Post by Alex FoylePost by Anthony MarshPost by Alex FoyleThen what source backs up your claim that Black Dog Man was a white man in
a black suit wearing a black hat?
The HSCA study.
The HSCA said no such thing. Kindly quote from their report, if you can.
Post by Anthony MarshPost by Alex FoyleThe woman and the baby are Black Dog Man, most likely.
Nope. The woman and baby are supposedly black, not white?
Nobody proved that Black Dog Man was white, so your "Nope" is pure
speculation, just as much as the Colored Lady with baby is Black Dog Man
is speculation, although the latter corresponds with the photographic and
physical evidence of the scene, contrary to your man in black suit with
black hat. Ever wonder?
FIGURE IV-8. Willis No. 5. Will Image Enhancement.
(296) Since the image was badly blurred, an attempt was made to
use the computer to remove the blur. Blur removal can be accomplished if
its extent is not too great. (101) Unfortunately, the image was severely
degraded in the region of the retaining wall that deblurring efforts were
not. successful. (297) The, next computer processing step was to make
measurements of the color values of the object, behind the retaining wall
in order to compare the perceived flesh tones with those of a person at
another location in the Willis photograph. The photograph was scanned in
color: Separate measurements were made of the three primary colors, red,
green and blue, from which other colors can be made.
(298) After scanning, an image analyst at the Aerospace Corp.
viewed the image on a color video image display and positioned a
computer-generated dot at those points where colors were to be measured.
The computer then recorded the red, green, and blue values in the image at
the dot's positions. A similar analysis was carried out at the University
of Southern California.
(299) Regions measured at the Aerospace Corp. included the flesh
tones of the object near the retaining wall and of Marilyn the secretary
to Abraham Zapruder, who is visible in the Willis photograph. Sitzman's
flesh tones were measured both in shadow and sunlight. At the University
of Southern California flesh tones were used for the object at the
retaining wall and for several people: A policeman, a bystander, and a
child. In addition, measurements were made of Mrs. Kennedy's hat, which
was pink in color and had a flesh tone appearance on the video display.
(102)
124
(300) The Aerospace Corp. measurements showed the flesh cones of
the object near the retaining wall to be comparable to the known flesh
tones of Zapruder's secretary. USC's measurements also showed similarity
between the flesh tones of the object and those of known persons; however,
the similarities were not as strong as those found Aerospace. The
measurements of Mrs. Kennedy's hat were found to be distinguishable from
the measurements of known flesh. Nevertheless, the differences of Mrs.
Kennedy's hat from known flesh ments were only marginally greater than
differences of flesh tone measurements from each other.
(301) Based on these measurements, as well as visual analysis,
Panel concludes that the object was most probably an adult standing behind
the wall. First, the general shape and structure the object, including the
location of the flesh tones, appear to be human.
The height of the object in relation to the known height of the
consistent with that, of an adult of average height (5'6" to 6' tall).
Third, the measured values of the flesh tones of the object are comparable
with those of people in the photograph. Fourth, an additional Willis
photograph, No. 6, taken after the Presidential limosine had exited Dealey
Plaza but showing approximately the view as No. 5, no longer shows the
object. near the retaining wall, or anywhere else; it has disappeared.
(See fig. IV-9.) mobility of the object greatly increases the likelihood
of its being a person.
Mr. GOLDSMITH. I ask that Dr. Hunt be shown F-155, F-129, and
F-161. While that is being done I would request that F-156 be
admitted into the record.
Chairman STOKES. Without objection, it may be entered into the
record at this point.
[Whereupon, exhibit F-156 was received.]
407
JFK EXHIBIT F-156
Mr. GOLDSMITH. