A Candidate For Prayer Person?

[Chris Davidson]

And if you find someone other than Mr Lovelady in those Wiegman frames with a second head @ higher elevation across multiple frames, let me know!

The two heads occur in camera shaken/motion blur frames.
Show a frame consisting of two heads without those characteristics.
Attach it (side x side) with a nice clear frame so others can use the brick detail from the west wall for comparison purposes.
Is it the translucent antenna which is causing the higher double/triple heads?

[John Mytton]

Thanks for these two photos which led me to the solution to Ford's double head problem, there is indeed two heads which are motion blur but this motion blur seems to be independent of everybody else, so what's happening?
Since we know in the next second or two Lovelady will appear to be dramatically lower, so obviously in the frames animated above, what we are looking at are the initial movements of Lovelady bending forward and hence he is moving independently of everyone else and this head motion is only accentuated by Wiegman's erratic camera panning.



For example, in the following Zapruder frame we see Clint Hill as clear but the bike helmet has a "double head" and the reason is what's moving relative to Zapruder's camera. Zapruder is panning at about the same speed as Hill is running hence his stable image whereas the bike is changing speed and causing independent "double head", all the objects in the red boxes show varying amounts of motion blur because everything is moving at a different speed or not at all, relative to what was captured by Zapruder's camera.







JohnM

[Alan Ford]

The two heads occur in camera shaken/motion blur frames.
Show a frame consisting of two heads without those characteristics.
Attach it (side x side) with a nice clear frame so others can use the brick detail from the west wall for comparison purposes.

I can only take it from this, Mr Davidson, that you can't find this phenomenon attaching itself to anyone else in those Wiegman frames. Noted!

Now! I have already posted frames where the brickwork is somewhat in focus and the second head in evidence------------------and have surmised that whoever added shadow may (for the Lovelady@UpperElevation frames) have restricted themselves to shadowing out Mr Oswald's head only in the sharpest frames, where its clarity would have caused trouble.

Remember the context here------------there is an impossible shadow down Mr Lovelady's side. It is obscuring Mr Oswald's shoulders (and maybe more). Were this shadow not there, we would not even be having this debate, for it would be abundantly evident that a second man (in a white tshirt) is standing just behind Mr Lovelady. That's the whole point of the shadow!

Thankfully, however, decent scans of Lovelady@LowerElevation show that there is indeed someone still standing there (in front of Mr Frazier, who can be made out in right corner of image)-------------



--------------and that the second head is not the phantom you are trying so very hard to make it. 

Is it the translucent antenna which is causing the higher double/triple heads?

No. And you seriously need to get out of the habit of trying to prove apples with oranges! 

[Alan Ford]

Thanks for these two photos which led me to the solution to Ford's double head problem, there is indeed two heads which are motion blur but this motion blur seems to be independent of everybody else, so what's happening?

Mr Mytton's Nineteenth 'Eureka' Moment!

What's happening, Mr Mytton, is that the two heads are not motion blur-------------they are two different heads, one of which belongs to the person you have been incorrectly placing up at a certain sixth floor window! 

Since we know in the next second or two Lovelady will appear to be dramatically lower, so obviously in the frames animated above, what we are looking at are the initial movements of Lovelady bending forward (~Snip~)

Ah yes, the Shoelaces Theory raises its clownish head again! All because you can't bear the fact that Mr Lovelady is so patently on the steps here:





And yet we see--------------according to your own method, Mr Mytton----------------that the area right behind Mr Lovelady and just west and in front of Mr Frazier is... oh, what's the phrase I'm looking for here?... ah yes: brimming with detail all of its own!



That's because the owner of the second head is still standing there on the landing.

You must be really kicking yourself now! 

[Alan Ford]

https://twitter.com/bzabby/status/1202048810052149251

 

There are only two types of research topic in Mr Scully's book:

Valid Research Topic: One that gives moi an opportunity to accrue glory on account of 'My Gift'.

