HomeSubscribe Live FeedJFK Research Photo GalleryStoreJFK Youtube ChannelArticlesSearchLinksNotepadLoginRegister
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
JFK Assassination Forum > JFK Assassination Photographic & Film Evidence Discussion & Debate > JFK Assassination Photographic & Film Evidence Discussion & Debate > Backyard photo shadows
May 23, 2012, 11:07:05 PM
News:

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 ... 14
Backyard photo shadows  (Read 10060 times)
Topic Options img
Offline  Martin Hinrichs
March 07, 2009, 01:01:34 AM

Super Member
*****

Posts: 2660

As you may all know Lee Harvey Oswald claimed to be not the man on the backyard photographs.

Oswald himself, when shown the photo in jail, claimed he had never seen it before and insisted someone had superimposed his head onto another body.

So far so good. David Von Pein gave me enough motivation to prove the following alleged lie of Lee Oswald:

20.) "That picture is not mine, but the face is mine. The picture has
been made by superimposing my face. The other part of the picture is
not me at all, and I have never seen this picture before. ... The small
picture was reduced from the larger one, made by some persons unknown
to me."

At first here one of three original photograph from the Warren Commission Report:
My reference.



Today i've worked on a simple 3d reconstruction of this photograph.

Sure, it's just a dummy but all important parts should be almost accurate.

I used the original specs of Lee H. Oswald as best as possible. The height is correct, the nose size is correct and also
the ears (little mug ears) angle will be the same of him.

Following the shadow in the reference picture you will see, the shadows in my reconstrucion fails as it's best in particular at the nose and his right ear obviously.




I used then a sun position which shows, how a casting shadow will be seen just from his face shadows only.

Here you go:



As you see the shadow on the ground won't fit at all.

If you doubt my work i will offer this simple 3 model for free to explore it by yourself and prove it.
If you are not in this position to got a 3d application or you have not the ability to do it, i recommend the
following one:

If you live in Dallas/Texas...wait until approx. March mid/end at 12:45 am, when the sun will be high enough and take a photograph from a person whom fit's the
specs of L.H.O at a similar shadow regarded position.
You will face the same problems i have here to fit all shadows. For sure.
You can take me by my word.
Prove it and show it.

My 3d app is able to create physics to 100% without a doubt.

I can say now this photographs are altered.
This not an opinion....this is a fact.

This is what Lee said... a fake.

My conclusion is a man with a similar body shape posed at this position in Oswalds backyard and his face was cutout
and replaced with Oswalds face, right above his chin.

Who has got the power to do, who made it?

Martin 



-------------------------
« Last Edit: March 12, 2009, 12:24:39 AM by Martin Hinrichs »

-------------------------
Firework As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

God bless Emmett Till:
As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Insipired by the Movie "Invictus" and Nelson Mandela.
What a poem!

As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
   ReplyReply
Offline  Martin Hinrichs
March 09, 2009, 03:12:12 AM

Super Member
*****

Posts: 2660

As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Why would Marina take a photo of an empty backyard? Practice? In 1963, was there available technology to manipulate photos - that is to insert a figure into a background and make it believable?

What puzzles me is if the photo was faked, how did George de Mohrenschildt end up with a copy?

Is there anything "straightforward" in the JFK assassination?

cheers,

Tony


I unfortunately know very little about De Mohrenschild.
My focus are the images.
I just know he spoke 5 different languages and exposure Oswald as an intellectual person.
And he admired Hitler and his regime.

Martin


-------------------------

   ReplyReply
Offline  Tony Fratini
March 09, 2009, 03:37:37 AM

Super Member
*****

Posts: 1417

As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Why would Marina take a photo of an empty backyard? Practice? In 1963, was there available technology to manipulate photos - that is to insert a figure into a background and make it believable?

What puzzles me is if the photo was faked, how did George de Mohrenschildt end up with a copy?

Is there anything "straightforward" in the JFK assassination?

cheers,

Tony


I unfortunately know very little about De Mohrenschild.
My focus are the images.
I just know he spoke 5 different languages and exposure Oswald as an intellectual person.
And he admired Hitler and his regime.

Martin

If the photos are genuine it really is so damaging to Oswald being "innocent" because he denied possessing the weapons - yet the photo clearly shows that he indeed had them. Your analysis tends to suggest that the sun was in the incorrect position to cast the shadow present in the photo. If you manipulate the suns position so that it does match up with the photo, what will this tell you? Would it indicate that the photo was done at a different hour, day or month?

With the camera used by Marina, would the film be taken to a "lab" to be processed or would the camera produce images like a Polaroid? Just wondering if there was a paper trail to the processing of the images.

