22-08-2013, 07:33 PM
The claim of private property rights to such an important piece of evidence seems absurd on its face. I suspect it served as an excuse explaining why access to the film was so relatively limited. I have no problem believing that the camera original was at NPIC over the weekend, and in fact it should have been as part of an investigation into a major crime.
I have a hard time believing that the camera original was ever projected, or if it was, not more than once or twice. 8mm film is easily scratched and even a single trip through a projector runs the risk of damage. The high speed machine at the lab is a common piece of gear used to ensure developed film has no processing flaws, and it built to ensure there is no risk of scratching. Anyone on scene who had their wits about them, would have insisted a copy be immediately made for actual viewing.
While the film was at Kodak, Zapruder popped over to the WFAA studios and appeared on television.
I don't buy the story about limiting the viewing of the Zapruder film to the Commission because of concerns over burning the film. A single trip through an 8mm projector risked scratching the film, and, if truly concerned and if it was truly the camera original, the stewards of the film would not have allowed any projection. This possibly served as an excuse to limit the viewing. The Commission should have had a copy of the film during the entire time of their work, and the claim that LIFE owned it and so it was inaccessible seems a cover.
Interestingly, the CBS Warren Commission news special from 1967 features an editorial by Walter Cronkite where he criticizes LIFE for refusing to allow CBS access to the film. He questions private property rights against the right to know.
Film alteration to the extent that a patch was added to cover the back of Kennedy's head following the fatal shot, and also perhaps the pink cloud at 313, could have been done relatively easily and in an afternoon. It appears that Sunday Nov 24 might have seen that work. Film alteration beyond that leaves me with serious reservations.
In my opinion, the concern with the Zapruder film was to limit its accessibility, primarily because of the backwards movement of Kennedy's body, which could not be explained against the lone nut hypothesis.
David, if Zapruder switched his camera to 48fps before picking up the motorcade again at Z133, then the frame rate would have had to stay at 48fps right through to the final frame.
I have a hard time believing that the camera original was ever projected, or if it was, not more than once or twice. 8mm film is easily scratched and even a single trip through a projector runs the risk of damage. The high speed machine at the lab is a common piece of gear used to ensure developed film has no processing flaws, and it built to ensure there is no risk of scratching. Anyone on scene who had their wits about them, would have insisted a copy be immediately made for actual viewing.
While the film was at Kodak, Zapruder popped over to the WFAA studios and appeared on television.
I don't buy the story about limiting the viewing of the Zapruder film to the Commission because of concerns over burning the film. A single trip through an 8mm projector risked scratching the film, and, if truly concerned and if it was truly the camera original, the stewards of the film would not have allowed any projection. This possibly served as an excuse to limit the viewing. The Commission should have had a copy of the film during the entire time of their work, and the claim that LIFE owned it and so it was inaccessible seems a cover.
Interestingly, the CBS Warren Commission news special from 1967 features an editorial by Walter Cronkite where he criticizes LIFE for refusing to allow CBS access to the film. He questions private property rights against the right to know.
Film alteration to the extent that a patch was added to cover the back of Kennedy's head following the fatal shot, and also perhaps the pink cloud at 313, could have been done relatively easily and in an afternoon. It appears that Sunday Nov 24 might have seen that work. Film alteration beyond that leaves me with serious reservations.
In my opinion, the concern with the Zapruder film was to limit its accessibility, primarily because of the backwards movement of Kennedy's body, which could not be explained against the lone nut hypothesis.
David, if Zapruder switched his camera to 48fps before picking up the motorcade again at Z133, then the frame rate would have had to stay at 48fps right through to the final frame.