Apr 10, 2022Liked by William Whitten -- Autodidact,
I'm sure this surfeit of words is convincing evidence. It was more than I could bear to swim through it. 58 years have passed since the CIA took over the United States government and now they have been involved in a shooting war in Ukraine since they overthrew the democratically-elected government in 2014. Nothing ever changes.
Will the NWO destroy Russia or will China come to Putin's aid and end the NWO?
The only thing I'm curious about today (4/10/2022) is whether Bill Gates is currently murdering the citizens of Shanghai. We will never learn the truth about anything and there's no point in searching for it.
I was a special effects artist and I am familiar with traveling mattes and in camera effects Blue screens, etc. I have read the Zavada Report and his commentary to the Alterationists.
One thing needs to be made clear at the beginning; it is impossible to make an undetectable altered film of the Zapruder film -- a Kodachrome II daylight film, to another Kodachrome II daylight film. This is because whatever method used would entail artificial light This would change the hue of the color in the film causing the greens to turn orange and the sky to become green.
That is simply the way the emulsion of Kodachrome ii film works. It is the chemical reaction to light.
Another problem is registration. An 8mm film has one row of perforations to go through a projector. this is not satisfactory for keeping the bias of the film steady.
Now Healy makes the assertion that there was one audience that the Zapruder film was meant for; "The Warren Commission." This would imply that Abraham Zapruder was an agent on duty to film the assassination. There is zero evidence for such a specious allegation.
Suffice it to say, I disagree with Healy and all of those who believe the film was altered. It was impossible in 1963, and it remains impossible today simply because of the nature of the film's chemical emulsion reaction to sunlight verses artificial light. There are many other issues that Rolland Zavada addressed as to the providence of the Z-film that need to be addressed as well.
“When examining the Zapruder film frame by frame, it is readily apparent the President Kennedy’s head moves forward slightly for one frame before his head and shoulders move backward in response to the gunshot wound to the head. German wound ballistic researcher Bernd Karger, states initial transfer of energy causes the target to move minutely into the force and against the line of fire, prior to target movement with the force of the moving bullet. Karger found greater the transferred energy, the more pronounced the forward movement (Karger, 2008). Wound ballistic researcher Robin Coupland used high-speed photography to confirm and document the forward movement into the line of fire referenced by Karger (Coupland, 2011). Researchers Karger and Coupland noted the force in a moving bullet is energy of motion, or kinetic energy. Upon impact, the bullet pushes against the head, and initially, as the weight of the head is greater than the weight of the bullet, the head moves against the line of fire. As the projectile slows, more kinetic energy transfers to the target. A overcoming the weight of the head with a sufficient transfer of energy causes the target to move with the continued direction of force of the moving bullet. Application of contemporary wound ballistics research to the movement observed in the Zapruder film indicates a minute forward motion followed by more pronounced rearward movement—consistent with a single shot from the front.
These are two other films of the JKF assassination. In none of these films did the limousine come to a complete stop. It slowed until Clint Hill reached it and climbed aboard. Do not try to tell me that they altered all of these films.
Anyone who understands cinematography, as well as the qualities of Kodachrome II daylight film, understands that it is impossible to make a undetectable copy of Kodachrome II film from an original copy of Kodachrome II film, BECAUSE: Any copy would necessarily be made using artificial light, carbon arch, or Tungsten projection. This would result with the telltale signs of orange shift in the final product; the grass would be orangish and dead looking, the sky would appear greenish..
The model 414 Director Series camera would be an interesting, although not exceptional, camera from the early 1960s. What makes it perhaps the most examined movie camera model ever, however, is that the most revealing film of the John F. Kennedy assassination on November 22, 1963 was taken with a Bell & Howell Model 414PD *(roll film)* Director Series camera by a Dallas dress manufacturer Abraham Zapruder. The 28 seconds of film includes the precise moment when the fatal bullet struck the president. Several sites discuss the camera including Abraham Zapruder 8MM JFK Assassination Camera, 1963, Abraham Zapruder Camera (includes owners manual), Roland J. Zavada, Dissecting the Zapruder Bell & Howell 8mm Movie Camera, The Bell & Howell Model 414PD 8mm Movie Camera Image Capture Characteristics.
