How much could you alter the film if Abraham Zapruder had shot in slow motion mode?

[David Josephs]

Thanks Chris - I'll see what I can do with it.

I did some quick removal work and it's amazing really.

The more I do the more it looks like the Zfilm as the limo moves down Elm you can see the mini jumps as Zap moves the camera around... same as what I just did.

Gotta run now but will post the work and analysis soon

DJ

Thanks again Chris

David,

The zfilm shot at 48fps and viewed at 15fps would have looked something like this.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BwrExtV...sp=sharing

Sorry I didn't make it to the films end, but, you get the idea.

Couldn't fully support a 48fps scenario until I figured out the math between CE884's and applied it to the extant zfilm. Just the way I approached it.

Kudos to you and Doug Horne for sticking with it.

chris

That's fascinating. Costella found something odd with the sign when he did his pincushion correction, and in that version - to me - the sign jumps around. Also for some reason it seems like the "blob" after the head shot looks more like a massive wound - again to me - it looks like the entire front right side of his head is gone. Anyone else see that? Does it look dramatically different to anyone else or are these old eyes f'ing with me?

Thanks Chris - the 15fps play speed makes the movie look slower than would normally be if played at 18fps - correct?

The other thing is that the final ratio of total starting frames to total ending frames needs to be 18.3

48fps / 18.3 fps = 2.623
486 frames x 2.623 = 1275 total frames if it was all filmed at 48fps.

In your motorcycle example, take the total frames and divide by 2.623 to get the ending # of frames required.

136 frames / 2.623 = 52 frames which means we need to cut 84 frames and show at 18fps on a projector.

Just look how jumpy this is even though it is stabilized. the jerkiness of the forward motion of the limo is exactly what we see when removing frames from the motorcycle scene
When the limo slows just before 313 it also smooth and then just after, it looks like a number of frames are gone - there is a jump in the film and the impossibly fast movements of Greer and Kellerman.




I removed the 2nd and 3rd frame from each 3 frame pair thru the turn then it goes back to no frames missing at 48fps shown at 18fps.

[Chris Bennett]

Thank you!

Dumb question. Why do people keep truncating and removing frames from this and other films? There must be a 100 versions of it by now.

[David Josephs]

That's fascinating. Costella found something odd with the sign when he did his pincushion correction, and in that version - to me - the sign jumps around. Also for some reason it seems like the "blob" after the head shot looks more like a massive wound - again to me - it looks like the entire front right side of his head is gone. Anyone else see that? Does it look dramatically different to anyone else or are these old eyes f'ing with me?

Not your eyes Michael - just the altered Zfilm and xrays. From this xray it appears impossible that a trail of fragments could originate at the back and move forward since there is no entrance point in the back where the trail ends/begins.

Dr. Mantik proves over and over these xrays are altered copies (most likely done by Ebersole)






This next composite shows where that trail of particles actually was and what those who were closest to JFK remember about his wounds.

The perfectly round black mark on the image at the bottom right is not naturally occurring and appears to cover the spot where a bullet would have entered.





Now to the after effects of alteration/paint-over. At the top left of the collage we see the spot in Z314 where that deep black area is opposite the sun - yet Jackie's face is also in that same shadow as are parts of everyone in the limo - yet no one retains a deep black mark which appears to over extend itself beyond the borders of JFK's head.

No other black in that image can be crushed out to do the same. Jackie's hair does not crush, the coats of JC, Greer and Kellerman do not over extend their bounds

There is simply no explanation for the straightness of the "shadow" across the top of JFK's head. This is z323 where to those who have seen the stereoscopic images claim that black thing just hovers over the images, not looking like part of the film... Hopefully the Hollywood 7 will someday share the best frames at the highest resolution to illustrate this alteration accomplish via plate-painting or directly onto the film. Given the "hovering" comments associated with this frame a painted plated cover-up and refilm was required.

DJ

[Chris Davidson]

Thanks Chris - the 15fps play speed makes the movie look slower than would normally be if played at 18fps - correct?
Yes, that is correct.