Invalid Research Topic: Everything else.

Wife's name included in his obituary was "Ina".
Truckers, certainly driving local routes, avoid making stops close to noon due to likelihood dock crews are on lunch break, and know from dispatch to anticipate and avoid "hurdles" such as prepublished parade routes.

Unless the trucker plans on staying to see the parade, duh!

[Alan J. Ford]

Appreciate the prompt response there, Mr. Ford, Thank You. 

Not to belabour the issue any further, so just a brief follow up...

Aside from your apt explanation (Reply 46), relative to any reflection(s) captured on the camera lense off the glass entrance doors being dark, Any chance of the illuminating light from flashbulb activity in and around those steps impacting your conclusion otherwise? I'm not denying the 2nd head, just offering up what may explain it away. Again, no harm, no foul with any insights/explanation you care to offer to address the potential of flashbulb activity creating a 2nd head reflecting off the glass entrance doors.

Last thought before venturing back here on Thursday, Any chance the unnatural shadow running down Lovelady's right-side has something to do with Bill Shelley?

He is on Lovelady's left-side in Altgens, but was he on the opposite side in Wiegman? (lest we forget both film shot in tandem at different angles). Due to the close proximity of this shooting sequence at different angles, Was Shelley removed to avoid any conflict with his placement in Altgens? None of us can be on the left side or right side all at once.

We know the wrongly accused was out front with them, because no one six stories up or in the 2nd floor lunchroom had no way of knowing precisely where Bill Shelley viewed the P. Parade ( tucked way back in the inner landing at the front door entrance, completely out of view of either of those places.)

The wrongly accused knew Bill Shelley's whereabouts precisely.

[Alan Ford]

Appreciate the prompt response there, Mr. Ford, Thank You. 

Not to belabour the issue any further, so just a brief follow up...

Aside from your apt explanation (Reply 46), relative to any reflection(s) captured on the camera lense off the glass entrance doors being dark, Any chance of the illuminating light from flashbulb activity in and around those steps impacting your conclusion otherwise? I'm not denying the 2nd head, just offering up what may explain it away. Again, no harm, no foul with any insights/explanation you care to offer to address the potential of flashbulb activity creating a 2nd head reflecting off the glass entrance doors.

Thanks for this suggestion, Mr Ford. Tbh I can't see how even a flashbulb----------------and actually it would need to be a continuous series of flashbulbs-----------------would show up the reflection of the back of a man's head in this way?

Last thought before venturing back here on Thursday, Any chance the unnatural shadow running down Lovelady's right-side has something to do with Bill Shelley?

He is on Lovelady's left-side in Altgens,

We don't know that this is Mr Shelley, and have very good reason IMO to doubt it...



Are you suggesting that LHO=PrayerMan and Mr Shelley is standing right beside him------------which was considered so great a problem that Mr Shelley had to be eliminated from Wiegman?

If that's the case, then it surely seems counterintuitive that they would leave Mr Oswald's presence discernible (albeit barely) and completely obliterate Mr Shelley's?

 

[Mark A. Oblazney]

Thanks for this suggestion, Mr Ford. Tbh I can't see how even a flashbulb----------------and actually it would need to be a continuous series of flashbulbs-----------------would show up the reflection of the back of a man's head in this way?

We don't know that this is Mr Shelley, and have very good reason IMO to doubt it...



Are you suggesting that LHO=PrayerMan and Mr Shelley is standing right beside him------------which was considered so great a problem that Mr Shelley had to be eliminated from Wiegman?

If that's the case, then it surely seems counterintuitive that they would leave Mr Oswald's presence discernible (albeit barely) and completely obliterate Mr Shelley's?

 

This is totally embarrassing to view, in my view.  What's wrong with you?  Do you also believe Judyth Baker's Tall Tales, Mssr. Ford?  Why don't YOU write a friggin' book about all of this?  Self-published, bien sur !!