Prior to the implementation of the taking on August 1, 1998, the Review Board—at my recommendation—commissioned a limited authenticity study of the Zapruder film (based primarily on examination of its edge print, the markings and script imposed on the film at the factory where it was produced, and at the developing plant after it was exposed). The ARRB staff first approached the Eastman Kodak Co. for film assistance and advice in 1996, and asked in 1997 if Kodak would perform the Zapruder film study pro bono; Kodak agreed, and hired a noted retired Kodak film chemist, Mr. Roland Zavada, as a paid consultant to perform the one-man study. Mr. Zavada studied the film’s edge print; perceived anomalies in the bleed-over imagery in the intersprocket area of the film; its forensic chain of custody on the day of JFK’s assassination; and educated himself on the basic characteristics of Zapruder’s Bell and Howell movie camera by purchasing several models and experimenting with them—but at our request, he did not study the film’s image content. Zavada’s report was signed out on September 25, 1998, and arrived in Washington, D.C. on September 28th, two days before the ARRB shut down its operations on September 30th.
Let me repeat a pertinent part of the above: "but at our request, he did not study the film’s image content."
Chicken Little Syndrome & Adrian Messenger say,, "Look at the President's limousine before it passes behind the freeway sign. Look at the side of the limousine. We should see the reflections of the crowd of people gathered to watch the presidential motorcade whose backs are turned towards the camera. Instead, we see what appears to be traffic reflected."
Nonsense, what we see in the reflection on the side of the barely distinguishable as it is the shadow side of the car, one thing that is clearly distinguishable is the reflection of the motorcycle's whit finder that is traveling to the right side of the Limo. And just as it comes from behind the sign, we see the sign clearly reflected on the side of the limousine. Chicken Little's visual acuity is clearly substandard. The special effect called "Front Projection" is an "in-camera technique" -- meaning it is not something one could do to an existing film that is being altered. Which shows Chicken Little has no understanding of special effects whatsoever.
It is literally IMPOSIBLE to make an undetectable altered copy of a Kodachrome II daylight film, using Kodachrome II daylight film as the copy film. This is because any technique of projecting the film onto Kodachrome II daylight necessarily involves the use of artificial light, in the case of a movie projector tungsten light is the 1963 standard. Halogen light is much to hot for celluloid film. At any rate any type of artificial light used to shoot Kodachrome II daylight film would cause the orangish tone in the greens and a green tone in the blue sky. it is simple film chemistry. Attempting the use of a blue filter will only result in more anomalous color problems.
Contact printing is out, because contact film is not Kodachrome II daylight film.
Zapruder had the film processed that day November 22, and received the camera original and three copies. There is no possible way that ANYBODY could have seen the original 16mm wide uncut film after that time. This whole alteration theory is nonsense. My opinion is that Mr. Brugioni was teetering into senility at this point and that Douglas Horne was manipulating him. What Horne's agenda was for this is hard to conceive of. But I will hazard a guess that James Fetzer offered him a large sum of money to go along with this deception
>>”You cannot properly interpret and understand the events of Nov 1963 by selectively quoting evidence. END” ~Douglas Horne
This is a very interesting point Mr Horne has brought up. I say that because I have read much of Mr Horne’s work, on the Internet, and as quoted by others.
The reason I find this statement interesting is because I see Mr Horne doing exactly that himself; ‘selectively quoting evidence’.
As a retired special effects artist myself, I also must say that in my reading of Mr Horne, he appears to have a very small grasp of the techniques of special effects cinematography.
An example follows:
>>“The implication here is that if the true exit wound on President Kennedy’s head can be obscured in the Zapruder film through use of aerial imaging (i.e., self-matting animation, applied to each frame’s image via an animation stand married to an optical printer) — as revealed by the u201C6Ku201D scans of the 35 mm dupe negative — then the same technique could be used to add a desired exit wound, one consistent with the cover story of a lone shooter firing from behind.”~Horne
This very paragraph proves that Horne has no grasp of special effects cinematography: “self-matting animation, applied to each frame’s image via an animation stand married to an optical printer.” There is no such thing as “self matting” using an animation stand. An animation stand is what is used to create mattes; an entirely different and lengthily process: One involving several previous processes to separate elements from each and every frame before the mattes can be created.
