How Did Bart Kamp Create The Lovelady Image?

[Tom Graves]

[...]

Dear danny BOY o'meara,

You need to be made to stood in the corner and look at the wall for three hours.

-- Tom

[Dan O'meara]

Dear danny BOY o'meara,

You need to be made to stood in the corner and look at the wall for three hours.

-- Tom

A few posts ago I tried to get this thread back on track.
I'll try again.
Why not have a grown up discussion about the points I'm raising?

This is the 'Lovelady' image Bart Kamp produced from a large print obtained for him from the collection of Richard Sprague.



This image seems to include an incredible amount of detail, particularly on the shirt of 'Lovelady'.
However, the print from which Kamp got this 'Lovelady' image is of such poor quality that is very hard to understand how this amount of detail could be present when far superior pictures show no such detail.
Kamp alludes to this contradiction in his description of how he came across the Sprague print:

"This...Scan of a Couch film still at first looks very harsh and doesn’t overall have much information, but it does happen to show a lot regarding our illustrious duo. This print comes from the Richard E. Sprague Collection from the National Archives."

How can it be that the Sprague print "doesn't overall have much information", yet the part of it showing Lovelady's shirt does?

This is a copy of the Sprague print that Kamp used to get his image of Lovelady from:



Look at the poor quality of this image in general. How washed out it is and how there is a lack of fine detail. As Kamp points out, there is not much overall information in this print, as it is of such poor quality.
In contrast, here is an image from the Couch footage taken from "Four Days In November":



Look at how superior this image is in quality, look at how much more detail is present in this image, how much more information is present overall.
One would have thought that the more detailed picture of 'Lovelady' would come from this superior image.
BUT THIS IS NOT THE CASE.
The picture of 'Lovelady' that has the very fine detail (of the distinctive check pattern of his shirt) comes from the inferior image.
How can that be?

This is a crop of 'Lovelady' from the Sprague print and 4 Days.



How was Kamp able to obtain such fine detail from the inferior Sprague print when no such detail is present in the far superior copy from 4 Days?

[Tom Graves]

This is the 'Lovelady' image Bart Kamp produced from a large print obtained for him from the collection of Richard Sprague.



This image seems to include an incredible amount of detail, particularly on the shirt of 'Lovelady'.
However, the print from which Kamp got this 'Lovelady' image is of such poor quality that is very hard to understand how this amount of detail could be present when far superior pictures show no such detail.
Kamp alludes to this contradiction in his description of how he came across the Sprague print:

"This...Scan of a Couch film still at first looks very harsh and doesn’t overall have much information, but it does happen to show a lot regarding our illustrious duo. This print comes from the Richard E. Sprague Collection from the National Archives."

How can it be that the Sprague print "doesn't overall have much information", yet the part of it showing Lovelady's shirt does?

This is a copy of the Sprague print that Kamp used to get his image of Lovelady from:



Look at the poor quality of this image in general. How washed out it is and how there is a lack of fine detail. As Kamp points out, there is not much overall information in this print, as it is of such poor quality.
In contrast, here is an image from the Couch footage taken from "Four Days In November":



Look at how superior this image is in quality, look at how much more detail is present in this image, how much more information is present overall.
One would have thought that the more detailed picture of 'Lovelady' would come from this superior image.
BUT THIS IS NOT THE CASE.
The picture of 'Lovelady' that has the very fine detail (of the distinctive check pattern of his shirt) comes from the inferior image.
How can that be?

This is a crop of 'Lovelady' from the Sprague print and 4 Days.



How was Kamp able to obtain such fine detail from the inferior Sprague print when no such detail is present in the far superior copy from 4 Days?

Dear danny BOY o'meara,

Why don't you ask Bart?

After all, he, too, is a tinfoil-hat JFKA conspiracy theorist.

(But at least he had the good sense to post the following 10 September 2021 interview of Tennent H. Bagley's friend, (JFKA CT!!!) Malcolm Blunt.)

-- Tom

[Dan O'meara]

Dear danny BOY o'meara,

Why don't you ask Bart?

After all, he, too, is a tinfoil-hat JFKA conspiracy theorist.

(But at least he had the good sense to post the following 10 September 2021 interview of Tennent H. Bagley's friend, (JFKA CT!!!) Malcolm Blunt.)

-- Tom

I'm asking you to join in with a grown up discussion of the issues raised.
What are your opinions about the issues I'm raising in this thread?

[Tom Graves]

I'm asking you to join in with a grown up discussion of the issues raised.
What are your opinions about the issues I'm raising in this thread?

Dear danny BOY o'meara,

Have you reached out to Bart, yet?

Maybe he'll tell you.

But of course, you won't believe him because he doesn't support your particular tinfoil-hat JFKA CT.

LOL!

-- Tom

[Dan O'meara]

Dear danny BOY o'meara,

Have you reached out to Bart, yet?

Maybe he'll tell you.

But of course, you won't believe him because he doesn't support your particular tinfoil-hat JFKA CT.

LOL!

-- Tom

 
Of course you're not going to join in a discussion like a grown man.

Keep on trolling   

[Tom Graves]

Of course, you're not going to join in a discussion like a grown man. Keep on trolling.

Says the KGB-approved King of the Trolls.

[Royell Storing]

Of course you're not going to join in a discussion like a grown man.

Keep on trolling   

  He doesn't have the JFK Assassination "foundation" to respond to your pin-point questions. I try to encourage him, but right now he's the class clown.