28-10-2015, 10:26 PM
(This post was last modified: 28-10-2015, 10:42 PM by Drew Phipps.)
Ok, I understand (and agree with) your general point about the direction of the shadows. I think however, that there is one possibility you haven't considered: That the "shadow" from the post (which is different) is not, in fact, a shadow from the post. The actual shadow from the post might be obscured (in part) by that white bag or plant or bit of junk on the ground to the left of the post, which appears to be about a foot high, (which would block the camera's view of the shadow) and (in part) by the shadows of the stairs into which it merges.
There are other shadows in that picture with "anomalous" directions, if you assume that a) only objects visible in the picture cast shadows, or b) you know what object is casting the shadow. There is a shadow on the ground that apparently proceeds from Oswald's heel toward the post. There are two "barbershop" stripes on the post itself. The lower "barbershop stripe" leaves the post and crosses the ground towards Oswald's shadow just above where the shadow of the pistol is.
Also, when you drew in the "Actual" shadow I think you have drawn that line too far counter-clockwise. In the original picture, the dark line just to the left of the bright post, stays much closer to the post, in fact (to me) looks parallel to the post - straight up and down, not angling away. Then it intersects shadows cast by the stairway. If you examine the individual pixels of the shadow, there are 16 dark pixel pairs which proceed straight up with no sideways displacement at all until it merges with another shadow. That means the angle from which that black area diverges from the bright post area is less than 3.7 degrees. Your drawing angles away from the post more than 10 degrees.
You also assume a single source of illumination. I don't know if that Reflex has a flash or not. I assume not, else more objects would show double shadows. The sun's rays are, for all intents and purposes, parallel, when they reach the earth. They do not converge or diverge. Nor do shadows. Any apparent convergence or divergence is an optical illusion created by your point of view or perspective, or a tilt of the ground upon which the shadow falls.
There are other shadows in that picture with "anomalous" directions, if you assume that a) only objects visible in the picture cast shadows, or b) you know what object is casting the shadow. There is a shadow on the ground that apparently proceeds from Oswald's heel toward the post. There are two "barbershop" stripes on the post itself. The lower "barbershop stripe" leaves the post and crosses the ground towards Oswald's shadow just above where the shadow of the pistol is.
Also, when you drew in the "Actual" shadow I think you have drawn that line too far counter-clockwise. In the original picture, the dark line just to the left of the bright post, stays much closer to the post, in fact (to me) looks parallel to the post - straight up and down, not angling away. Then it intersects shadows cast by the stairway. If you examine the individual pixels of the shadow, there are 16 dark pixel pairs which proceed straight up with no sideways displacement at all until it merges with another shadow. That means the angle from which that black area diverges from the bright post area is less than 3.7 degrees. Your drawing angles away from the post more than 10 degrees.
You also assume a single source of illumination. I don't know if that Reflex has a flash or not. I assume not, else more objects would show double shadows. The sun's rays are, for all intents and purposes, parallel, when they reach the earth. They do not converge or diverge. Nor do shadows. Any apparent convergence or divergence is an optical illusion created by your point of view or perspective, or a tilt of the ground upon which the shadow falls.
"All that is necessary for tyranny to succeed is for good men to do nothing." (unknown)
James Tracy: "There is sometimes an undue amount of paranoia among some conspiracy researchers that can contribute to flawed observations and analysis."
Gary Cornwell (Dept. Chief Counsel HSCA): "A fact merely marks the point at which we have agreed to let investigation cease."
Alan Ford: "Just because you believe it, that doesn't make it so."
James Tracy: "There is sometimes an undue amount of paranoia among some conspiracy researchers that can contribute to flawed observations and analysis."
Gary Cornwell (Dept. Chief Counsel HSCA): "A fact merely marks the point at which we have agreed to let investigation cease."
Alan Ford: "Just because you believe it, that doesn't make it so."