Do you know how long after the assassination that these photos were found? If they were faked - they had to be made up and planted  cameraghjgfjgf


-------------------------

-------------------------
Representative FORD - The window that you saw the man that you describe was on what end of the building?
Mr. ROWLAND - The west, southwest corner.
Representative FORD - And the man you saw hanging out from the window was at what corner?
Mr. ROWLAND - The east, southeast corner.
   ReplyReply
Offline  Martin Hinrichs
March 09, 2009, 04:00:12 AM

Super Member
*****

Posts: 2660

As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
[
If the photos are genuine it really is so damaging to Oswald being "innocent" because he denied possessing the weapons - yet the photo clearly shows that he indeed had them. Your analysis tends to suggest that the sun was in the incorrect position to cast the shadow present in the photo. If you manipulate the suns position so that it does match up with the photo, what will this tell you? Would it indicate that the photo was done at a different hour, day or month?

With the camera used by Marina, would the film be taken to a "lab" to be processed or would the camera produce images like a Polaroid? Just wondering if there was a paper trail to the processing of the images.

Do you know how long after the assassination that these photos were found? If they were faked - they had to be made up and planted  cameraghjgfjgf

Tony, as i mention before everybody have the chance to reproduce this photograph.
Tell me your location and i tell you the time when you can do it.

I don't know when this photopraphs were taken. Lot of possibilties.
It can not have been done in November
Late September was the last chance.

Oswald was facing this photographs at first on November 23 at 6:00pm.

Now, counting 2 and 2 together.

I can tell you from the bottom of my heart,  my analysis were made on real facts.
There is no cheating involved in any way.
Thats the reason why i offer help and hope for your assistance with some real photographs.

If i'am wrong (and i'am not) i will suddenly disappear from every board.

Martin


-------------------------

   ReplyReply
Offline  Tony Fratini
March 09, 2009, 04:13:53 AM

Super Member
*****

Posts: 1417

As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
[
If the photos are genuine it really is so damaging to Oswald being "innocent" because he denied possessing the weapons - yet the photo clearly shows that he indeed had them. Your analysis tends to suggest that the sun was in the incorrect position to cast the shadow present in the photo. If you manipulate the suns position so that it does match up with the photo, what will this tell you? Would it indicate that the photo was done at a different hour, day or month?

With the camera used by Marina, would the film be taken to a "lab" to be processed or would the camera produce images like a Polaroid? Just wondering if there was a paper trail to the processing of the images.

Do you know how long after the assassination that these photos were found? If they were faked - they had to be made up and planted  cameraghjgfjgf

Tony, as i mention before everybody have the chance to reproduce this photograph.
Tell me your location and i tell you the time when you can do it.

I don't know when this photopraphs were taken. Lot of possibilties.
It can not have been done in November
Late September was the last chance.

Oswald was facing this photographs at first on November 23 at 6:00pm.

Now, counting 2 and 2 together.

I can tell you from the bottom of my heart,  my analysis were made on real facts.
There is no cheating involved in any way.
Thats the reason why i offer help and hope for your assistance with some real photographs.

If i'am wrong (and i'am not) i will suddenly disappear from every board.

Martin

Hi Martin,

your photo analysis and 3d skill is first class  ;D What I am suggesting is, is it possible from your analysis to determine the time that photo was done based on the position of the sun? Could have the camera that was used caused any of the shadow anomalies in the photo? Those photos are so crucial to the WC and very detrimental to Oswald unless of course he wanted to use them for some purpose.

Trying to make sense of Nov 22 1963 is like trying to walk into a mine field blind folded and walking backwards!  taz


-------------------------

   ReplyReply
Offline  Martin Hinrichs
March 09, 2009, 04:29:45 AM

Super Member
*****

Posts: 2660

As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Hi Martin,

your photo analysis and 3d skill is first class  ;D What I am suggesting is, is it possible from your analysis to determine the time that photo was done based on the position of the sun? Could have the camera that was used caused any of the shadow anomalies in the photo? Those photos are so crucial to the WC and very detrimental to Oswald unless of course he wanted to use them for some purpose.

Trying to make sense of Nov 22 1963 is like trying to walk into a mine field blind folded and walking backwards!  taz

At first i have to locate the exact position of this house (tomorrow) then i can tell you more.
But again there will be a lot of possiblities remain when this photograph were taken. It's not that easy.

But i can tell you the camera is not coming into play. No anomalies are possible.

Again, the position of this house is not important at all.
You can do it on almost on every place on earth. The sun angle of 34° degrees from the vertical point is important.

That is what is all about.

Martin


-------------------------

   ReplyReply
Offline  Martin Hinrichs
March 09, 2009, 11:44:19 AM

Super Member
*****

Posts: 2660

EDIT for correction. I missinterpreted the backyard and stairways location in 214 West Neely Street.
Photographer and person were west-east aligned you can see in the attachement

Tony, May 10 14:52 pm was a good chance at that house taken the picture and also August 05 14:31.

+/- 15 minutes and +/- 2 days.

Martin


-------------------------
« Last Edit: March 10, 2009, 07:50:30 PM by Martin Hinrichs »

   ReplyReply
Offline  Tony Fratini
March 10, 2009, 01:04:34 AM

Super Member
*****

Posts: 1417

As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Tony, March 22 11:47 am was a good chance at that house taken the picture and also September 22 11:47.

+/- 15 minutes and +/- 2 days.

