There Was A Test Film Shot With Zapruder's Camera On 5/24/64
David Von Pein
An interesting topic came up at "The Education Forum" recently,
regarding the fact that the FBI actually took a test film with Abraham
Zapruder's Bell & Howell camera during the WC/FBI/SS re-enactment of
the assassination in Dealey Plaza on May 24, 1964.
This "test" film utilizing Mr. Zapruder's very own camera apparently
still exists and is currently being stored at the National Archives
(along with test films that were also made on 5/24/64 with Orville
Nix's camera and Marie Muchmore's camera).
Duncan MacRae said this in a thread-starting post at The Education
Forum on January 1, 2010:
"The May 1964 FBI/Secret Service re-enactment in Dallas included
a test film shot with the Zapruder camera. The film is at the National
Archives waiting for someone to have it transfered to video. Perhaps
if the alterationists investigated this further, they could find out
information Re: the sprocket hole controversy and other debatable
issues. It puzzles me why they have never tried to gain access to this
avenue of research to prove their points, or have they?
Test films shot with the Nix and Muchmore cameras are also at the
National Archives. This information was provided by Gary Mack." --
Duncan MacRae; 01/01/10
Link to Education Forum thread:
http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?s=0774b70a681ed8b3e4a628c62417863e&showtopic=15183
On January 3, 2010, conspiracy theorist David S. Lifton added the
following comments to the above-linked Education Forum discussion:
"I looked up [Lyndal] Shaneyfelt's testimony about the May, 1964
reconstruction, hopeful that I would find confirmation on the
existence of such a test film. According to Shaneyfelt, he indeed took
pictures from the Zapruder pedestal, frame by frame, as he
photographed the re-enactment. But he did not--I repeat, did NOT--use
Zapruder's camera. (And, after all, why should he have? Think about
it: the hypothesis being tested was whether Oswald had a clear line of
sight from the window; NOT whether the Zapruder camera was the source
of the Z frames that are in evidence).
"Quoting from Shaneyfelt's testimony, at page 148 of Volume 5 of
the Warren Commission: "The picture in the upper right is a photograph
that I made with a speed graphic camera from Zapruder's position of
the car reestablished in that position."
"According to Duncan MacRae's post, he has been informed by
Sixth Floor Museum Curator Gary Mack that such a film--taken in
Zapruder's camera-- exists at NARA. I have no way of knowing whether
or not that is true. In addition, there is the question of whether any
such test film was actually exposed at full telephoto.
"If all this is indeed the case--i.e., if there was indeed
motion picture footage from Zapruder's position, exposed with
Zapruder's camera and exposed with the setting at full telephoto--then
I would certainly like to know about it. Further, I would like to then
examine the left margin and do a careful comparison between what those
frames show and the frames from the so-called "camera original"
Zapruder film.
"From my reading of Shaneyfelt's testimony, the Zapruder camera
was not used during the May, 1964 re-enactment. Rather, an ordinary
speed graphic camera was utilized. Now it is entirely possible, I
suppose, that Gary Mack has better information--and if so, perhaps he
could post it on this forum. If such footage exists, using Zapruder's
Bell and Howell camera, and exposed at full telephoto, I'd certainly
like to obtain a contact print, showing the entire left margin--so
that it can be compared with the Zapruder frames in evidence.
"Postscript: If such a film exists, then what is needed is not a
video transfer, but a full frame contact print. That would be the best
way to examine the intersprocket area--it seems to me. But. . first
things first: did the Secret Service really shoot a test film, with
Zapruder's camera, at full telephoto? And is such a film in the JFK
Records Collection?"
[End Lifton quotes.]
----------------
But had Mr. Lifton taken a look at some more of Lyndal Shaneyfelt's
Warren Commission testimony, he would have been able to confirm for
himself the fact that Zapruder's camera WAS, in fact, used to create a
test film FROM ZAPRUDER'S POSITION ON TOP OF THE PEDESTAL. We find
that confirmation in Shaneyfelt's testimony at 5H162:
http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh5/html/WC_Vol5_0086b.htm
Here's the pertinent excerpt from page 162 of WC volume 5:
ARLEN SPECTER -- "What motion pictures, if any, were taken during the
reenactment?"
