Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
0 Members

Author Topic: Those Front Steps  (Read 135276 times)

Online Royell Storing

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2598
Re: Those Front Steps
« Reply #320 on: November 16, 2019, 04:45:15 PM »
Advertisement

Although I do not embrace Mr Stancak's calculations regarding shadow lines, and Mannequin/Image placement, I do have total confidence that Mr Hackerott's calculations regarding shadow lines, and Mannequin/Image placement, are quite accurate.

A credible rebuttal of your argument? Your baseless argument is not credible. Where is your reliable evidence? Is your "evidence" based on a double exposure alteration of image sizing and placement, filmed by an in motion hand held motion picture camera, by a Camerman riding in a Motorcade Vehicle?

Perhaps, you can explain why there is no eyewitness statements/testimony, among numerous eyewitnesses available, that places LeeHarveyOswald on the Top Step/Landing/Stairs at the time of the Motorcade driving past the TSBD Bldg Elm St Entrance?


    Come on Larry. Look at that Curtain. It is Unlike Any actual shadow anywhere close to those steps/hand rail. That curtain looks like Lovelady has a Jet Black trench coat thrown over his shoulder.  Lovelady is Not hugging the West wall and he is Not standing on top of the landing. This shadow stuff defies what we are seeing.
« Last Edit: November 16, 2019, 04:47:50 PM by Royell Storing »

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Those Front Steps
« Reply #320 on: November 16, 2019, 04:45:15 PM »


Offline Larry Trotter

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 435
Re: Those Front Steps
« Reply #321 on: November 16, 2019, 05:00:24 PM »
    Forget the Oswald claim. Instead, tell this Forum exactly what is that Straight-As-A-String, Jet Black, Curtain.

That is your claim. I do not claim the shadow line on BillyLovelady/Image's right side remains straight in WiegmanFilm. As a matter of fact, it does not!

It need not take a photography expert to correctly conclude that the shading and darkened area is due to blocked sunlight creating a shadow, and photograph/film frame light/dark contrast.

That is what I see, Forum!
« Last Edit: November 16, 2019, 05:28:25 PM by Larry Trotter »

Online Royell Storing

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2598
Re: Those Front Steps
« Reply #322 on: November 16, 2019, 05:40:21 PM »
That is your claim. I do not claim the shadow line on BillyLovelady/Image's right side remains straight in WiegmanFilm. As a matter of fact, it does not!

It need not take a photography expert to correctly conclude that the shading and darkened area is due to blocked sunlight creating a shadow, and photograph/film frame light/dark contrast.

That is what I see, Forum!

    What you are referring to as "darkend" is actually JET BLACK. As in Jet Black inside a tunnel. Take a look at other shadows inside Dealey Plaza. Stemmons Sign, etc. Straight and Depth of BLACK.

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Those Front Steps
« Reply #322 on: November 16, 2019, 05:40:21 PM »


Offline Larry Trotter

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 435
Re: Those Front Steps
« Reply #323 on: November 16, 2019, 06:39:03 PM »
    What you are referring to as "darkend" is actually JET BLACK. As in Jet Black inside a tunnel. Take a look at other shadows inside Dealey Plaza. Stemmons Sign, etc. Straight and Depth of BLACK.

My comments relate to BillyLovelady/Image as seen in WiegmanFilm of the TSBD Bldg Entrance Portal at the time that the MotorcadeVehicle/CameraCar carrying Camerman/DaveWiegman is turning, and/or has turned on to Elm St from Houston St. And, I do not embrace any correlation between said filming and what may be seen, or unseen in WiegmanFilm in other areas and from other camera positioning/status/locations/angles.

Offline Alan Ford

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4820
Re: Those Front Steps
« Reply #324 on: November 16, 2019, 09:33:22 PM »

Although I do not embrace Mr Stancak's calculations regarding shadow lines, and Mannequin/Image placement, I do have total confidence that Mr Hackerott's calculations regarding shadow lines, and Mannequin/Image placement, are quite accurate.

 :D

Mr Hackerott's shadow line calculations are no different to Mr Stancak's!
« Last Edit: November 16, 2019, 09:46:17 PM by Alan Ford »

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Those Front Steps
« Reply #324 on: November 16, 2019, 09:33:22 PM »


Offline Zeon Mason

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 905
Re: Those Front Steps
« Reply #325 on: November 16, 2019, 11:59:40 PM »
some questions

1. If there was a conspirator able to examine the Wiegman film, frame by frame, and had the skill to use some technique to blacken out the figure, why would they leave the head of the figure still visible?

2. If the 2nd head is Oswalds, why is it almost the same height as Billy Lovelady? If Oswald is behind Lovelady, he is most likely standing on one step higher, thus should be about 7 or more inches higher than Lovelady. Can you show this figure is 'bending his knees, or leaning forward in a way that can lower his head to same level as Lovelady head?

