Sean Murphy's research deserves more

[Albert Doyle]

Skilled experts would be able to confirm what I'm saying.



You won't get that because America is now a place where all technical experts have been free marketized, which means they are directly dependent on the political persuasion of the so called private interests that sponsor them.

[David Josephs]

Skilled experts would be able to confirm what I'm saying.



You won't get that because America is now a place where all technical experts have been free marketized, which means they are directly dependent on the political persuasion of the so called private interests that sponsor them.

David Healy IS a skilled expert Albert... you're backing the wrong horse here buddy.

Let's get real, okay?

An 8mm single frame is 4.8 mm × 3.5 mm or .189"x .138"

This image is just over 36 TIMES bigger at 173x127mm

The image of Prayerman, reduced down using the same ratios is
2/10th of a millimeter by 3/10th of a millimeter

for a TOTAL area of 3/5th of a millimeter




Add now the resolution from which the image was enlarged. Did Duncan do a drum scan of the negative or an enlargement there of or just use the same crappy quality images the rest of us have?

And yet, despite the reality of physics and light, it is claimed that buttons can be made out in the image on the right along with other details.

In the 3/5th of a millimeter square which this image resides, there is not enough captured information to claim anything that is claimed without it being a guess.




If we are going to speculate... I can speculate as well....

[Jim DiEugenio]

Why are we talking about Duncan's image?

I may be wrong, but I got the impression this was the work of John Mytton. (alias)

[Albert Doyle]

Duncan's flash graphic on page one of his "Prayer Man Is A Woman" shows the woman's sleeve pretty good.



Wish I could transport it here.

[Jim DiEugenio]

Can someone answer my question?

I would like to know if I am wrong.

[Mark A. O'Blazney]

Can someone answer my question?

I would like to know if I am wrong.

You are not wrong, Jim, you are asking the right questions.

[Michael Cross]

Skilled experts would be able to confirm what I'm saying.

You're debating with skilled experts. You just ignore them.

Healy is as good as they come.

There's no way for you to know it, but my degree is a BFA in Photography.

But by all means, ignore away.

[David Josephs]

Why are we talking about Duncan's image?

I may be wrong, but I got the impression this was the work of John Mytton. (alias)

the image I posted of the 2 PM images shows Duncan's "enhancements" on the right.

If that is John's work... it's simply adding size to the image which creates the square pixelation and crushing of light and dark.

I am going to post an image I "enhanced" to show that shadows and light with some contrast and Photoshop play can create images that are not there.

Like claiming the arrows point to "buttons" and other features can be made out if you squint and tilt your head to one side, this is kneeling boy, who is also NOT there and is NOT a woman.







If Carolyn and/or Mrs Reid are right and Oswald was on the first floor as late as 12:20-12:25... AND Lovelady's move from the west corner (as seen in Hughes) to the East.... that being Oswald is really not that far a stretch

I posted this earlier in the thread.... the image in the top middle is from Hughes showing Lovelady on the WEST side of the doorway while the bottom right shows both Lovelady and PM.





Here is most of the frame I mentioned. That person is not in the middle of the stairs yet when Altgens is taken, appears to be.

Maybe Lovelady wasn't as far over to the east as we think or as the graphic suggests?

When does he move from the Hughes position to the Darnell letter "F" (if that's Darnell - I get them mixed up)

[Albert Doyle]

David Healy IS a skilled expert Albert... you're backing the wrong horse here buddy.

Let's get real, okay?

David,


Healy is the guy who was over on the Education Forum apologizing to the infamous blowhard and liar Greg Parker and endorsing Parker's bullshit. Healy wrote that he apologized and retracted everything he said and acknowledged Parker's material.


You were saying?

[Michael Cross]

I am going to post an image I "enhanced" to show that shadows and light with some contrast and Photoshop play can create images that are not there.

Like claiming the arrows point to "buttons" and other features can be made out if you squint and tilt your head to one side, this is kneeling boy, who is also NOT there and is NOT a woman.

Thanks David, that illustrates exactly the point I tried to make earlier, all it lacks is a white outline. Albert has taken to ignoring me, which is I suppose, a blessing.