Those Front Steps

[Thomas Graves]

Answer: I can't see him?

Edit answer: it's morphing from each corresponding pixel position in each image, so we continuously see movement between all the relative pixels.

JohnM

John,

1) "I can't see him?" 

Huh? Typo?

2)  Once again, is Lovelady still up there on a top step (or on the landing, itself) in the Darnell frame/the Darnell clip/the Darnell whatever, or is that some kind of ghost image/"morphing pixels" image which only appears to show him leaning forward like a MoFo, but he ain't really there at that point?

3) "Morphing pixels" between just two frames, one from Wiegman and one from Darnell? (Your GIF is comprised of just two frames. right?)

--  MWT 

[John Mytton]

John,

1) "I can't see him?" 

Huh? Typo?

2)  Once again, is Lovelady still up there on a top step (or on the landing, itself) in the Darnell frame/the Darnell clip/the Darnell whatever, or is that some kind of ghost image/"morphing pixels" image which only appears to show him leaning forward like a MoFo, but he ain't really there at that point?

3) "Morphing pixels" between just two frames, one from Wiegman and one from Darnell? (Your GIF is comprised of just two frames. right?)

--  MWT 

1. Is this what you mean because I can't really make them out but it could be?



2. Lovelady is on the top step in Wiegman and not on the top step in Darnell or if he is I can't see him.
3. Yes.



JohnM

[Thomas Graves]

1. Is this what you mean because I can't really make them out but it could be?



2. Lovelady is on the top step in Wiegman and not on the top step in Darnell or if he is I can't see him.
3. Yes.

JohnM

Yes. John.

That's Gloria Calvery and her dressed-in-white colleague, Carol Reed, in Zapruder. Sandy Larsen and I discovered Calvery and her three headscarf-wearing colleagues in Zapruder at the EF a couple of years ago, after I had found Stella Mae Jacob and her two colleagues (Gloria Holt and Sharon Simmons) standing by the Stemmons sign in Zapruder, forcing researchers to look for Calvery and Co. somewhere else on the north side of Elm Street.

You can't make them (Sandy's and my Calvery and Reed) out in the Darnell frame part of your two-frame GIF ? ? ?

You can see Calvery's black blouse (or sweater) and black headscarf, can't you?  And Reed's white dress and white headscarf?

If you had a clearer Darnell frame, you could even see two "fuzzy" dark horizontal bands in the slice of Calvery's skirt that's visible, which subtle dark bands can be easily seen in clear Zapruder frames.

--  MWT 

PS  Thanks for confirming for me that Lovelady is no longer on a top step in Darnell.

[John Mytton]

Yes. John.

That's Gloria Calvery and her dressed-in-white colleague, Carol Reed, in Zapruder. Sandy Larsen and I discovered Calvery and her three headscarf-wearing colleagues in Zapruder at the EF a couple of years ago, after I had found Stella Mae Jacob and her two colleagues (Gloria Holt and Sharon Simmons) standing by the Stemmons sign in Zapruder, forcing researchers to look for Calvery and Co. somewhere else on the north side of Elm Street.

You can't make them (Sandy's and my Calvery and Reed) out in the Darnell frame part of your two-frame GIF ? ? ?

You can see Calvery's black blouse (or sweater) and black headscarf, can't you?  And Reed's white dress and white headscarf?

If you had a clearer Darnell frame, you could even see two "fuzzy" dark horizontal bands in Calvery's skirt, which subtle dark bands can be seen in clear Zapruder frames.

--  MWT 

I can see the characters and they seem to match.

JohnM

[John Mytton]

Bump for Storing, stop running, we want answers!

      Your questioning the positioning of Lovelady is answered by there being a Greater Elapsed Time between the images than has previously been accepted. The same goes for Buell Frazier and other people that were  standing in the TSBD stairs area.

How long after?
Accepted by whom?
In what textbook did you find all the accepted times, can I see it?
I asked you before to provide some sort of verified evidence to support your guesses, where is it?
Why do you keep making these definitive unsupported statements?

JohnM

[Alan Ford]

The Lovelady stepping down is a red herring because look at the distance from the top of Lovelady's head to the next frame, that distance is way too much for a step but if you look closely at the shape of Lovelady's head, the way he counterbalances himself with his right arm, the angle and shape of his Tshirt, his button shirt right side falling forward and creating a shadow across his tummy, his left lapel that tightens and removes the shadow, his upper body twisting and the shadowing on Lovelady's face, it looks like he's ducking a little and bending forward as you do, to try and get a better look at something or maybe he was just leaning forward to tie up his shoe laces? The total amount of frames of Lovelady is about half a second and is just a flash in time.





