Choose Search Type
Search
 
 

Display results as :
 


Rechercher Advanced Search

Latest topics
» Lee Harvey Oswald: The Legend and the Truth
Today at 10:25 am by James Norwood

» Update to Anatomy Of The Second Floor Lunch Room Encounter
Today at 4:14 am by barto

» Forrest Sorrels
Yesterday at 11:16 pm by barto

» Jack Ruby told FBI informant to "watch the fireworks"
Thu 23 Nov 2017, 11:35 pm by greg parker

» scenario
Thu 23 Nov 2017, 11:23 pm by greg parker

» Invitation to Dr Norwood
Thu 23 Nov 2017, 8:47 am by greg parker

» ROKC Art Gallery
Mon 20 Nov 2017, 6:39 pm by barto

» Oswald's get out of jail free Patsy card.
Sun 19 Nov 2017, 1:59 pm by greg parker

» Olsen's Green Camp Wrong Number
Sun 19 Nov 2017, 9:38 am by James K. Olmstead

Log in

I forgot my password

Social bookmarking

Social bookmarking Digg  Social bookmarking Delicious  Social bookmarking Reddit  Social bookmarking Stumbleupon  Social bookmarking Slashdot  Social bookmarking Yahoo  Social bookmarking Google  Social bookmarking Blinklist  Social bookmarking Blogmarks  Social bookmarking Technorati  

Bookmark and share the address of REOPENKENNEDYCASE on your social bookmarking website

Bookmark and share the address of REOPENKENNEDYCASE on your social bookmarking website

RSS feeds


Yahoo! 
MSN 
AOL 
Netvibes 
Bloglines 


Affiliates
free forum
 



Does anybody cite the "lapel flip" as evidence anymore?

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Does anybody cite the "lapel flip" as evidence anymore?

Post by David Wimp on Mon 13 Nov 2017, 3:50 am

There are basically two ways a spot in a film can change appearance.  The actual surface that is exposed there can change, e.g., a jacket swings open revealing a shirt, or the illumination can change.  It did not take me long to conclude long ago that the "lapel flip" was really illumination change and not clothing movement but it took a really long time to understand just the basics of what is happening there.  I think I have a reasonable case that what is seen in 222-224 is illumination from somewhere around the base of the windshield is traveling parallel to the side of the car and illuminating the frame of the small window, the vertical part of the handhold mounted in front of Connally, and Connally's chest through the space in between.  Things change because the car is turning slightly.  I think it has to be a double reflection off curved surface(s) or something like that for the reflection to change as much as it does with the car turning as little as it does,  I actually can't detect that it is turning there but it is turning left shortly after that.  I can make a very simple case that suggests that illumination is the cause and that would be more of a case than anybody has ever made for clothing movement.  The only one I have ever heard is "What else can it be?"  I pursued this off and on over the years because I wanted to know what the hell was happening there and because I thought it had great embarrassment value.  I am afraid most of the embarrassment value is gone, but it does appear that there may be a delicious irony.  This might place Connally too far to the outside for the SBT to work there.

David Wimp

Posts : 23
Join date : 2017-11-11

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Does anybody cite the "lapel flip" as evidence anymore?

Post by greg parker on Mon 13 Nov 2017, 7:27 am

David Wimp wrote:There are basically two ways a spot in a film can change appearance.  The actual surface that is exposed there can change, e.g., a jacket swings open revealing a shirt, or the illumination can change.  It did not take me long to conclude long ago that the "lapel flip" was really illumination change and not clothing movement but it took a really long time to understand just the basics of what is happening there.  I think I have a reasonable case that what is seen in 222-224 is illumination from somewhere around the base of the windshield is traveling parallel to the side of the car and illuminating the frame of the small window, the vertical part of the handhold mounted in front of Connally, and Connally's chest through the space in between.  Things change because the car is turning slightly.  I think it has to be a double reflection off curved surface(s) or something like that for the reflection to change as much as it does with the car turning as little as it does,  I actually can't detect that it is turning there but it is turning left shortly after that.  I can make a very simple case that suggests that illumination is the cause and that would be more of a case than anybody has ever made for clothing movement.  The only one I have ever heard is "What else can it be?"  I pursued this off and on over the years because I wanted to know what the hell was happening there and because I thought it had great embarrassment value.  I am afraid most of the embarrassment value is gone, but it does appear that there may be a delicious irony.  This might place Connally too far to the outside for the SBT to work there.
David, these types of things are not often discussed here, but we do have a professional photographer as well as a television cameraman as members, so if any of us can respond with confidence, it would be those guys.

_________________
Mixing Pop and Politics he asks me what the use is
I offer him embarrassment and my usual excuses
While looking down the corridor
Out to where the van is waiting
I'm looking for the Great Leap Forward

            Billy Bragg
-----------------------------
 Australians don't mind criminals: It's successful bullshit artists we despise. 
             Lachie Hulme            
-----------------------------
The Cold War ran on bullshit.
              Me

“God favors drunks, small children, and the cataclysmically stoned...” Steve King
"The worst thing about some men is that when they are not drunk they are sober." Billy Yeats
"You're not drunk if you can lie on the floor without holding on." Dino Martin



https://www.thenewdisease.space
avatar
greg parker
Admin

Posts : 4521
Join date : 2009-08-21
Age : 59
Location : Orange, NSW, Australia

View user profile http:// http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00IXOA5ZK/ref=s9_simh_

Back to top Go down

Re: Does anybody cite the "lapel flip" as evidence anymore?

Post by David Wimp on Mon 13 Nov 2017, 9:53 am

The first sentence of that post was supposed to be-- I think the lapel flip is one of the silliest things in all of JFK assassination lore.  I have a special hatred of it and really would like to kill it dead.  It seems most people have accepted that, even if it is clothing movement, it isn't evidence.  But it isn't even clothing movement.

David Wimp

Posts : 23
Join date : 2017-11-11

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Does anybody cite the "lapel flip" as evidence anymore?

Post by greg parker on Mon 13 Nov 2017, 10:00 am

David Wimp wrote:The first sentence of that post was supposed to be-- I think the lapel flip is one of the silliest things in all of JFK assassination lore.  I have a special hatred of it and really would like to kill it dead.  It seems most people have accepted that, even if it is clothing movement, it isn't evidence.  But it isn't even clothing movement.
Thanks for clarifying David.

_________________
Mixing Pop and Politics he asks me what the use is
I offer him embarrassment and my usual excuses
While looking down the corridor
Out to where the van is waiting
I'm looking for the Great Leap Forward

            Billy Bragg
-----------------------------
 Australians don't mind criminals: It's successful bullshit artists we despise. 
             Lachie Hulme            
-----------------------------
The Cold War ran on bullshit.
              Me

“God favors drunks, small children, and the cataclysmically stoned...” Steve King
"The worst thing about some men is that when they are not drunk they are sober." Billy Yeats
"You're not drunk if you can lie on the floor without holding on." Dino Martin



https://www.thenewdisease.space
avatar
greg parker
Admin

Posts : 4521
Join date : 2009-08-21
Age : 59
Location : Orange, NSW, Australia

View user profile http:// http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00IXOA5ZK/ref=s9_simh_

Back to top Go down

Re: Does anybody cite the "lapel flip" as evidence anymore?

Post by Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum