|
|
 April 18, 2009, 01:16:36 AM
|
Group: Administrator
Super Member
Posts: 2077
|
I noticed this second car immediately on looking at Rick's latest gif in the JFK Bonus Materials thread. Given the unknown then and now variables, I am still not convinced that we are not seeing the car as I have illustrated in the other thread. I now see a second darker car near the first white colored car. The shadows coming from the car appear to be consistent with the direction of shadows cast on Nov 22nd 1963. I have made an illustration using the last frame from Rick's animation, which to me appears to show a second car. I'm reminded of the old saying..If it looks like a Duck, Walks like a Duck, Quacks like a Duck, Flies like a Duck, then it probably is a Duck. In this case, we appear to have 2 Ducks, neither of them being lame. 
-------------------------
|
|
|
« Last Edit: April 18, 2009, 05:21:48 AM by Duncan MacRae »
|
-------------------------
An opinion based on something other than fact, is an opinion based on ignorance. As a guest, you are not allowed to view links.
Register or Login
|
|
|
 Reply |
|
|
|
|
April 18, 2009, 08:14:01 PM
|
Super Member
Posts: 2127
|
Gary Mack will be going to the exact Nix location in about an hours time to check if cars are visible in the car park from the exact Nix location. The car park is currently full. I will post his findings as soon as I have them.
While we're waiting for Duncan's report I think this might be a good time to r eview some gifs. After inspection I'd like to know if we're all still convinced that we're seeing human motion (or wheel wells) in Rick's work. Jerry Jerry, I can say one thing for certain. You certainly haven't done any justice to all my hard work. Just look what you've done to them laugh2 Rick, I'm sorry to say that they're all your images, resized %400 bicubic smoother. (Except I added three frames at the end of NixLaterFrames to show that the "head, wheel well, shadow" is only there for 1 frame -.06 seconds.) However, if you want better quality then it would be very useful for you to create a gif that includes the three frames subsequent to the .06 second "head pop, and to include the fence area where we seem to see shapes leaping about and looking a lot like your "head". I think you're right. An enhancement of superior quality would let us know if there's any real difference between what's happening in front of the fence and what appears to be happening behind the fence. Jerry Jerry, You start out by saying "I'm sorry to say that they're all your images". I don't know what resized %400 bicubic smoother is, but they look like none I've posted here. Color/gamma/brightness/contrast adjustments or whatever...."noise" cubes (bicubic maybe?) have all changed the entire look of the animations. As far as adding in 3 subsequent fames after the 'head pop' as you put it, that's not possible. Nix has all but panned away from the area in question by Nix 093. Don't know what else to tell you. Rick Rick, I'm sure most people on the forum will recognize Bicubic smoother. You can find it in PhotoShop and you can get more information in general by searching for photo interpolation in google. The process of saving as gifs after resizing may account for what you believe is a loss of quality. If it's a problem there's a simple solution. Post your gifs but include the last three frames and the fence area you've edited out. Then we'll all be able to see clearly! You're wrong about Nix. Frames 94, 95 and 96 show the area of the "head" pop (but no head). I can post them if you like but if you check your files I'm sure you'll see that the "head" area doesn't leave Nix until frame 97. Jerry Jerry said Frames 94, 95 and 96 show the area of the "head" pop (but no head). I was mistaken Jerry. The area is still seen until Nix 095. Nix 096 is a questionable frame, IMO. The reason I originally left these two frames out (094 & 095) when I first began constructing them from Nix is because of the way I prefer to construct my animated gifs. Using these two frames would not allow me to keep all the frames sizes exactly the same. They'd be partial frames and would be distracting to the eye. But nonetheless, here is a quick animation I've made especially for you. It begins with frame 093. Nix frame 094 is very fuzzy in that area, but Nix frame 095 is showing once again what looks to be the top of the head behind the fence. No special "cutting" for this animation. I'm tired. Just the frames just as they are. Running quite slow. You should know where to look by now ;) Also, of the four gifs you posted above, two are running way too fast. ANY animation will look like pea soup if you do that shock2 Rick
-------------------------
|
|
|
« Last Edit: April 18, 2009, 08:23:59 PM by Rick Needham »
|
-------------------------
But peace does not rest in the charters and covenants alone. It lies in the hearts and minds of all people- John F. Kennedy
|
|
|
Reply |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
April 19, 2009, 01:20:35 AM
|
Newbie
Posts: 8
|
-------------------------
|
|
|
Reply |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
April 19, 2009, 02:17:44 AM
|
Newbie
Posts: 8
|
Yeah I know that documentary did not receive much critical acclaim from conspiracy buffs :-) I just posted in case this is of higher quality than the other Nix films in circulation.
-------------------------
|
|
|
Reply |
|
|
|
|
April 19, 2009, 03:35:14 AM
|
Super Member
Posts: 2127
|
From Gary Mack
Duncan,
Good news and bad. We've had heavy thunderstorms on and off all day, and it was pouring when I left the office. I didn't go to the Nix spot, and when I got to our parking lot behind the fence, all the cars but one pickup truck had left the area behind the fence.
So while today's test may not have been definitive, I could tell that the top part of the truck was higher than the top of the fence. Since trucks were somewhat taller in the 60s, I have to assume that some vehicles probably could have been seen above the fence in the Nix film.
Gary
Duncan, Do you now if Gary Mack intends to try this once again at some other time when the carpark area is full and viewed from Nix's original filming location? Thanks for reporting back what was passed along to you from Mr. Mack ;) Rick
-------------------------
|
|
|
« Last Edit: April 19, 2009, 03:36:38 AM by Rick Needham »
|
|
|
|
Reply |
|
|
|
|
April 19, 2009, 03:43:36 AM
|
Group: Administrator
Super Member
Posts: 2077
|
From Gary Mack
Duncan,
Good news and bad. We've had heavy thunderstorms on and off all day, and it was pouring when I left the office. I didn't go to the Nix spot, and when I got to our parking lot behind the fence, all the cars but one pickup truck had left the area behind the fence.
So while today's test may not have been definitive, I could tell that the top part of the truck was higher than the top of the fence. Since trucks were somewhat taller in the 60s, I have to assume that some vehicles probably could have been seen above the fence in the Nix film.
Gary
Duncan, Do you now if Gary Mack intends to try this once again at some other time when the carpark area is full and viewed from Nix's original filming location? Thanks for reporting back what was passed along to you from Mr. Mack ;) Rick I'm sure he will Rick ,whenever the opportunity arises, and whenever the weather conditions and cars in the car park criteria are correct.
-------------------------
|
|
|
Reply |
|
|
|
|
April 19, 2009, 04:46:56 AM
|
Sr. Member
Posts: 374
|
Gary Mack will be going to the exact Nix location in about an hours time to check if cars are visible in the car park from the exact Nix location. The car park is currently full. I will post his findings as soon as I have them.
While we're waiting for Duncan's report I think this might be a good time to r eview some gifs. After inspection I'd like to know if we're all still convinced that we're seeing human motion (or wheel wells) in Rick's work. Jerry Jerry, I can say one thing for certain. You certainly haven't done any justice to all my hard work. Just look what you've done to them laugh2 Rick, I'm sorry to say that they're all your images, resized %400 bicubic smoother. (Except I added three frames at the end of NixLaterFrames to show that the "head, wheel well, shadow" is only there for 1 frame -.06 seconds.) However, if you want better quality then it would be very useful for you to create a gif that includes the three frames subsequent to the .06 second "head pop, and to include the fence area where we seem to see shapes leaping about and looking a lot like your "head". I think you're right. An enhancement of superior quality would let us know if there's any real difference between what's happening in front of the fence and what appears to be happening behind the fence. Jerry Jerry, You start out by saying "I'm sorry to say that they're all your images". I don't know what resized %400 bicubic smoother is, but they look like none I've posted here. Color/gamma/brightness/contrast adjustments or whatever...."noise" cubes (bicubic maybe?) have all changed the entire look of the animations. As far as adding in 3 subsequent fames after the 'head pop' as you put it, that's not possible. Nix has all but panned away from the area in question by Nix 093. Don't know what else to tell you. Rick Rick, I'm sure most people on the forum will recognize Bicubic smoother. You can find it in PhotoShop and you can get more information in general by searching for photo interpolation in google. The process of saving as gifs after resizing may account for what you believe is a loss of quality. If it's a problem there's a simple solution. Post your gifs but include the last three frames and the fence area you've edited out. Then we'll all be able to see clearly! You're wrong about Nix. Frames 94, 95 and 96 show the area of the "head" pop (but no head). I can post them if you like but if you check your files I'm sure you'll see that the "head" area doesn't leave Nix until frame 97. Jerry Jerry said Frames 94, 95 and 96 show the area of the "head" pop (but no head). I was mistaken Jerry. The area is still seen until Nix 095. Nix 096 is a questionable frame, IMO. The reason I originally left these two frames out (094 & 095) when I first began constructing them from Nix is because of the way I prefer to construct my animated gifs. Using these two frames would not allow me to keep all the frames sizes exactly the same. They'd be partial frames and would be distracting to the eye. But nonetheless, here is a quick animation I've made especially for you. It begins with frame 093. Nix frame 094 is very fuzzy in that area, but Nix frame 095 is showing once again what looks to be the top of the head behind the fence. No special "cutting" for this animation. I'm tired. Just the frames just as they are. Running quite slow. You should know where to look by now ;) Also, of the four gifs you posted above, two are running way too fast. ANY animation will look like pea soup if you do that shock2 Rick Rick, All the gifs I posted were set to run at the same frame rate, .06 seconds per frame. Slightly (very slightly) slower (not faster) than Nix film. I don't know about your computer graphic card or internet connection speed and I don't know what program you're using to view the gifs. But everything was set to run real time from my end. However, you've put your finger on an important problem. When you run the frames in real-time your "shooter" looks like a roadrunner cartoon. And the "head" at 91, 92, 93, 94, 95 exists for a single .055 frame. Jerry
-------------------------
|
|
|
Reply |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
April 19, 2009, 08:57:29 AM
|
Super Member
Posts: 2127
|
Gary Mack will be going to the exact Nix location in about an hours time to check if cars are visible in the car park from the exact Nix location. The car park is currently full. I will post his findings as soon as I have them.
