Z-317 shows no rearward blowout

[Dillon Rankine]

Some (notably folks like Fetzer) have claimed that the nonexistence of a rearward blowout in Z317 proves the film was doctored, noting what they think is a ?black blob? on the rear of the head. Professor Hany Farid, author of a highly cited paper on detecting image forgery conducted a study using computational modelling* and demonstrated that the darkness manifest on the rear of the head is consistent with natural shadows, revealing no obvious lesion.

Read the paper, or review Fig. 7 on p. 8. https://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/farid/downloads/publications/tr10a.pdf

*For those who autonomically respond with ?Garbage In: Garbage Out,? note that this is academic paper and as such all values applied to the model and how they were determined can be found on pp. 2-6.

[Ray Mitcham]

Some (notably folks like Fetzer) have claimed that the nonexistence of a rearward blowout in Z317 proves the film was doctored, noting what they think is a ?black blob? on the rear of the head. Professor Hany Farid, author of a highly cited paper on detecting image forgery conducted a study using computational modelling* and demonstrated that the darkness manifest on the rear of the head is consistent with natural shadows, revealing no obvious lesion.

Read the paper, or review Fig. 7 on p. 8. https://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/farid/downloads/publications/tr10a.pdf

*For those who autonomically respond with ?Garbage In: Garbage Out,? note that this is academic paper and as such all values applied to the model and how they were determined can be found on pp. 2-6.

Hary Farid did work for the gubermint. Enough said.

[Steve M. Galbraith]

Hary Farid did work for the gubermint. Enough said.

Of course. I'm a lone nutter and I went to "gubermint" schools.

We're everywhere.

If you did work for THE GOVERNMENT at any time then obviously you're in cahoots with THEM.

[John Mytton]

Hary Farid did work for the gubermint. Enough said.

Did you even look at his analysis, he didn't just say "Abracadabra" and come up with some biased paranoid conclusion(as above) but every step of his work is detailed and can be replicated by anybody to validate his results.

JohnM

[Ray Mitcham]

Did you even look at his analysis, he didn't just say "Abracadabra" and come up with some biased paranoid conclusion(as above) but every step of his work is detailed and can be replicated by anybody to validate his results.

JohnM

Why did he study just one photo?

And his report  is  based on poor conclusions.
"Hany Farid report3.3. Posture
?It has been argued that Oswald is leaning so far to the left as to be physically implausible. Our 3-D model allows for arbitrary views of Oswald?s body and measurements of his posture. Shown in Figure 7 are four renderings of Oswald?s body taken from the front, back, and left and right sides, each of which look qualitatively reasonable. The tilt of Oswald?s body was measured to be a physically plausible five degrees from vertical.?

Only problem is Farid was measuring the tilt on a photo which itself was out of tilt. On correcting the tilt, the angle that Oswald is standing is nearer to be a physically implausible 10˚ from vertical NOT 5˚.

[Jerry Freeman]

The frame in question---------------------------

[John Iacoletti]

Why did he study just one photo?

And his report  is  based on poor conclusions.
"Hany Farid report3.3. Posture
?It has been argued that Oswald is leaning so far to the left as to be physically implausible. Our 3-D model allows for arbitrary views of Oswald?s body and measurements of his posture. Shown in Figure 7 are four renderings of Oswald?s body taken from the front, back, and left and right sides, each of which look qualitatively reasonable. The tilt of Oswald?s body was measured to be a physically plausible five degrees from vertical.?

Only problem is Farid was measuring the tilt on a photo which itself was out of tilt. On correcting the tilt, the angle that Oswald is standing is nearer to be a physically implausible 10˚ from vertical NOT 5˚.

"Look qualitatively reasonable".

How scientific.

[Barry Pollard]

The frame in question---------------------------

"Where's Myers when we need him?"


The cashew shape that some think is evidence of the real rear blow-out.

I think that would be his ear on the right, rather than the damage seen in earlier frames??