The other thing is that the final ratio of total starting frames to total ending frames needs to be 18.3
48/18.3 conversion ratio is provable in a particular spot on CE884.

48fps / 18.3 fps = 2.623
486 frames x 2.623 = 1275 total frames if it was all filmed at 48fps.

In your motorcycle example, take the total frames and divide by 2.623 to get the ending # of frames required.

136 frames / 2.623 = 52 frames which means we need to cut 84 frames and show at 18fps on a projector.

Just look how jumpy this is even though it is stabilized. the jerkiness of the forward motion of the limo is exactly what we see when removing frames from the motorcycle scene
When the limo slows just before 313 it also smooth and then just after, it looks like a number of frames are gone - there is a jump in the film and the impossibly fast movements of Greer and Kellerman.
Probably what occurs when you break sequence and add multiple 48fps frames back to the extant film.

I removed the 2nd and 3rd frame from each 3 frame pair thru the turn then it goes back to no frames missing at 48fps shown at 18fps.roof
Your proof of concept is well-established. Don't spend too much time recreating multiple sequences, we understand the concept. imo

chris

P.S. Still pondering how to introduce the supporting equation for 48fps/18.3fps conversion.

1

[David Josephs]

Thanks Chris - the 15fps play speed makes the movie look slower than would normally be if played at 18fps - correct?
Yes, that is correct.

The other thing is that the final ratio of total starting frames to total ending frames needs to be 18.3
48/18.3 conversion ratio is provable in a particular spot on CE884.

48fps / 18.3 fps = 2.623
486 frames x 2.623 = 1275 total frames if it was all filmed at 48fps.

In your motorcycle example, take the total frames and divide by 2.623 to get the ending # of frames required.

136 frames / 2.623 = 52 frames which means we need to cut 84 frames and show at 18fps on a projector.

Just look how jumpy this is even though it is stabilized. the jerkiness of the forward motion of the limo is exactly what we see when removing frames from the motorcycle scene
When the limo slows just before 313 it also smooth and then just after, it looks like a number of frames are gone - there is a jump in the film and the impossibly fast movements of Greer and Kellerman.
Probably what occurs when you break sequence and add multiple 48fps frames back to the extant film.

I removed the 2nd and 3rd frame from each 3 frame pair thru the turn then it goes back to no frames missing at 48fps shown at 18fps.roof
Your proof of concept is well-established. Don't spend too much time recreating multiple sequences, we understand the concept. imo

chris

P.S. Still pondering how to introduce the supporting equation for 48fps/18.3fps conversion.

1

I did those calcs as well Chris. Based on the size of a frame and the 25 feet of film there are only so many frames available in total on 25 feet of film.

You know immediately that taking 48fps to 16fps is simply what you did - keep 1 remove 2

As mentioned, if the entire 486 net frames was filmed at 48fps we'd have 1275 total frames to start with YET we still have not added back what is between 132 and 133.

With a large chunk of frames removed I am of the opinion that 48fps does not begin until 133. How many frames where there originally between 132 and 133 is hard to tell yet
it is obviously more than a few seconds of film - which in turn adds to the total length of film taken.

It may only have started at z158 and the reason for the break in the film. IDK. and 48fps may have ended well before the extant 486. We don't know.
There is also the stop which is removed adding even more frames.

I get the feeling that alteration was done with an awareness of this 3:1 ratio but they simply could not remove any more of the film and had to go with an 18.3 fps figure despite it not being one of the speed setting on that camera.

Everything appears to have been worked out in reverse from 313 - irrespective of the physical realities of the place or what the evidence shows. WCD298 is the FBI's explanation of the events. Z313 represents the 2nd shot not the third.

"Wehave not yet examined the assassination scene to determine
whetherthe assassin in fact could have shot the President prior to
frame190. We could locate the position on theground which
correspondsto this frame and it would then be our intent to establish
byphotography that the assassin would have fired the first shot at the
Presidentprior to this point. Our intention isnot to establish the
pointwith complete accuracy, but merely to substantiate the
hypothesiswhich underlies the conclusions that Oswald was the sole
assassin."

