The Backyard Photo Paradox

[Jack Trojan]

All the photos of Lee Harvey Oswald have been determined to be authentic. 

What does "authentic" mean and who determined that? Unfortunately, a photo-analyst can't tell you whether you are looking at a picture of a picture that has been modified. So how can authenticity be established and what does it mean?

Roscoe White was the mastermind behind the BYPs. He had real darkroom skills and he was Photoshopping prints with film enlargers and taking pictures of edited prints. His wife Geneva even found an undocumented BYP in his garage after he died. This photo was designated CE 133-c and matched a cutout which was also found in Roscoe's possession.



As far as I'm concerned CE 133-c is the smoking gun proving Roscoe White was an integral part in Oswald's sheep-dipping. There is no other reason for Roscoe to have an undocumented BYP and a matching cutout from another shot of Oswald's backyard in his possession. Maybe a LNer can enlighten me.

Did you know that Roscoe White was in the same military division as Lee Harvey Oswald, the 1st Marine Air Wing? Roscoe's wife Geneva swears he and Oswald were friends.  He was also good friends with Jack Ruby. In the fall of 1963 Geneva worked for a few weeks as a hostess in Jack Ruby’s Carousel Club. Roscoe even confessed to his involvement in the Big Event in his journal which his son Ricky claimed was confiscated by the FBI.

To prove the BYPs are all authentic, you need to examine their negatives, of which only 2 exist. But why were they cut from the reel? So you couldn't determine whether they came from the same  reel, of course.

[John Iacoletti]

To prove the BYPs are all authentic, you need to examine their negatives, of which only 2 exist.

Which two?

[Walt Cakebread]

There is no paradox here. All the BY photos were real but the money shot, CE-133a, was different from the rest. Oswald knew he was being sheep-dipped as the patsy, which is why the BY photos exist at all. I mean come on, the assassin poses for >7 photos (Marina only recalled taking 1) holding commie lit and both murder weapons? Give me a break.

As it was, the photos taken with the Imperial Reflex camera didn't resolve LHO's face well enough and you couldn't read the headline on the commie lit. That's why they took other photos at the same time with a different camera with a better lens. It's one of those photos that became the infamous CE-133a. Without a doubt, that photo was not taken with the Imperial Reflex camera. There is no way in hell that you can alter the spherical aberration of a lens by slightly changing the POV or the distance from the camera. Note the differences in distortion between the Imperial Reflex camera and the camera that took the money shot CE-133a below. These photos were taken at approx. the same distance from the camera and nearly the same POV.



These photos were not taken with the same camera, and being a photogrammetrist, I should know. This is why Oswald claimed the photo was a fake because his head had been enlarged and the shot was in focus with minimal spherical aberration. Oswald obviously did not have access to the photos that were taken with the other, higher quality camera and that CE-133a was planted with the rest to frame him as the patsy.

Geeeez...I wish I could accept your self accreditation, Mr T.......

[Jack Trojan]

Geeeez...I wish I could accept your self accreditation, Mr T.......

I wish I could believe that you actually own a MC, but alas.

Which two?

The Photographic Evidence Panel examined Warren Commission exhibits CE 133-A and 133-B, the two backyard pictures seized from the Oswald residence by Dallas Police in 1963; CE 749, the original negative to CE 133-B, and CE 134, an enlargement of CE 133-A.

Apparently, the DPD only found 1 negative for CE 133-B. They never found the negative for the money shot, CE 133-A. Surprise, surprise.

[John Iacoletti]

So only one negative still exists, right?

[Jack Trojan]

You're right, 1 negative for CE 133-B only. I mistakenly thought the negative for CE 133-C was found with Roscoe White. But it's the negative for the money shot CE 133-A that is suspiciously missing.

[Walt Cakebread]

I wish I could believe that you actually own a MC, but alas.

The Photographic Evidence Panel examined Warren Commission exhibits CE 133-A and 133-B, the two backyard pictures seized from the Oswald residence by Dallas Police in 1963; CE 749, the original negative to CE 133-B, and CE 134, an enlargement of CE 133-A.

Apparently, the DPD only found 1 negative for CE 133-B. They never found the negative for the money shot, CE 133-A. Surprise, surprise.

I wish I could believe that you actually own a MC, but alas.

Actually, Mt T... I own more than one, but what's the big deal about that??   20 - 30 years ago they were plentiful ( The CIA was dumping their inventory ) and cheap.  I know an ex-FBI man who had hundreds of the carcanos....

They never found the negative for the money shot, CE 133-A. Surprise, surprise.

I'm not certain that the FBI displayed the original "one and only" CE 133A to Marina......  ( who knows how many copies they made of that photo?) And Marina was more ignorant than I am about photography...( which is not good) .So she didn't even know that there was a difference between CE 133A and CE 133B.....   When those two photos were presented to her so that she could compare them and see that they were in fact two different BY photos she said that she didn't remember taking two photos of Lee...and she possibly had snapped the shutter twice when Lee was posing for the photo.  At any rate up until her appearance  before the Warren Commission she thought that there was only ONE  BY photo..... Then when she realized there were two...She tried to explain that by saying perhaps she had pressed the shutter twice.....  Well Ok let's ignore the fact that if she had pressed the shutter twice we wouldn't have any clear BY photos because she would have created a double exposure....But putting that aside...We now have THREE BY photos.....  She certainly couldn't have produced three photos with Lee in different positions in each photo by pressing the shutter multiple times.
 

[Pat Speer]

FWIW, the HSCA determined that the blow up of 133a came from the original negative. Since this negative was never handed over to the WC, this means the DPD "lost" this negative.

Or does it? The HSCA testimony off Robert Studebaker, which is now available on the Mary Ferrell website (thanks to some dweeb named...Pat Speer) indicates that Studebaker made numerous copies of the BY photos using a copy camera, and that the blow-up of 133a was in fact a photo of a photo. This, moreover, was also the position of DPD crime lab employee Rusty Livingstone in First Day Evidence.

If this is true, for that matter--that the blow up to 133A was in fact a photo of a photo--it means the photoanalysts for the HSCA couldn't tell a photo of a photo from a first generation print, which is to say they could not tell s from Shinola, and that their authentication of the BY photos is meaningless.