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˚.
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˚.
Looks like Ray goes to the Cakebread Correspondence School of Gut-Feel Analysis.Let's just say I wouldn't want a CT plumbing my doors.
Why? The area behind where Oswald is standing happens to be the most-true-to-vertical part of the 133A photo.How about producing some graphics of your own? Gut feelings and vague hunches aren't that measurable.
The Oswald tilt article by Farid:https://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/farid/downloads/publications/jdfsl15.pdf
What's holding up the guy to the right...
Craig Lamson's graphic showing a 7? tilt when the perspective is corrected. True-verticals were found by Craig on the house, the post behind the left shoulder and the vertical on the far-right of the shed.