LYNDAL L. SHANEYFELT -- "During the reenactment the black-and-white
photographs were made from Zapruder's position with a Speedgraphic
camera and we also took motion pictures with Mr. Zapruder's camera
from Zapruder's position with the car in the fixed locations as they
were established with the car just stationary in those locations.
After establishing all those points and making these film records of
it, we then had the car proceed along that Elm Street route at
approximately 11 miles per hour, and filmed it with Mr. Zapruder's
camera loaded with color film from Mr. Zapruder's position and
simultaneously photographed it with Mr. Nix's camera from Mr. Nix's
position, and Mrs. Muchmore's camera from Mrs. Muchmore's position,
and this was done twice."
---------------------
It would, indeed, be very interesting to see that test film that was
shot with Abraham Zapruder's camera in May of 1964.
http://www.DavidVonPein.blogspot.com
Anthony Marsh
>
> An interesting topic came up at "The Education Forum" recently,
> regarding the fact that the FBI actually took a test film with Abraham
Yet another example of the wrong priorities of the WC defenders. They will
spend billions of dollars to cover up the Kennedy assassination, but not
one cent to try to preserve the evidence. HBO, National Geographic, The
History Channel, and The Discovery Channel will spend millions of dollars
trying to debunk conspiracy theories, but not one cent to help to preserve
the evidence in this case. Leave it up to MPI to be the only one to
digitize the Zapruder film.
But we already have other films shot with the Zapruder camera and they do
not try to replicate the conditions in Dealey Plaza.
And why shouldn't replication films using the same model as Zapruder's
camera be just as conclusive as actually using Zapruder's camera? We have
the Zavada test footage which shows the same ghost images in the sprocket
hole area.
WhiskyJoe
"... the fact that the FBI actually took a test film
with Abraham Zapruder's Bell & Howell camera during
the WC/FBI/SS re-enactment of the assassination in
Dealey Plaza on May 24, 1964".
If the test film is made public it would be interesting
to see it. Of course, I have no serious doubt that
after analyzing it Fetzer, White, Mantik and Costella
will all conclude that certain frames had been
tampered with and certain people seen on the infield
grass were actually standing out in the street so
the test film was modified so as to not show them
being run over.
Actually, I am curious to see what interesting things
we may see on this test film that required it to be
withheld from the American people for over 45 years.
Probably more startling information that what was on
the original Zapruder film. Maybe it shows agents
digging slugs out of the freeway sign.
David Von Pein
ADDENDUM TO THREAD-STARTER (I hadn't thought of this until after I already
posted my thread-starting message):
For several years now, I've had in my possession a copy of a few portions
of the 5/24/64 re-enactment film (linked below). The picture quality isn't
too great, but it's a re-creation film that definitely shows
motion-picture sequences taken from the three locations in Dealey Plaza
where Abe Zapruder, Orville Nix, and Marie Muchmore took their films.
Now, whether this exact re-enactment film linked below contains footage
taken with the Zapruder, Nix, and Muchmore cameras, I cannot say for
certain. But I'd wager to say it is:
http://DVP-Potpourri.blogspot.com/2010/01/jfk-assassination-reenactment-film.html
Anthony Marsh
I'll take a look, but as I remember it I saw an announcement of the
films being released, tried to buy it and then was told they were no
longer available for sale. DVD, right?
Well, we can see that all they did was use one of their own SS cameras
and try to film from where they thought Zapruder was standing and used
the same camera to film from where they thought Nix was standing. The
characteristics of the film are not like either Zapruder or Nix. More
careful analysis might even pinpoint the make and model of the camera
they used.
yeuhd
> On 1/3/2010 11:49 AM, David Von Pein wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > An interesting topic came up at "The Education Forum" recently,
> > regarding the fact that the FBI actually took a test film with Abraham
> > Zapruder's Bell& Howell camera during the WC/FBI/SS re-enactment of
> > the assassination in Dealey Plaza on May 24, 1964.
>
> > This "test" film utilizing Mr. Zapruder's very own camera apparently
> > still exists and is currently being stored at the National Archives
> > (along with test films that were also made on 5/24/64 with Orville
> > Nix's camera and Marie Muchmore's camera).
>
> > Duncan MacRae said this in a thread-starting post at The Education
> > Forum on January 1, 2010:
>
> > "The May 1964 FBI/Secret Service re-enactment in Dallas included
> > a test film shot with the Zapruder camera. The film is at the National
> > Archives waiting for someone to have it transfered to video. Perhaps
> > if the alterationists investigated this further, they could find out
> > information Re: the sprocket hole controversy and other debatable
> > issues. It puzzles me why they have never tried to gain access to this
> > avenue of research to prove their points, or have they?
> > Test films shot with the Nix and Muchmore cameras are also at the
> > National Archives. This information was provided by Gary Mack." --
> > Duncan MacRae; 01/01/10
>
> > Link to Education Forum thread:
I'm sure HBO, National Geographic, etc., would have LOVED to digitize
the Zapruder film. But they did not own the rights. The Zapruder
family owned the copyright from 1975 to 1999, and they chose who could
reproduce the film and at what price.
Squinty Magoo
> On 1/3/2010 10:28 PM, David Von Pein wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > ADDENDUM TO THREAD-STARTER (I hadn't thought of this until after I already
> > posted my thread-starting message):
>
> > For several years now, I've had in my possession a copy of a few portions
> > of the 5/24/64 re-enactment film (linked below). The picture quality isn't
> > too great, but it's a re-creation film that definitely shows
> > motion-picture sequences taken from the three locations in Dealey Plaza
> > where Abe Zapruder, Orville Nix, and Marie Muchmore took their films.
>
> > Now, whether this exact re-enactment film linked below contains footage
> > taken with the Zapruder, Nix, and Muchmore cameras, I cannot say for
> > certain. But I'd wager to say it is:
>
>
> I'll take a look, but as I remember it I saw an announcement of the
> films being released, tried to buy it and then was told they were no
> longer available for sale. DVD, right?
>
> Well, we can see that all they did was use one of their own SS cameras
> and try to film from where they thought Zapruder was standing and used
> the same camera to film from where they thought Nix was standing. The
> characteristics of the film are not like either Zapruder or Nix. More
> careful analysis might even pinpoint the make and model of the camera
> they used.
One would hope they could operate their own cameras better than the
camera(s) is/are operated in those clips. (Fewer shots of the ground,
agents legs, exposure correctly adjusted, etc. would have been
nice.)
All in all, it doesn't seem like it was a professional re-creation.
David Von Pein
Here's an interesting e-mail conversation I had with Gary Mack on
January 8th, 2010:
Subject: Yet ANOTHER camera original Zapruder film
Date: 1/8/2010 2:44:15 PM Eastern Standard Time
From: Gary Mack
To: David Von Pein
-------------------------
Hello Dave,
I am continually astonished at how little the alterationists know about
the Zapruder film and its history. Now, led by Doug Horne and others,
they are whining about needing a test film from the Zapruder camera to see
if its images have the same camera artifacts as the assassination film.
Their “thinking” is that the test film won’t match and that will
prove the original film is a fake. But many such original reels exist and
most, if not all, have been available at the National Archives for
decades!
The alterationists didn’t know, until I told Duncan MacRae, that the
Zapruder camera was used by the FBI for re-creations in Dealey Plaza on
May 23-24, 1964, and that the resulting film reels are at NARA II in
College Park, MD. The films presumably contain similar intersprocket
images and artifacts as those in the assassination film. (The extremely
poor quality You Tube version of one of the reels is not an accurate
representation of its image quality.)
How could the alterationists not know that? The man the FBI assigned to
investigate and analyze the assassination films, Lyndal Shaneyfelt,
testified that he used the original Zapruder, Orville Nix and Marie
Muchmore cameras. There are news films and photographs showing those
cameras sitting atop the Zapruder pedestal the day of the test!
Nor, apparently, do the alterationists know about other test reels shot
with the Zapruder camera within days and years of the assassination. As
noted in The Sixth Floor Museum’s Zapruder chronology
(http://jfk.org/go/collections/about/zapruder-film- chronology), the FBI
first borrowed Zapruder’s camera on December 4, 1963, for testing.
“On December 20, the bureau concluded, ‘This camera when operated at
normal ‘run’ speed operates at 18.3 frames per second.’ This
‘clock’ was later used to determine the timing of specific events as
seen in the film.”
The timing test, which was duplicated by Bell & Howell in December 1966,
involved loading the camera and filming a clock with an accurate second
hand, then counting the number of frames that were exposed over specific
times. Barring any peculiarity with the lighting on the clocks, all such
test reels will certainly reveal the same intersprocket images and
artifacts as Mr. Zapruder’s famous film.
What all this means is that when Zapruder’s camera was still in the same
condition as the day of the assassination, and when Kodachrome II film and
processing were easily available, government and private company
investigations of the operating characteristics yielded multiple test
reels that can be studied and measured.
There was no need in 1996 for the ARRB to borrow Zapruder’s camera for
use in Dallas, nor was there a need in 2000 for Rollie Zavada to use it
for his follow-up study of the original film. There was no need because
test films already existed and they are available for examination in one
form or another.
And yet, the alterationists remain completely ignorant of their existence.
Amazing!
Gary Mack
Subject: Re: Yet ANOTHER camera original Zapruder film
Date: 1/8/2010 10:19:39 PM Eastern Standard Time
From: David Von Pein
To: Gary Mack
-------------------------
Gary,
Thanks--yet again--for another detailed e-mail message. Your knowledge
regarding various aspects of the JFK assassination continues to
astound me.
But, like you said, it's rather remarkable that the "alterationists"
who think the Zapruder Film is a fake and a fraud wouldn't have taken
the time to find out about all of the various test films that were
shot with Abraham Zapruder's Bell & Howell camera.
And equally as remarkable is something that occurred just this week
(on January 3, 2010) when conspiracy theorist extraordinaire David
Lifton posted a message at John Simkin's Education Forum, with Lifton
saying he was not able to find any reference at all to the test films
shot with Zapruder's camera when he (Lifton) looked up Lyndal
Shaneyfelt's Warren Commission testimony. And Lifton was SPECIFICALLY
SEARCHING for references to Zapruder's camera when he was going
through Shaneyfelt's testimony, too!
It wasn't until I posted a follow-up message [linked below] on Duncan
MacRae's forum regarding Zapruder's camera positively being used by
Shaneyfelt for test films, which is a message that Duncan was nice
enough to paste into a thread at the Education Forum, that Lifton
finally was able to confirm for himself that Zapruder's camera was, in
fact, utilized for test films in Dealey Plaza in May 1964.
And it took me less than 30 seconds of searching time to find that
reference to the Zapruder test films in Shaneyfelt's testimony (at
5H162), too. (Perhaps Mr. Lifton has never heard of "Internet word
search tools" before.) ~shrug~
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/fe52c1acfc52f064
Anyway, Gary, thanks again for the e-mail. I always appreciate and
benefit from the information you pass along.
Regards,
David Von Pein
Anthony Marsh
>
> Here's an interesting e-mail conversation I had with Gary Mack on
> January 8th, 2010:
>
>
>
>
> Subject: Yet ANOTHER camera original Zapruder film
> Date: 1/8/2010 2:44:15 PM Eastern Standard Time
> From: Gary Mack
> To: David Von Pein
>
> -------------------------
>
>
> Hello Dave,
>
> I am continually astonished at how little the alterationists know about
> the Zapruder film and its history. Now, led by Doug Horne and others,
> they are whining about needing a test film from the Zapruder camera to see
> if its images have the same camera artifacts as the assassination film.
> prove the original film is a fake. But many such original reels exist and
> most, if not all, have been available at the National Archives for
> decades!
>
> Zapruder camera was used by the FBI for re-creations in Dealey Plaza on
> May 23-24, 1964, and that the resulting film reels are at NARA II in
> College Park, MD. The films presumably contain similar intersprocket
I seriously doubt it.
> images and artifacts as those in the assassination film. (The extremely
> poor quality You Tube version of one of the reels is not an accurate
> representation of its image quality.)
>
The film shown was not shot with Zapruder's camera.
> How could the alterationists not know that? The man the FBI assigned to
> investigate and analyze the assassination films, Lyndal Shaneyfelt,
> testified that he used the original Zapruder, Orville Nix and Marie
> Muchmore cameras. There are news films and photographs showing those
> cameras sitting atop the Zapruder pedestal the day of the test!
>
You mean he lied.
Sure, maybe to take still photos.
> Nor, apparently, do the alterationists know about other test reels shot
> with the Zapruder camera within days and years of the assassination. As
> noted in The Sixth Floor Museum�s Zapruder chronology
> (http://jfk.org/go/collections/about/zapruder-film- chronology), the FBI
> first borrowed Zapruder�s camera on December 4, 1963, for testing.
> �On December 20, the bureau concluded, �This camera when operated at
> normal �run� speed operates at 18.3 frames per second.� This
> �clock� was later used to determine the timing of specific events as
> seen in the film.�
>
You seem to miss a fundamental point. The ghost images appear only when
the camera is set to full telephoto, allowing exposure of the sprocket
hole area. The backyard scenes of his grandson do not show them, do
they? And the lightly and film stock have to be duplicated also. The
CLOCK test was not on full telephoto and the lighting conditions were
different than Dealey Plaza.
> The timing test, which was duplicated by Bell& Howell in December 1966,
> involved loading the camera and filming a clock with an accurate second
> hand, then counting the number of frames that were exposed over specific
> times. Barring any peculiarity with the lighting on the clocks, all such
> test reels will certainly reveal the same intersprocket images and
> artifacts as Mr. Zapruder�s famous film.
>
No, because they weren't shot on full telephoto.
Why do you pretend that we don't have any other examples of the ghost
images when I have provided several?
http://the-puzzle-palace.com/football.jpg
> What all this means is that when Zapruder�s camera was still in the same
> condition as the day of the assassination, and when Kodachrome II film and
> processing were easily available, government and private company
> investigations of the operating characteristics yielded multiple test
> reels that can be studied and measured.
>
It makes very little difference what exact peculiarities Zapruder's
serial number camera had as compared to all other serial number camera
of the same model, as Zavada showed. And I have provided examples from
other cameras of that type.
> There was no need in 1996 for the ARRB to borrow Zapruder�s camera for
> use in Dallas, nor was there a need in 2000 for Rollie Zavada to use it
> for his follow-up study of the original film. There was no need because
> test films already existed and they are available for examination in one
> form or another.
>
And weren't analyzed thanks to you.
Why do you continue the cover-up? What do you gain financially? How much
money do you need?
> And yet, the alterationists remain completely ignorant of their existence.
> Amazing!
>
And at the time Fetzer et al wrote their nonsense I held in my hands
several others film clips showing the ghost images in the sprocket hole
area which they said could only be produced in an ULTRA TOP SECRET CIA
photo lab.
http://the-puzzle-palace.com/amateurs.htm
> Gary Mack
>
> ==========================================================
>
> Subject: Re: Yet ANOTHER camera original Zapruder film
> Date: 1/8/2010 10:19:39 PM Eastern Standard Time
> From: David Von Pein
> To: Gary Mack
>
> -------------------------
>
> Gary,
>
> Thanks--yet again--for another detailed e-mail message. Your knowledge
> regarding various aspects of the JFK assassination continues to
> astound me.
>
> But, like you said, it's rather remarkable that the "alterationists"
> who think the Zapruder Film is a fake and a fraud wouldn't have taken
> the time to find out about all of the various test films that were
> shot with Abraham Zapruder's Bell& Howell camera.