And the shadow planes confirms the above.





So as can be seen, Lovelady isn't stepping down and his actions as described above places him here and PP is against the wall a foot or two in front of the glass.



JohnM

 

Context for this latest Mytton Foray Into The Twilight Zone!

Mr Mytton has watched Mr Mitcham do what he himself knew better than to do---------------------namely, commit to actually putting Mr Lovelady on the vertical shadow line somewhere on the steps:



'Hmmmm,' said Mr Mytton to himself, still smarting from the total collapse of his center railing scam, 'that way fresh hell lies... No deuced way around the Lovelady-blocking-Prayer-Person problem if we put Lovelady anywhere on the steps'.

So! He takes a look at that shadow line (which he daren't query btw) and realises there's only one last scam left to try:

Put Mr Lovelady way back on the landing just in front of the door!



He knows it's a deranged idea, even by Mytton standards, but it just might fool the fools! 

Problem!

Mr Lovelady clearly steps downwards and forwards between the early and the later Lovelady-In-Wiegman frames:



The idea that Mr Lovelady @ lower elevation is way back on the landing, just in front of the door, is so patently absurd it must make even Mr Mytton blanch as he tries to screw his courage to the sticking place to launch his latest scam! But on he ploughs, doughty conman that he is...

Mytton Solution!

Gaslight people with the idea that "the Lovelady stepping down is a red herring"!  Suggest Mr Lovelady might be leaning forward to tie his shoelaces!  Claim that "total amount of frames of Lovelady is about half a second and is just a flash in time"! 

That sound you hear, friends, is the sound of a desperate Lone Nut scam artist scraping the bottom of a barrel that has become terrifyingly empty...

Of course, this latest scam is not going to go any better for Mr Mytton than his recent ones! 

Where to start?

How about here:

Mr Mytton cannot get away from the gap Wiegman shows from Mr Lovelady's head to the metal door frame:



Mr Hackerott--------whose meticulous 3D calcuations Mr Mytton daren't take on----------has already shown that this gap puts Mr Lovelady out at the edge of the landing:



The only solution for Mr Mytton here would be to make a new 'Educated Guess' and put Mr Lovelady further west back there in order to create fictional sidelong distance between Mr Lovelady and the frame. But that won't work because too much of Mr Lovelady's body would then be eaten up by shadow!



Poor Mr Mytton!

Alternatively, we could start here:

Mr Mytton has forgotten to factor in the horizontal lintel shadow!



He can't put Mr Lovelady back there and have his full face in direct sunlight! 

Or here:

Mr Mytton has forgotten to factor in Mr Frazier in Wiegman!  



Perhaps Mr Mytton can make a second 'Educated Guess', this time as to the respective positions of Messrs Lovelady and Frazier--------------and test his two 'Educated Guesses' against the respective heights of those two gentlemen?



Once Mr Mytton has addressed the above------------each of which is a deal-breaker on its own-------------we can talk about something else Mr Mytton has forgotten to factor in:



Get out the popcorn, friends!

[Royell Storing]

Yes. John.

That's Gloria Calvery and her dressed-in-white colleague, Carol Reed, in Zapruder. Sandy Larsen and I discovered Calvery and her three headscarf-wearing colleagues in Zapruder at the EF a couple of years ago, after I had found Stella Mae Jacob and her two colleagues (Gloria Holt and Sharon Simmons) standing by the Stemmons sign in Zapruder, forcing researchers to look for Calvery and Co. somewhere else on the north side of Elm Street.

You can't make them (Sandy's and my Calvery and Reed) out in the Darnell frame part of your two-frame GIF ? ? ?

You can see Calvery's black blouse (or sweater) and black headscarf, can't you?  And Reed's white dress and white headscarf?

If you had a clearer Darnell frame, you could even see two "fuzzy" dark horizontal bands in the slice of Calvery's skirt that's visible, which subtle dark bands can be easily seen in clear Zapruder frames.

--  MWT 

PS  Thanks for confirming for me that Lovelady is no longer on a top step in Darnell.

    Just how long do you believe it would take these Stunned women to walk from the Stemmons Sign through the mingling mob on the corner of Elm/Houston and then through the throng milling around in front of the TSBD and then begin climbing the TSBD Steps as pictured? The Elapsed Time between the images under discussion is Greater than has been accepted as well as the currently accepted Time Stamping of those Films.