3. If its Oswald, and he is IN THE MIDST of several people, now the probability of him not being seen is  approaching "impossible", even more than when Alan Ford was certain that Prayerblob was Oswald "in the corner"  ;)
« Last Edit: November 17, 2019, 12:24:38 AM by Zeon Mason »

Offline Alan Ford

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4820
Re: Those Front Steps
« Reply #326 on: November 17, 2019, 12:16:01 AM »
some questions

1. If there was a conspirator able to examine the Wiegman film, frame by frame, and had the skill to use some technique to blacken out the figure, why would they leave the head of the figure still visible?

a question

If Mr Ford has already addressed this question at length in Post #570, why is Mr Mason mindlessly asking it again?  ::)

Quote
2. If the 2nd head is Oswalds, why is it almost the same height as Billy Lovelady?

Both on the landing--------------Mr Lovelady is leaning, Mr Oswald is not.  Thumb1:

Quote
3. If its Oswald, and he is IN THE MIDST of several people, now the probability of him not being seen is  approaching "impossible", even more than when Alan Ford was certain that Prayerblob was Oswald "in the corner"  ;)

Oh, that's easy!

a) Everyone is focused on the P. parade.

b) Only one person has Mr Oswald in their line of sight: Mr Frazier.

c) Mr Oswald only pops out front for a very short time before returning back inside to the vestibule.

 Thumb1:

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Those Front Steps
« Reply #326 on: November 17, 2019, 12:16:01 AM »


Offline Zeon Mason

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 905
Re: Those Front Steps
« Reply #327 on: November 17, 2019, 01:19:09 AM »
3 or 4 frames? Every single Wiegman frame showing Mr Lovelady has had a dark vertical strip added to his right side! Even when Mr Lovelady takes a step down, the 'shadow' moves down with him, continuing to cover most of his right side. Even if (in the parallel universe some of you KeepOswaldAwayFromTheFrontSteps people think hosted this assassination) the shadow line from the western column had extended diagonally right across much of the west side of the entranceway, this would be bizarre!



So your objection to the evidence of Mr Oswald's presence just behind Mr Lovelady is not that you have an alternative explanation for it but that the cover-up people in 1963 didn't predict the rise of digital technology and an online research community capable of producing 3D reconstructions of the entranceway!  :D

Now!

The priority in this rush job was to kill any identification of Mr Oswald in Wiegman. (Remember: they knew exactly where to find Mr Oswald in Wiegman, because Mr Oswald will have told Captain Fritz in his first interrogation exactly where he was at the time of the shooting. Mr Lovelady's name will have been mentioned, which explains why they went straight to him with a blowup of the Altgens photograph.)

Here's what the original Wiegman film showed:

1. In the frames showing Mr Lovelady at higher elevation, the original Wiegman film showed
-----------a second head in very close proximity to Mr Lovelady's head (right behind it)
-----------a white tshirt and bare right arm, identifying the owner of the second head as a casually dressed white male employee.

Solution to the Lovelady@HigherElevation frames? Add a crude dark strip down Mr Lovelady's right side. People will assume it's a natural shadow. In the absence of a second body, it's unlikely anyone will even notice the second head. Even if anyone were to do so, they won't be able to identify it as Mr Oswald's. Could be anybody!



2. In the frames showing Mr Lovelady at lower elevation, the original Wiegman film showed
-----------Mr Oswald's sunlit head/face now easily visible in all frames (because he hasn't changed elevation)
-----------Mr Oswald's t-shirted upper body and bare arms now easily visible
-----------> Mr Oswald now easily identifiable

Solution to the Lovelady@LowerElevation frames? Don't just add a crude dark strip down Mr Lovelady's right side--------blacken out all of Mr Oswald, head included. It will be crude work, but it will fool the fools!



The key point in all this is that the entire scam gambled on no one's ever noticing that the shadow down Mr Lovelady's right side couldn't possibly be a natural shadow. Up to very recently, the gamble paid off!

 Thumb1:


Your post no. 570 in which you claim that 2nd head which IS VISIBLE, therefore NOT blackened out, is the head of Oswald.

Your suggestion that the conspirators were pressed for time, yet they apparently had enough time to examine EACH FRAME of the Wiegman film AND had the time to use a technique of some sort to INDIVIDUALLY blacken EACH FRAME one by one, which is NOT  a hastily done process... and yet.. the HEAD which is VISIBLE , they MISSED?????

Whether the conspirators anticipated future examination of Wiegman film with improved tech in the future is irrelevant to my question WHY DIDNT THEY BLACKEN OUT THE FACE of the supposed Oswald figure?

do you have another explanation than "a rush job" as the reason to have missed the 2nd head which if it is as distinguishable as you claim to be Oswald, they SURELY should have made EVERY effort to make sure the most ESSENTIAL element of the figure, the FACE is blacken out.

Or is the 2nd head an aberration or motion blur and does NOT actually exist? If that is the reason for the 2nd head being visible, THEN your anomalous black shadow alteration theory makes more sense, at least to me :)
« Last Edit: November 17, 2019, 01:22:55 AM by Zeon Mason »