While we're waiting for Duncan's report I think this might be a good time to r eview some gifs. After inspection I'd like to know if we're all still convinced that we're seeing human motion (or wheel wells) in Rick's work. Jerry Jerry, I can say one thing for certain. You certainly haven't done any justice to all my hard work. Just look what you've done to them laugh2 Rick, I'm sorry to say that they're all your images, resized %400 bicubic smoother. (Except I added three frames at the end of NixLaterFrames to show that the "head, wheel well, shadow" is only there for 1 frame -.06 seconds.) However, if you want better quality then it would be very useful for you to create a gif that includes the three frames subsequent to the .06 second "head pop, and to include the fence area where we seem to see shapes leaping about and looking a lot like your "head". I think you're right. An enhancement of superior quality would let us know if there's any real difference between what's happening in front of the fence and what appears to be happening behind the fence. Jerry Jerry, You start out by saying "I'm sorry to say that they're all your images". I don't know what resized %400 bicubic smoother is, but they look like none I've posted here. Color/gamma/brightness/contrast adjustments or whatever...."noise" cubes (bicubic maybe?) have all changed the entire look of the animations. As far as adding in 3 subsequent fames after the 'head pop' as you put it, that's not possible. Nix has all but panned away from the area in question by Nix 093. Don't know what else to tell you. Rick Rick, I'm sure most people on the forum will recognize Bicubic smoother. You can find it in PhotoShop and you can get more information in general by searching for photo interpolation in google. The process of saving as gifs after resizing may account for what you believe is a loss of quality. If it's a problem there's a simple solution. Post your gifs but include the last three frames and the fence area you've edited out. Then we'll all be able to see clearly! You're wrong about Nix. Frames 94, 95 and 96 show the area of the "head" pop (but no head). I can post them if you like but if you check your files I'm sure you'll see that the "head" area doesn't leave Nix until frame 97. Jerry Jerry said Frames 94, 95 and 96 show the area of the "head" pop (but no head). I was mistaken Jerry. The area is still seen until Nix 095. Nix 096 is a questionable frame, IMO. The reason I originally left these two frames out (094 & 095) when I first began constructing them from Nix is because of the way I prefer to construct my animated gifs. Using these two frames would not allow me to keep all the frames sizes exactly the same. They'd be partial frames and would be distracting to the eye. But nonetheless, here is a quick animation I've made especially for you. It begins with frame 093. Nix frame 094 is very fuzzy in that area, but Nix frame 095 is showing once again what looks to be the top of the head behind the fence. No special "cutting" for this animation. I'm tired. Just the frames just as they are. Running quite slow. You should know where to look by now ;) Also, of the four gifs you posted above, two are running way too fast. ANY animation will look like pea soup if you do that shock2 Rick Rick, All the gifs I posted were set to run at the same frame rate, .06 seconds per frame. Slightly (very slightly) slower (not faster) than Nix film. I don't know about your computer graphic card or internet connection speed and I don't know what program you're using to view the gifs. But everything was set to run real time from my end. However, you've put your finger on an important problem. When you run the frames in real-time your "shooter" looks like a roadrunner cartoon. And the "head" at 91, 92, 93, 94, 95 exists for a single .055 frame. Jerry Also Jerry....I don't think the man was deliberately trying to peer up and over the top of the picket fence to sneak a quick peek, like I had previously thought. There's just not enough of his head showing to say his eye level is above the fence top. I think it was a major screwup on his part to partially pop into view as he was most likely dismantling his rifle/weapon/piece at this time. The partial top of his head accidentially "popping up into view" in one frame and disappearing by the next is totally possible, IMO. Rick
-------------------------
|
|
|
Reply |
|
|
| 0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
|