Horne quotes Zavada mentioning Raymond Fielding’s book on special effects cinematography – but it is quite obvious that Horne has not read the book himself. I have. I still own my original hard bound volume.
An Accurate Representation of The Kennedy Assassination
The JFK assassination research community now faces a critical dilemma. That being in that so much effort has been put to disproving the Autopsy Photographs and X-rays. The dilemma the community faces is that all the while it was thought that the results of such faking proved a rear shot, or attempted to. However using the most modern scientific forensic knowledge, it has been proven beyond reasonable doubt that those very documents X-rays and photos in fact prove a single shot from the front killed Kennedy.
Let us begin first of all with cui bono? Who would have the most to gain from disputing the authenticity of the Zapruder Film?
The answer is obvious, the perpetrators of the assassination, because the film shows the timing of the shots that hit Kennedy and Connolly, and modern ballistics can prove the trajectory of the shots. Therefore it is in the perpetrator’s self-interests to cast as much doubt as possible on the most critical visual evidence of the assassination.
Essentially my critique is based on Horne’s acceptance of CIA agent Brugioni’s claims that is the crux of my counterargument. And I suspect, the CIA’s continuing cover-up is this trashing of the Zapruder film as a fake is the coup de grâce in erasing the most vital visual evidence in the case of the Kennedy assassination.
. . .
“The goal to create a “Kodachrome original” provides further insurmountable challenges..”~Roland Zavada
I would like to address the issues you raise above.
There is a 4th possibility, and this is the one I think is correct:
“When examining the Zapruder film frame by frame, it is readily apparent the President Kennedy’s head moves forward slightly for one frame before his head and shoulders move backward in response to the gunshot wound to the head. German wound ballistic researcher Bernd Karger, states initial transfer of energy causes the target to move minutely into the force and against the line of fire, prior to target movement with the force of the moving bullet. Karger found greater the transferred energy, the more pronounced the forward movement (Karger, 2008). Wound ballistic researcher Robin Coupland used high-speed photography to confirm and document the forward movement into the line of fire referenced by Karger (Coupland, 2011). Researchers Karger and Coupland noted the force in a moving bullet is energy of motion, or kinetic energy. Upon impact, the bullet pushes against the head, and initially, as the weight of the head is greater than the weight of the bullet, the head moves against the line of fire. As the projectile slows, more kinetic energy transfers to the target. A overcoming the weight of the head with a sufficient transfer of energy causes the target to move with the continued direction of force of the moving bullet. Application of contemporary wound ballistics research to the movement observed in the Zapruder film indicates a minute forward motion followed by more pronounced rearward movement—consistent with a single shot from the front.”
I'm sure this surfeit of words is convincing evidence. It was more than I could bear to swim through it. 58 years have passed since the CIA took over the United States government and now they have been involved in a shooting war in Ukraine since they overthrew the democratically-elected government in 2014. Nothing ever changes.
Will the NWO destroy Russia or will China come to Putin's aid and end the NWO?
The only thing I'm curious about today (4/10/2022) is whether Bill Gates is currently murdering the citizens of Shanghai. We will never learn the truth about anything and there's no point in searching for it.
I was a special effects artist and I am familiar with traveling mattes and in camera effects Blue screens, etc. I have read the Zavada Report and his commentary to the Alterationists.
One thing needs to be made clear at the beginning; it is impossible to make an undetectable altered film of the Zapruder film -- a Kodachrome II daylight film, to another Kodachrome II daylight film. This is because whatever method used would entail artificial light This would change the hue of the color in the film causing the greens to turn orange and the sky to become green.
That is simply the way the emulsion of Kodachrome ii film works. It is the chemical reaction to light.
Another problem is registration. An 8mm film has one row of perforations to go through a projector. this is not satisfactory for keeping the bias of the film steady.