<snip>
"Ishould add that the facts which we now have in our
possession,submitted to us in separate reports from the FBI and
SecretService, are totally incorrect and, if left uncorrected, will
presenta completely misleading picture."

It may well be that this project should be undertaken by the
FBI and Secret Service with our assistance instead of being done as a
staff project. The important thing is that the project be undertaken
expeditiously."

- Redlich to Rankin April 27, 1964

[Chris Davidson]

Thanks Chris - the 15fps play speed makes the movie look slower than would normally be if played at 18fps - correct?
Yes, that is correct.

The other thing is that the final ratio of total starting frames to total ending frames needs to be 18.3
48/18.3 conversion ratio is provable in a particular spot on CE884.

48fps / 18.3 fps = 2.623
486 frames x 2.623 = 1275 total frames if it was all filmed at 48fps.

In your motorcycle example, take the total frames and divide by 2.623 to get the ending # of frames required.

136 frames / 2.623 = 52 frames which means we need to cut 84 frames and show at 18fps on a projector.

Just look how jumpy this is even though it is stabilized. the jerkiness of the forward motion of the limo is exactly what we see when removing frames from the motorcycle scene
When the limo slows just before 313 it also smooth and then just after, it looks like a number of frames are gone - there is a jump in the film and the impossibly fast movements of Greer and Kellerman.
Probably what occurs when you break sequence and add multiple 48fps frames back to the extant film.

I removed the 2nd and 3rd frame from each 3 frame pair thru the turn then it goes back to no frames missing at 48fps shown at 18fps.roof
Your proof of concept is well-established. Don't spend too much time recreating multiple sequences, we understand the concept. imo

chris

P.S. Still pondering how to introduce the supporting equation for 48fps/18.3fps conversion.

1[/QUOTE]

I did those calcs as well Chris. Based on the size of a frame and the 25 feet of film there are only so many frames available in total on 25 feet of film.
David, My calcs/equation have nothing to do with the length of film. But, at 80frames per ft, 25ft gets you 2000 frames

You know immediately that taking 48fps to 16fps is simply what you did - keep 1 remove 2
The only reason for using this sequence was to show the smoothest motion in regards to a removal ratio of something close to 2.62/1.
1/2.62 =.381 1/3 =.333 or 1/3 2/6 3/9 4/12 etc….

As mentioned, if the entire 486 net frames was filmed at 48fps we'd have 1275 total frames to start with YET we still have not added back what is between 132 and 133.
Don't knock your brain out with this.

With a large chunk of frames removed I am of the opinion that 48fps does not begin until 133. How many frames where there originally between 132 and 133 is hard to tell yet
it is obviously more than a few seconds of film - which in turn adds to the total length of film taken. This either.

It may only have started at z158 and the reason for the break in the film. IDK. Or near there. and 48fps may have ended well before the extant 486. We don't know. Agreed.
There is also the stop which is removed adding even more frames. I don't disagree, but, this might be impossible to actually prove, in terms of the film itself.

I get the feeling that alteration was done with an awareness of this 3:1 ratio but they simply could not remove any more of the film and had to go with an 18.3 fps figure despite it not being one of the speed setting on that camera. I'm still fairly sure that 18.3 was used in accordance with the vertical/horizontal slope formula for Elm St.

Everything appears to have been worked out in reverse from 313. I agree. - irrespective of the physical realities of the place or what the evidence shows. WCD298 is the FBI's explanation of the events. They had to accommodate the limo length and distance's within Z313 represents the 2nd shot not the third. Agree

Remember, they have to have the film jive with a 6th floor shooter, in terms of vertical as well as horizontal distances.

chris

[/QUOTE]

[Chris Davidson]

Hi guys,

I will not be cross-posting my final topic here. It will be at the Education Forum. Please feel free to visit, if interested.

best,
chris

[Chris Davidson]

Enjoy,

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index....opic=22692

Second post.

chris