The Backyard Photos Have Insomnia

[John Mytton]

I believe my question to Walt was who studied them and was in regard to facial expression and not just the position

The World doesn't revolve around you, look again, I was replying to Caprio. Doh



JohnM

[Jerry Freeman]

And Roscoe Whites little cutout of this picture was for what purpose?

For the readers who otherwise don't know about it...
This image was re-shot and re-done about a year after the original.
Dodging and burning was the old school technique for modern day photo shopping.





example...this was done using an an enlarger and a bit of practice.


Roscoe White was an expert in darkroom work.
A full review here....
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dodging_and_burning
 

[John Mytton]

example...this was done using an an enlarger and a bit of practice.

 

This obviously fake composite with wrong lighting, mismatching grain, terrible contrast which just looks fake is a perfect example of how difficult it is to combine two images.

To get Oswald to fit into the scene seamlessly requires photographing Oswald in the exact same position with what would have to be perfect recreated lighting and as seen in Jerry's example above, it ain't as easy as your imagination wants it to be.





JohnM

[Matt Grantham]

There's no doubt in my mind that CE 133A   ( same as De Morhenchildt print) is an authentic photo taken by Marina at the request of Lee Oswald.   Ther is evidence in both CE 133B and 133c of photo alteration.    Who altered the photos an why??

 Hi Walt I responded to this yesterday and see today I totally misread it I am having big time kidney stones and drugs and perhaps need to stop posting. I erased the original post from yesterday I am not sure if you did not respond out of apathy and disregard or a mild sense of tolerance Either way things have been embarrassing enough for me the last couple of days so thanks one way or another

[Walt Cakebread]

Hi Walt I responded to this yesterday and see today I totally misread it I am having big time kidney stones and drugs and perhaps need to stop posting. I erased the original post from yesterday I am not sure if you did not respond out of apathy and disregard or a mild sense of tolerance Either way things have been embarrassing enough for me the last couple of days so thanks one way or another

Hi Matt.....I believe that the BY photo(s) are a pivotal aspect of the entire case....

I believe that originally the critics of LBJ's Special Select Blue Ribbon Committee knew that the report from that farce patsy railroading committee were desperate to refute the decree that LBJ's Warren Commission handled down but they were handicapped by LBJ's power in the White house.   They couldn't prove anything that their common sense dictated.

So in desperation they tried to work with the meager information they had and refute Hoover's decree.....LBJ had all of the aces and a stacked deck.....The critics (CT's) had very little, so in frustration and desperation  they pointed out that Lee Oswald had declared  A SINGLE Back Yard photo to be a fake.....  To this day we don't know what photo Lee was shown....( My belief is, that it was 133c)  Whatevr photo Fritz displayed to lee ...Lee immediately pronounced that photo to be a fake.....apparently he told the interrogators that the image of his head had been placed on some other man's body.....So based on that we can safely assume that ONE of the BY photos is a fake....AND Marina is on record as swearing that she took CE 133A  at Lee's request.

So we have solid evidence that at least one BY photo is a fake and at least one is authentic....

The problem...Very few want to separate the photos....Most students want to lump all three known photos together as fakes ...or authentic...

If we can't examine the BY photos rationally and objectively.....this key aspect of the case will never be resolved. and The CT's are stuck in an endless rut   

[Matt Grantham]

Hi Matt.....I believe that the BY photo(s) are a pivotal aspect of the entire case....

I believe that originally the critics of LBJ's Special Select Blue Ribbon Committee knew that the report from that farce patsy railroading committee were desperate to refute the decree that LBJ's Warren Commission handled down but they were handicapped by LBJ's power in the White house.   They couldn't prove anything that their common sense dictated.

So in desperation they tried to work with the meager information they had and refute Hoover's decree.....LBJ had all of the aces and a stacked deck.....The critics (CT's) had very little, so in frustration and desperation  they pointed out that Lee Oswald had declared  A SINGLE Back Yard photo to be a fake.....  To this day we don't know what photo Lee was shown....( My belief is, that it was 133c)  Whatevr photo Fritz displayed to lee ...Lee immediately pronounced that photo to be a fake.....apparently he told the interrogators that the image of his head had been placed on some other man's body.....So based on that we can safely assume that ONE of the BY photos is a fake....AND Marina is on record as swearing that she took CE 133A  at Lee's request.

