Bumped for newcomers like Brian
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?