Now Healy makes the assertion that there was one audience that the Zapruder film was meant for; "The Warren Commission." This would imply that Abraham Zapruder was an agent on duty to film the assassination. There is zero evidence for such a specious allegation.
Suffice it to say, I disagree with Healy and all of those who believe the film was altered. It was impossible in 1963, and it remains impossible today simply because of the nature of the film's chemical emulsion reaction to sunlight verses artificial light. There are many other issues that Rolland Zavada addressed as to the providence of the Z-film that need to be addressed as well.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Acn_caIFAs&lc=UgzhM1yps-4iDc2fdwp4AaABAg.9bC2V2nmkCv9cHEVdr_3-T
\\][//
“When examining the Zapruder film frame by frame, it is readily apparent the President Kennedy’s head moves forward slightly for one frame before his head and shoulders move backward in response to the gunshot wound to the head. German wound ballistic researcher Bernd Karger, states initial transfer of energy causes the target to move minutely into the force and against the line of fire, prior to target movement with the force of the moving bullet. Karger found greater the transferred energy, the more pronounced the forward movement (Karger, 2008). Wound ballistic researcher Robin Coupland used high-speed photography to confirm and document the forward movement into the line of fire referenced by Karger (Coupland, 2011). Researchers Karger and Coupland noted the force in a moving bullet is energy of motion, or kinetic energy. Upon impact, the bullet pushes against the head, and initially, as the weight of the head is greater than the weight of the bullet, the head moves against the line of fire. As the projectile slows, more kinetic energy transfers to the target. A overcoming the weight of the head with a sufficient transfer of energy causes the target to move with the continued direction of force of the moving bullet. Application of contemporary wound ballistics research to the movement observed in the Zapruder film indicates a minute forward motion followed by more pronounced rearward movement—consistent with a single shot from the front.
\\][//
These are two other films of the JKF assassination. In none of these films did the limousine come to a complete stop. It slowed until Clint Hill reached it and climbed aboard. Do not try to tell me that they altered all of these films.
https://youtu.be/KqSEDtDk8gA?t=6 – Muchmore film
https://youtu.be/GU4mAVCprAU?t=1 – Nix film
\\][//
Oral history interview with Dino Brugioni
https://collections.ushmm.org/search/catalog/irn90099
\\][//
Anyone who understands cinematography, as well as the qualities of Kodachrome II daylight film, understands that it is impossible to make a undetectable copy of Kodachrome II film from an original copy of Kodachrome II film, BECAUSE: Any copy would necessarily be made using artificial light, carbon arch, or Tungsten projection. This would result with the telltale signs of orange shift in the final product; the grass would be orangish and dead looking, the sky would appear greenish..
\\][//
Bell & Howell Zoomatic 8mm "Director's Series"
The model 414 Director Series camera would be an interesting, although not exceptional, camera from the early 1960s. What makes it perhaps the most examined movie camera model ever, however, is that the most revealing film of the John F. Kennedy assassination on November 22, 1963 was taken with a Bell & Howell Model 414PD *(roll film)* Director Series camera by a Dallas dress manufacturer Abraham Zapruder. The 28 seconds of film includes the precise moment when the fatal bullet struck the president. Several sites discuss the camera including Abraham Zapruder 8MM JFK Assassination Camera, 1963, Abraham Zapruder Camera (includes owners manual), Roland J. Zavada, Dissecting the Zapruder Bell & Howell 8mm Movie Camera, The Bell & Howell Model 414PD 8mm Movie Camera Image Capture Characteristics.
https://www.collectorsweekly.com/stories/49294-bell-and-howell-zoomatic-8mm-directors-s
\\][//
https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/41p2IrCWnIL._AC_.jpg
October 2, 1962 issue of LIFE Magazine.