So we have solid evidence that at least one BY photo is a fake and at least one is authentic....

The problem...Very few want to separate the photos....Most students want to lump all three known photos together as fakes ...or authentic...

If we can't examine the BY photos rationally and objectively.....this key aspect of the case will never be resolved. and The CT's are stuck in an endless rut

Thanks Walt Very interesting Of course it is totally weird, but that is not necessarily a reason to continue going down an endless rut as you say

[Jerry Freeman]

133C was not seen or heard of until Mrs White found it in some of Roscoe's belongings sometime in late 1976.
Marina told the Warren Commission that she forgot she had taken two different poses.

Mr. RANKIN. And he was dressed up with a pistol at the same time, was he?
Mrs. OSWALD. Yes.
Mr. RANKIN. You have examined that picture since, and noticed that the telescopic lens was on at the time the picture was taken, have you not?
Mrs. OSWALD. Now I paid attention to it. A specialist would see it immediately, of course. But at that time I did not pay any attention at all. I saw just Lee. These details are of great significance for everybody, but for me at that time it didn't mean anything. At the time' that I was questioned, I had even forgotten that I had taken two photographs. I thought there was only one. I thought that there were two identical pictures, but they turned out to be two different poses.
Mr. RANKIN. Did you have anything to do with the prints of the photograph after the prints were made? That is, did you put them in a photographic album yourself?
Mrs. OSWALD. Lee gave me one photograph and asked me to keep it for June somewhere.

"I thought there was only one" she claimed.
Does this sound like someone lying  [ to anyone else besides me]?
If that was a lie, why isn't the rest of it.

Then Mrs Porter testified to the HSCA...

Mr. McDONALD. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mrs. Porter, I have got two exhibits to show you, if the clerk would procure them from the representatives of the National Archives.
We have two photographs to show you. They are Warren Commission Exhibits C-133-A and B, which have been given JFK Nos. F-378 and F-379. If the clerk would please hand them to you, and also if we could now have for display purposes JFK Exhibit F-179, which is a blowup of the two photographs placed in front of you.
Mrs. Porter, do you recognize the photographs placed in front of you?
Mrs. PORTER. Yes, I do.
Mr. McDONALD. And how do you recognize them?
Mrs. PORTER. That is the photograph that I made of Lee on his persistent request of taking a picture of him dressed like that with rifle.
Mr. McDONALD. Please tell us what happened? This was at the Neely Street address.
What happened on this occasion when Lee asked you to take those photographs?
Mrs. PORTER. Well, first of all, I refused to take picture because I did not know how to operate camera, and he told me, he insist that I will take it, and he said he will show me how, if I just push the button. So I took one picture, I think, and maybe he changed the pose, I don't recall. Maybe I took two pictures, but I was very annoyed by all the incidents.

Maybe she took TWO pictures?

Mr. McDONALD. Now if you will look at the photographs as are displayed on the exhibit, he is wearing, he is holding a rifle and he has got a handgun in a holster attached to his belt.
Had you seen the handgun before, before you took the photograph?
Mrs. PORTER. I don't think so. Anyway I do not recall.
Mr. McDONALD. Well, do you recall if this was the first time when you were taking the photograph that you had seen him, or that you had known that he owned both the rifle and a handgun?
Mrs. PORTER. R. It is possible.
Mr. McDONALD. Did Lee appear to be nervous at all when you took the photograph?
Mrs. PORTER. No. He was just angry with me because I refused. I was making fun of him.
Mr. McDONALD. Did you use a tripod at all?
Mrs. PORTER. Did I use what?

He was "angry" Oh boo hoo hoo
                     

[John Mytton]

Sorry John, but 😀🤣😃😃😆. Please.

What are you sorry about? The above evidence is rock solid, the arrested Oswald footage with the same overhead lighting shows the EXACT same chin as the backyard photos with the overhead sun, You Lose!

So you have no evidence to cite for your claim. Got it.

No you made a silly claim without evidence and I present irrefutable photographic proof. The backyard bush has thickened and shows phenomenal growth.

Without an overlay supporting your claim these are empty assumptions. Experienced people have done this and found no differences.

Who cares about your memories, your claim your proof, Well?
Where is your supporting evidence?
Muhahaha!





JohnM