HomeSubscribe Live FeedJFK Research Photo GalleryStoreJFK Youtube ChannelArticlesSearchLinksNotepadLoginRegister
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
May 24, 2012, 12:13:20 AM
News:

Pages: 1 [2]
Stereographic photos prove that the visual record is genuine  (Read 1598 times)

Super Member
*****

Posts: 753


 I have been creating 3D photos from pairs of photos from 1963.
The techniques needed to composite advanced 3D images would be impossible, until very recently.

The Backyard Photos.
In the following three photos i combined the photos in every way possible and they all show a strong 3D effect.
Thus proving that Oswald was photographed within a 3D environment








The Zapruder Film

 Because Zapruder was panning left to right, the Zapruder film shows 3D images quite clearly.
Here we have the frames immediately before and after the brutal headshot, showing that this film is continuous, with no cuts.









The Autopsy Photo
 This following photo shows no detail to me when viewed in 2D, but in 3D the amount of trauma and where it is, is clear.



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

   ReplyReply
Super Member
*****

Posts: 2568


As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Forgive my ignorance on this subject but I have a question.

If you had two identical photos couldn't they be cropped slightly differently and then re sized (made smaller) to give the appearance of being two different photos taken from a few inches apart and then used as a stereoscopic pair?



Excellent point Martin...  but I think the point is that stereoscopic pairs of photos are created at the same time with two cameras...  to angles on a singular object...
when you only have the one object - Oswald's head - you can create the 3D effect since you only need change the angles slightly... but since these two photos
are supposedly done at different times... they shoudl NOT match well enough to create a clear 3D image...


So... John,
unless Oswald's head in 133A and C are exactly the same,  you wouldn't be able to create a 3D image...  images that are 3D are taken with a special camera at the same time so the image CAN overlap and create the 3D effect...
Since they were taken at different times and different distances and different height, there should be no way for you to match 133A and C UNLESS the head of Oswald was the same image on both photos...
The ONLY thing that should work perfectly is his face... isn't that what you are saying occurred?

Thanks for your patience as I do want to understand whether you are simply using a simgle image to create 3D and calling them different
or what

DJ



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

   ReplyReply
Super Member
*****

Posts: 6711


As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
The head in the backyard photos when viewed with the glasses is absolute, I think. Anyone who understands what you've done can't possibly continue to argue the photos are somehow faked. A very valuable contribution John, thanks.

Can you use the same technique on a known fake photo to illustrate how it would expose a fake?


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

   ReplyReply

Super Member
*****

Posts: 753


As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Excellent point Martin...  but I think the point is that stereoscopic pairs of photos are created at the same time with two cameras...  to angles on a singular object...
when you only have the one object - Oswald's head - you can create the 3D effect since you only need change the angles slightly... but since these two photos
are supposedly done at different times... they shoudl NOT match well enough to create a clear 3D image...


So... John,
unless Oswald's head in 133A and C are exactly the same,  you wouldn't be able to create a 3D image...  images that are 3D are taken with a special camera at the same time so the image CAN overlap and create the 3D effect...
Since they were taken at different times and different distances and different height, there should be no way for you to match 133A and C UNLESS the head of Oswald was the same image on both photos...
The ONLY thing that should work perfectly is his face... isn't that what you are saying occurred?

Thanks for your patience as I do want to understand whether you are simply using a simgle image to create 3D and calling them different
or what

DJ


David
 
 Thanks for trying to understand.
 Have you tried looking at these images with a pair of red/blue glasses yet?


 When Marina took these photos, each was seperated horizontally and vertically by a small margin, each photo has a totally unique background and were taken from 3 unique positions.
 By looking closely at these photos, it quickly becomes obvious, roughly where each was taken from and by combining these two which simulate our own eyes, we see depth within this image





Oswalds face has depth his nose protrudes and his ears are set back.
Marina has moved horizontally between these two photo's.



Here Marina has moved closer to Lee, which means the two views of Oswald's face are seperated vertically, so to be viewed stereoscopically the images must be rotated 90 degrees. This image ain't great since the best 133c i could find was pretty average.



 Oswalds face is completely unique in each photo, as i showed you in my last post, and the shadows that fall on Oswalds face correspond to the shadows on his neck.
I only combine 2 different images, it's not possible to make an authentic stereoscopic image from a single image, a computer doesn't know sh!t from shinola when it looks at a 2 dimensional image, and can only guess where to place objects, human interaction can help, but in the end it is really just estimations.
If Oswalds face was exactly the same, these 3d effects would not work, as seen in the following image.





And if anyone thinks they faked the Moon landings, think again.


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

   ReplyReply

Sr. Member
****

Posts: 448


As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Excellent point Martin...  but I think the point is that stereoscopic pairs of photos are created at the same time with two cameras...  to angles on a singular object...
when you only have the one object - Oswald's head - you can create the 3D effect since you only need change the angles slightly... but since these two photos
are supposedly done at different times... they shoudl NOT match well enough to create a clear 3D image...


So... John,
unless Oswald's head in 133A and C are exactly the same,  you wouldn't be able to create a 3D image...  images that are 3D are taken with a special camera at the same time so the image CAN overlap and create the 3D effect...
Since they were taken at different times and different distances and different height, there should be no way for you to match 133A and C UNLESS the head of Oswald was the same image on both photos...
The ONLY thing that should work perfectly is his face... isn't that what you are saying occurred?

Thanks for your patience as I do want to understand whether you are simply using a simgle image to create 3D and calling them different
or what

DJ



David, correct me if I am wrong but hasn't Duncan just created a 3D Zapruder film and other 3D films using footage shot from a single camera at a single position at a single time? Why are these images any different to what Duncan has done?


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

-------------------------
Believe those who are seeking the truth. Doubt those who find it.
    ~Andre Gide


Common sense is the least common of the senses.
    ~Unknown

   ReplyReply

Super Member
*****

Posts: 2355

Germany


I always belevied that you cannot create a 3D image from just one single 2D image. Only if you have 2 images which differ from the perspective just a little bit, it would be possible.  For the Z film you only hvae info of one perspective, If Z had a camera with 2 lenses beside each other it would be possible to merge the two image information together and create a 3D Z-film.
I am not sure if you can turn a single 2D image into a 3D image with the anaglyphic technique, where you have colored glasses.
But correct me if I am wrong.
The BY pix vary in perspective slightly, that is why you can.


-------------------------
« Last Edit: October 18, 2011, 01:31:21 PM by Gerda Dunckel »

-------------------------
"ich bin ein Berliner"

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

"There's none so blind as those who will not see."

   ReplyReply
Super Member
*****

Posts: 2568


Thanks for the explanation John... and please excuse my slowness with the concepts.. and no, I have not yet had a chance to use glasses on these images.... the pair I got with my Sports Illustrated swimsuit edition seems to have gone missing...   

I realize that 3D can be CREATED....  or it is filmed/photographed that way at the source....

When it it filmed at the source... we have two cameras taking an image at two slightly diff angles of the SAME image, adding the 3D glasses and we see a perfect 3D image with depth that is FAKED by the use of color & glasses
If we use 2 DIFFERENT images to create a 3D model... the ONLY way the 3D effect works is if the object is exactly the same in both images, otherwise the 3D effect would not work, there would be overlap lines...

So the fact you are saying that you can create a single 3D image from two different photos, and the faces are a perfect 3D image suggest to me that the man's face is the same in both pictures... EXACTLY the same, as he and others suggest.

John, you say if the faces where the same the 3D effect would NOT work...  that makes no sense to me...  the faces NEED to be the same, the angles must be a little different and that's what you are doing with the2D version of the photos... slightly changing the perspective... if the faces are different, as they should be in two different photos from two different distances/angles, then the 3D effect would NOT look right...

Please clarify...

Thanks
DJ


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

   ReplyReply

Super Member
*****

Posts: 753


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


John, you say if the faces where the same the 3D effect would NOT work...  that makes no sense to me...  the faces NEED to be the same, the angles must be a little different and that's what you are doing with the2D version of the photos... slightly changing the perspective... if the faces are different, as they should be in two different photos from two different distances/angles, then the 3D effect would NOT look right...

Please clarify...

Thanks
DJ

David,
Yes you are right, we need 2 images from 2 perspectives to view 3d images.
The static background in the backyard photo's are suitable for 3D, because of the slight horizontal movement between pictures, but Oswald was moving and always looking at the camera, so the 3d in the first face photo is a little wacky, but the unique shadows, provide a reaility to the image. In the 2nd photo the 3d is preferred because Oswalds head is definitely shifted vertically and by viewing the stereoscopic image horizontally, Oswalds face has a solid look.
BTW I would like better copies of 133b and 133c, to match the mega pixel version i have of 133a, and then i could build better 3d pictures of Oswald face, if anybody's listening, please paste on this page. thumbs1xx

Here i have matched Oswalds ears and you can see the massive difference in shadowing, lighting and vertical size. There is NO way they cut and pasted Oswalds face anywhere. Airbrushing shadows to the mathematical precision required is still pretty unfeasible.




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

   ReplyReply
0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.
Pages: 1 [2]


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