\\][//
Prior to the implementation of the taking on August 1, 1998, the Review Board—at my recommendation—commissioned a limited authenticity study of the Zapruder film (based primarily on examination of its edge print, the markings and script imposed on the film at the factory where it was produced, and at the developing plant after it was exposed). The ARRB staff first approached the Eastman Kodak Co. for film assistance and advice in 1996, and asked in 1997 if Kodak would perform the Zapruder film study pro bono; Kodak agreed, and hired a noted retired Kodak film chemist, Mr. Roland Zavada, as a paid consultant to perform the one-man study. Mr. Zavada studied the film’s edge print; perceived anomalies in the bleed-over imagery in the intersprocket area of the film; its forensic chain of custody on the day of JFK’s assassination; and educated himself on the basic characteristics of Zapruder’s Bell and Howell movie camera by purchasing several models and experimenting with them—but at our request, he did not study the film’s image content. Zavada’s report was signed out on September 25, 1998, and arrived in Washington, D.C. on September 28th, two days before the ARRB shut down its operations on September 30th.
Let me repeat a pertinent part of the above: "but at our request, he did not study the film’s image content."
Why would Horne make that request?
http://assassinationofjfk.net/the-two-npic-zapruder-film-events-signposts-pointing-to-the-films-alteration/
\\][//
Techniques of Special Effects of Cinematography (Library of Communication Techniques) 4th Edition
by Raymond Fielding
\\][//
Chicken Little Syndrome & Adrian Messenger say,, "Look at the President's limousine before it passes behind the freeway sign. Look at the side of the limousine. We should see the reflections of the crowd of people gathered to watch the presidential motorcade whose backs are turned towards the camera. Instead, we see what appears to be traffic reflected."
Nonsense, what we see in the reflection on the side of the barely distinguishable as it is the shadow side of the car, one thing that is clearly distinguishable is the reflection of the motorcycle's whit finder that is traveling to the right side of the Limo. And just as it comes from behind the sign, we see the sign clearly reflected on the side of the limousine. Chicken Little's visual acuity is clearly substandard. The special effect called "Front Projection" is an "in-camera technique" -- meaning it is not something one could do to an existing film that is being altered. Which shows Chicken Little has no understanding of special effects whatsoever.
It is literally IMPOSIBLE to make an undetectable altered copy of a Kodachrome II daylight film, using Kodachrome II daylight film as the copy film. This is because any technique of projecting the film onto Kodachrome II daylight necessarily involves the use of artificial light, in the case of a movie projector tungsten light is the 1963 standard. Halogen light is much to hot for celluloid film. At any rate any type of artificial light used to shoot Kodachrome II daylight film would cause the orangish tone in the greens and a green tone in the blue sky. it is simple film chemistry. Attempting the use of a blue filter will only result in more anomalous color problems.
Contact printing is out, because contact film is not Kodachrome II daylight film.
These are the very simple facts of the matter.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YSHbnlU8wwQ&lc=Ugxx8I28fzSR0MWcpPp4AaABAg.9a6bLu7pFZR9aER199VlQJ
\\][//
Zapruder had the film processed that day November 22, and received the camera original and three copies. There is no possible way that ANYBODY could have seen the original 16mm wide uncut film after that time. This whole alteration theory is nonsense. My opinion is that Mr. Brugioni was teetering into senility at this point and that Douglas Horne was manipulating him. What Horne's agenda was for this is hard to conceive of. But I will hazard a guess that James Fetzer offered him a large sum of money to go along with this deception
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J_QIuu6hsAc&lc=UgycW7t1zuGCXf4sc8B4AaABAg.9KE1_aS24VM9aA77ncErHM
\\][//
https://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/
Costella Combined Edit Frames (updated 2006)
Click on a frame number below to view the corresponding frame of the film,
or click here to download all 486 frames in a single ZIP file (119 MB).
WILLY WHITTEN
DECEMBER 17, 2014 AT 3:04 PM
>>”You cannot properly interpret and understand the events of Nov 1963 by selectively quoting evidence. END” ~Douglas Horne
This is a very interesting point Mr Horne has brought up. I say that because I have read much of Mr Horne’s work, on the Internet, and as quoted by others.
The reason I find this statement interesting is because I see Mr Horne doing exactly that himself; ‘selectively quoting evidence’.
As a retired special effects artist myself, I also must say that in my reading of Mr Horne, he appears to have a very small grasp of the techniques of special effects cinematography.
