville said* he had the camera set to run at, the movement of the girl looks more normal, it takes away the floaty quality and just looks better. and then calculating the speed of the limousine in the 8 frame period after the headshot a preliminary speed of 3.2 mph is arrived at. As distance measurement I estimate tyre width which has a error, also there is blur which has an error. More double checking (by others as well) will reveal errors and make an estimate more reliable.
* http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/...Vol24_0279a.htm
EDIT a few calcualtions later and widely differing end results. I have to start afresh after sleep. For now discount speed finding from me. Hopefully someone else will attempt as well.
* http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/...Vol24_0279a.htm
EDIT a few calcualtions later and widely differing end results. I have to start afresh after sleep. For now discount speed finding from me. Hopefully someone else will attempt as well.
in the meantime:
(image)
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.