A new Look at the BYP by Jeff Carter

[David Josephs]

F. Carlier
Of course, the backyard photos are genuine, period.

Did someone forget to lock the doggie door?

We really need to hear all this junk science again?

Or do we get to review some REAL science?

Wonder why the HSCA has to qualify the REASONS they found lines in the chin area? isn't using higher resolution and enhancement techniques encouraged to determine if this was expertly done or not?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. It is my opinion that it was used directly to make the print. However, I cannot specifically eliminate the possibility of an internegative or the possibility of this photograph having been copied, a negative made by copying a photograph similar to this from which this print was I think this is highly unlikely, because if this were the result of a copied negative, there would normally be evidence that I could detect, such as a loss of detail and imperfections that show up due to this added process.
Although a very expertly done rephotographing and reprinting cannot positively be eliminated, I am reasonably sure it was made directly from the negative

Now who in the world would have access to expert photographic retouching facilities in 1963-64?

NPIC, or Hawkeyeworks?

;;okay::

[size=12](398) The 133-B negative (CE 749) was digitally processed at the Aerospace Corp. and the University of California Image Processing Institute using several different image-processing techniques. This
process confirmed that the grain distribution was uniform. (173) (See g. IV-31, JFK exhibit 197.) Under very carefully adjusted display conditions, the scanned image of the Oswald backyard negative did
exhibit irregular, very fine lines in the chin area. The lines appeared, however, only with the Aerospace gradient-enhancement process, where the technique was applied at a much higher resolution (i.e., the image area scanned was magnified since only a small portion of the picture was being subjected to the computations)
[/SIZE]