Subject: Re: The Zapruder film is authentic
Date: Sun, 02 Aug 1998 12:26:24 -0700
From: David Wimp <joliraja@ix.netcom.com>
To: AnthonyMarsh <amarsh@quik.com>

    I think between all the you and I are seeing, there may be more than one
phenomenon involved.  Where I said vertical line, I should have said
vertical boundary between light and dark areas.  I see this in the slide you
sent me and in the WC frames.  In 313, the image is darker to the left of
this boundary in the bottom 2/3's of the inter sprocket area than to the
right.  In the upper third, it is different on the right and left but not
clearly darker or lighter.  There is a clear horizontal boundary between the
upper 1/3 and lower 2/3's.  Maybe the vertical boundary is caused by
something else, but it seems to persist for a while.  This can't be the edge
of the aperture plate because it would have a doubly exposed area darker
than an adjacent singly exposed area.  Which brings up the question, where
is the boundary of the aperture plate?  It should surely appear somewhere if
it defines the boundary between single and double exposure.  If the ghost
images are the result of multiple exposure, and that seems quite possible to
me, then the boundary of the double exposure must not be the aperture plate.
Or maybe the mechanism differs a bit from how you have it.  It does seem to
be a motorcycle and it does seem to be in the same place.
    When the DVD version comes out, I may be able to place that image in a
larger frame relative to the car, other mc, etc.  There is significant
pincushion distortion in the film.  I was able to get a pretty good fit to
Mantik's expanding sign data.  It is definitely pincushion distortion, but I
had to extrapolate the outside sign post in my frames so it is not terribly
accurate.  There could be higher order terms kicking in also.  That could
make it very hard.
    I am actually not interested in watching the Z-film as a movie.  I just
want a good slide set.
    I am enclosing a photo.  I should have said the approximate Zapruder
position.  I was determining the field of view from distant objects so it
was close enough for me.  There are not many landmarks left to line up
with.  I thing I was a little far right.  The people are standing by the
plaque which is supposed to mark JFK's position at 313.

[Image]

--
Dave