An example follows:
>>“The implication here is that if the true exit wound on President Kennedy’s head can be obscured in the Zapruder film through use of aerial imaging (i.e., self-matting animation, applied to each frame’s image via an animation stand married to an optical printer) — as revealed by the u201C6Ku201D scans of the 35 mm dupe negative — then the same technique could be used to add a desired exit wound, one consistent with the cover story of a lone shooter firing from behind.”~Horne
This very paragraph proves that Horne has no grasp of special effects cinematography: “self-matting animation, applied to each frame’s image via an animation stand married to an optical printer.” There is no such thing as “self matting” using an animation stand. An animation stand is what is used to create mattes; an entirely different and lengthily process: One involving several previous processes to separate elements from each and every frame before the mattes can be created.
Horne quotes Zavada mentioning Raymond Fielding’s book on special effects cinematography – but it is quite obvious that Horne has not read the book himself. I have. I still own my original hard bound volume.
~Willy Whitten
\\][//
https://jfkfacts.org/where-did-the-most-famous-jfk-assassination-film-come-from/#comment-653291
WILLY WHITTEN
DECEMBER 18, 2014 AT 7:44 AM
THE ZAPRUDER FILM:
An Accurate Representation of The Kennedy Assassination
The JFK assassination research community now faces a critical dilemma. That being in that so much effort has been put to disproving the Autopsy Photographs and X-rays. The dilemma the community faces is that all the while it was thought that the results of such faking proved a rear shot, or attempted to. However using the most modern scientific forensic knowledge, it has been proven beyond reasonable doubt that those very documents X-rays and photos in fact prove a single shot from the front killed Kennedy.
Let us begin first of all with cui bono? Who would have the most to gain from disputing the authenticity of the Zapruder Film?
The answer is obvious, the perpetrators of the assassination, because the film shows the timing of the shots that hit Kennedy and Connolly, and modern ballistics can prove the trajectory of the shots. Therefore it is in the perpetrator’s self-interests to cast as much doubt as possible on the most critical visual evidence of the assassination.
Essentially my critique is based on Horne’s acceptance of CIA agent Brugioni’s claims that is the crux of my counterargument. And I suspect, the CIA’s continuing cover-up is this trashing of the Zapruder film as a fake is the coup de grâce in erasing the most vital visual evidence in the case of the Kennedy assassination.
. . .
“The goal to create a “Kodachrome original” provides further insurmountable challenges..”~Roland Zavada
See: https://hybridrogue1.wordpress.com/2014/12/12/the-zapruder-film/
~Willy Whitten, Special Effects Artist (Retired)
https://jfkfacts.org/where-did-the-most-famous-jfk-assassination-film-come-from/#comment-653979
\\][//
WILLY WHITTEN
DECEMBER 21, 2014 AT 4:54 PM
Dear Mr. Herrera,
Thank you for your kind remarks.
I would like to address the issues you raise above.
There is a 4th possibility, and this is the one I think is correct:
“When examining the Zapruder film frame by frame, it is readily apparent the President Kennedy’s head moves forward slightly for one frame before his head and shoulders move backward in response to the gunshot wound to the head. German wound ballistic researcher Bernd Karger, states initial transfer of energy causes the target to move minutely into the force and against the line of fire, prior to target movement with the force of the moving bullet. Karger found greater the transferred energy, the more pronounced the forward movement (Karger, 2008). Wound ballistic researcher Robin Coupland used high-speed photography to confirm and document the forward movement into the line of fire referenced by Karger (Coupland, 2011). Researchers Karger and Coupland noted the force in a moving bullet is energy of motion, or kinetic energy. Upon impact, the bullet pushes against the head, and initially, as the weight of the head is greater than the weight of the bullet, the head moves against the line of fire. As the projectile slows, more kinetic energy transfers to the target. A overcoming the weight of the head with a sufficient transfer of energy causes the target to move with the continued direction of force of the moving bullet. Application of contemporary wound ballistics research to the movement observed in the Zapruder film indicates a minute forward motion followed by more pronounced rearward movement—consistent with a single shot from the front.”
~Sherry Fiester CSI
https://jfkfacts.org/where-did-the-most-famous-jfk-assassination-film-come-from/#comment-657251
. . . .
\\][//