Martin

Thanks Martin - that is one very impressive program  ;D

Does anyone know when those photos were reported to have been taken?

cheers,

Tony


-------------------------

   ReplyReply
Offline  Martin Hinrichs
March 10, 2009, 01:22:47 AM

Super Member
*****

Posts: 2660

As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Tony, March 22 11:47 am was a good chance at that house taken the picture and also September 22 11:47.

+/- 15 minutes and +/- 2 days.

Martin

Thanks Martin - that is one very impressive program  ;D

Does anyone know when those photos were reported to have been taken?

cheers,

Tony

Yes Tony, march 31, 1963 at 3:00pm.

At that time the sun was way to low and the historical weather report told it was a cloudy/rainy day. ;D

Martin


-------------------------

   ReplyReply
Offline  Tony Fratini
March 10, 2009, 12:29:20 PM

Super Member
*****

Posts: 1417

As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Tony, March 22 11:47 am was a good chance at that house taken the picture and also September 22 11:47.

+/- 15 minutes and +/- 2 days.

Martin

Thanks Martin - that is one very impressive program  ;D

Does anyone know when those photos were reported to have been taken?

cheers,

Tony

Yes Tony, march 31, 1963 at 3:00pm.

At that time the sun was way to low and the historical weather report told it was a cloudy/rainy day. ;D

Martin

Do you have doubts about the authenticity of those photos? Your analysis confirms that the shadow doesn't appear to add up.

I saw a presentation that suggests that it is Roscoe White's body in the images.


As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login



cheers,

Tony


-------------------------

   ReplyReply
Offline  Martin Hinrichs
March 10, 2009, 02:13:01 PM

Super Member
*****

Posts: 2660

Yes Tony, i have reasonable doubts about this photos.

I will not confirm every observations by Jack White but definitely the shadow issue.
I say this images are fabrications.

Don't know if Roscoe White was the one. That claim is too bold.
But not impossible.

Martin


-------------------------

   ReplyReply
img  Ian Lloyd
March 10, 2009, 03:26:33 PM
Group: Guest

As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
As you may all know Lee Harvey Oswald claimed to be not the man on the backyard photographs.

Oswald himself, when shown the photo in jail, claimed he had never seen it before and insisted someone had superimposed his head onto another body.

So far so good. David Von Pein gave me enough motivation to prove the following alleged lie of Lee Oswald:

20.) "That picture is not mine, but the face is mine. The picture has
been made by superimposing my face. The other part of the picture is
not me at all, and I have never seen this picture before. ... The small
picture was reduced from the larger one, made by some persons unknown
to me."

At first here one of three original photograph from the Warren Commission Report:
My reference.



Today i've worked on a simple 3d reconstruction of this photograph.

Sure, it's just a dummy but all important parts should be almost accurate.

I used the original specs of Lee H. Oswald as best as possible. The height is correct, the nose size is correct and also
the ears (little mug ears) angle will be the same of him.

Following the shadow in the reference picture you will see, the shadows in my reconstrucion fails as it's best in particular at the nose and his right ear obviously.




I used then a sun position which shows, how a casting shadow will be seen just from his face shadows only.

Here you go:



As you see the shadow on the ground won't fit at all.

If you doubt my work i will offer this simple 3 model for free to explore it by yourself and prove it.
If you are not in this position to got a 3d application or you have not the ability to do it, i recommend the
following one:

If you live in Dallas/Texas...wait until approx. March mid/end at 11:45 am, when the sun will be high enough and take a photograph from a person whom fit's the
specs of L.H.O at a similar shadow regarded position.
You will face the same problems i have here to fit all shadows. For sure.
You can take me by my word.
Prove it and show it.

My 3d app is able to create physics to 100% without a doubt.

I can say now this photographs are altered.
This not an opinion....this is a fact.

This is what Lee said... a fake.

My conclusion is a man with a similar body shape posed at this position in Oswalds backyard and his face was cutout
and replaced with Oswalds face, right above his chin.

Who has got the power to do, who made it?

Martin 



Just wondering what has happened to the shadow in the Oswald photograph - a portion of it seems to be "whited out" (Oswald's left shoulder (to the right as you look at it))...?


-------------------------

   ReplyReply
Offline  Martin Hinrichs
March 10, 2009, 04:53:47 PM

Super Member
*****

Posts: 2660

As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Just wondering what has happened to the shadow in the Oswald photograph - a portion of it seems to be "whited out" (Oswald's left shoulder (to the right as you look at it))...?

Ian, there was a sort of metal sheet or paper lying on the lawn close to fence.
That appear the shadow to be brighter on that sheet.

Martin


-------------------------

   ReplyReply
0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 ... 14
« previous next »


Jump to:  

JFK Assassination Kennedy Assassination JFK Assassination Forum JFK Dealey Plaza Dallas November 22nd 1963

JFK Assassination Gallery

JFKForum.com

JFK Assassination Kennedy Assassination JFK Assassination Forum JFK Dealey Plaza Dallas November 22nd 1963
Powered by SMF 1.1.16 | SMF © 2011, Simple Machines