28-08-2013, 10:05 PM
(This post was last modified: 28-08-2013, 10:23 PM by David Healy.)
Jan Klimkowski wrote:
Quote:
...
Some behaviour worthy of a pigsty.
The following is not an argument from authority. It is an argument from some direct technical knowledge.
But so what, eh?
dgh: what praytell does direct technical knowledge have to do with a Hollywood type matte artist dealing with 130 or so 35mm frames projected at 36"x24" (or larger) to do whatever that particular artist is comfortable doing while working-plying his craft? ...
Having made network broadcast documentaries on both film (briefly), various tape formats and digital drives, I do not believe that the travelling matte Z film is technically possible, even with non-public domain "covert" technology in 1963.
dgh: so what! What you believe or what "Jeffrey" believes, or anyone else for that matter, has no absolutely no bearing regarding what film-video post-production type artists need to do in order to advance (even save), production camera (whether mechanical of human error) defects, PERIOD!
...
Jeff Carter did not kill JFK and the attacks on him are not proportionate.
dgh: If Jeffrey expects respect for his input, aka throwing his hat in the Z-film alteration ring, he's got to do better than simply making grand pronouncements (or as old Rich DellaRosa use to say "don't shit over my transom and expect kudo's") about what he, Jeffrey thinks, or for that matter his mysterious Canadian film technician thinks can or can not be done within a very specific, artistic medium. Jeffrey also has to present his film-video-compositing post-production credentials to even get little old me to give him more than a hello nod.
Frankly, Len's Black Op Radio's 50/50 series production cred's doesn't cut it.
And Albert Rossi has contributed much in his short time here at DPF. I share his disgust at the manner in which the arguments in this thread have been made.
dgh: and who might Albert be? And who is arguing, btw? Hell man, I'm not even debating -- there is [B]NO debate, there's two opposing opinions mine published nearly 15 years ago.[/B]
Researchers need thick skins.
dgh: as does Albert, evidently -- have I ruffled his feathers too? ...
Hypotheses need testing against the known and potential evidence.
dgh: great concept, I like it. Perhaps Jeffrey and his secret technician can set us up with a 6 projector aerial image optical printer and he can get to work, under my post-production direction, of course
Researchers don't need abuse from the research community.
dgh: where have you been the past 20 years? Until the Jeffrey's of the world come up with something other than mere opinion, it will continue as a street fight.
And that is what I see here.
dgh: well, what I see, is a few newcomers (of unknown persuasion) claiming very specific expertise with no, zero public credentials -- desperate to hide behind a few, possibly, original creators of this forum. Simple as that
:monkeypiss: :thumbsdown:
dgh: wow, after 20 years of USENET's alt.conspiracy.jfk, not to mention my many years as photo-film moderator at Rich DellaRosa's JFK Assassination Reseach forum, Zapruder film forum presentation and participation, and horrors upon all horrors a published author. Living the large life under lone nut intimidation, slander, physicaL threats on myself and family members, what-a-way-to-go Dude.. It certainly gives me pause, and I'm the one on record, in print and digital video form saying, "I can't prove the Zapruder film is altered," lmfao. However, after all that, I do have to say, I've never seen a JFK assassination related Zapruder film related post referred to as "monkey piss" Thank you, Jan you've now brought new meaning to the JFK USENET-forum wars.
You want to give Jeffrey a pass, fine with me, Jan.... just don't expect me to buy any of Len's and Jeffrey's 50/50 series DVD's. Nor his disinfo. The company production values still STINKS.
Oliver Stone breathed new life into the Fletcher Prouty character-persona, it's time to move on.
