More Fake Pictures of Oswald

[Jack Trojan]

|   133-A   |   133-B   |   133-C   |

Oswald's left shoulder appears to be further back in space relative to the chest-midline in the 133-B picture than in the 122-A picture. This accounts for the difference in the shoulder width.

I also believe the morph...



... has the 133-B head a bit smaller than the 133-A head, which would in turn make the left shoulder more narrow to the camera. Not saying the animation sizing was intentional, but there's an amount of subjectivity that could induce error. Since the shadow-cast on the facial features in the two photos vary (due to head tilt), the width of the head might be a more accurate thing to align.

Nope. The head is distorting but from ear to ear stays consistent. It might be undersized by no more than 1-2%, which is far less than the body is oversized. Here is the proof. I scaled the same photos relative to Oswald's leg length instead and applied the same algorithm.



There is only 1 conclusion I come to, and that is CE 133-A was shot with a different camera than the rest. Otherwise, the spherical aberration of the lens and quality of this photo clearly does not match the others. Oswald immediately claimed it was a fake, which probably meant a darkroom creation where a print of CE 133-A was photographed with Oswald's Imperial Reflex camera. This camera was not originally found with Oswald's possessions by the DPD. And this is not to be confused with Oswald's Minox spy camera or his superior 35mm Russian Cuera 2 camera, which was probably the camera that took the original CE 133-A.

This along with all the other shenanigans that the DPD where up to in the darkroom, including re-enactments and a curious cutout of CE 133-C, which was never submitted into evidence nor found with Oswald's possessions, makes the BYPs highly suspect. The fact that the DPD only leaked CE 133-A, which was the money shot where you could actually read the name of the commie lit, means they were an integral part of the conspiracy. They sheep-dipped Oswald to be the patsy with the BYPs, planted the gun in the TSBD, arrested him in record time, interrogated him in private and took no notes, then led him to his assassin who did the killing for them to gave them plausible deniability. This is why they didn't kill him in the theater. I could go on and on but you get the picture. 

[John Mytton]

|   133-A   |   133-B   |   133-C   |

Oswald's left shoulder appears to be further back in space relative to the chest-midline in the 133-B picture than in the 122-A picture. This accounts for the difference in the shoulder width.

I also believe the morph...



... has the 133-B head a bit smaller than the 133-A head, which would in turn make the left shoulder more narrow to the camera. Not saying the animation sizing was intentional, but there's an amount of subjectivity that could induce error. Since the shadow-cast on the facial features in the two photos vary (due to head tilt), the width of the head might be a more accurate thing to align.

Hi Jerry, yes of course you are right and the original head ratios are indeed different. The wide-angle effect makes Oswald's head in 133-A stretch vertically as compared to the more centered head in 133-B thus exposing Trojan's gif. Btw imo this alone makes any image manipulation virtually impossible because not only do you have to match Oswald's lighting you have to match his position within the frame to allow for the appropriate image distortion.





JohnM

[Jack Trojan]

 

The code you presented is a simple fade to white, how do you think that is relevant?
And please explain how your code applies to your gif which is just swapping one set of RGB values for another?



JohnM

You also don't write code I see. RGB1 is photo 1 and RGB2 is photo 2. A color is interpolated between 2 corresponding pixels according to the frame number (fn). Say you want 12 intermediary frames for your fade. Divide (RGB1 - RGB2) / 12 then multiply this increment by the frame number and add it to RGB1. This is the pixel color for your fade frame. Get it?

[Jack Trojan]

Hi Jerry, yes of course you are right and the original head ratios are indeed different. The wide-angle effect makes Oswald's head in 133-A stretch vertically as compared to the more centered head in 133-B thus exposing Trojan's gif. Btw imo this alone makes any image manipulation virtually impossible because not only do you have to match Oswald's lighting you have to match his position within the frame to allow for the appropriate image distortion.





JohnM

Wrong again. These photos were supposedly taken from the same approx. distance from the camera so they should have similar distortion. There should also be less spherical aberration near the center of the lens (the sweet spot). I don't see ANY SA in CE133-A. That 35mm Cuera 2 camera must have had a decent lens on it.

[John Mytton]

You also don't write code I see. RGB1 is photo 1 and RGB2 is photo 2. A color is interpolated between 2 corresponding pixels according to the frame number (fn). Say you want 12 intermediary frames for your fade. Divide (RGB1 - RGB2) / 12 then multiply this increment by the frame number and add it to RGB1. This is the pixel color for your fade frame. Get it?

Yeah like I said your gif just swapped one set of RGB values for another, so what?



JohnM

[Jack Trojan]

Yeah like I said your gif just swapped one set of RGB values for another, so what?

JohnM

Which is exactly what your gifs do. Oh, you thought your gifs somehow tracked the facial features like facial recognition does, didn't you?

[John Mytton]

Wrong again. These photos were supposedly taken from the same approx. distance from the camera so they should have similar distortion. There should also be less spherical aberration near the center of the lens (the sweet spot). I don't see ANY SA in CE133-A. That 35mm Cuera 2 camera must have had a decent lens on it.

Yawn! I really don't know where to start, you are so out of your depth it ain't funny.

(507)  Additionally, photographs were made of a manikin head with an Imperial Deluxe Reflex duo lens camera similar to the Oswald camera, placing the image of the head in various positions from the center of the negative to the edges. The purpose of this was to illustrate the effect such variations in placement have on the shape of the image of the head in order to explain the differences in head shapes in photographs CE-133A, CE-133B, and, CE-133C, observed when the high-contrast color transparencies were superimposed. A black and white contact print of three negatives (fig. RIT 21-8) shows the  manikin head in the center of the photograph, near the top (tilting the camera down), and near the top left corner (tilting the camera down and aiming it, to the right). Placing the image of the head off the lens axis causes it to be elongated in a direction radiating away from the center of the photograph. Thus, the head at the top of the photograph is stretched vertically and the head in the corner is stretched diagonally. This change in shape can be seen on the contact print but the heads were also enlarged on high-contrast film and contact color transparencies were made so that direct comparisons could be made by superposing green and magenta pairs of the three images. (fig. RIT 21-9).

(508)  This change in shape is known as the wide-angle effect and it occurs with all conventional camera lenses including normal, wideangle, and telephoto, but it is most obvious with short focal length wide-angle lenses. In addition, pincushion distortion, which is evident in the curved reproduction of straight subject lines, and the altered perspective, which is evident in the convergence of vertical subject lines when the camera is tilted, slightly affect the shape of the head. (The differences in sharpness of the images of the manikin head when placed in the center and near the edges of the photograph is further evidence of curvature of field observed in photographs made with the Oswald camera.) Thus, the difference in height to width proportions of the heads in CE-133A, CE-133B, and CE-133C can be explained in terms of these effects since the tilt of the camera changed between the photographs, thereby placing the head in different positions. Of the three effects mentioned, the wide-angle effect, has the greatest influence on the shape of the head. Since the wide-angle effect applies only to three-dimensional objects, it would not alter the shape of the two-dimensional head on a photographic poster or print, which has been suggested as a way off faking the photographs of Oswald. Thus, the presence of this effect in the backyard picture is another item of evidence negating the likelihood of fakery.
https://people.rit.edu/andpph/text-oswald-HSCA-report.html



JohnM

[Jerry Freeman]

 
The guy [lower left]...the official wikipedia photo of Lee Harvey Oswald...looks nothing to me like the other guys.
Do the Mad Jack Mytton magic motion on these..................................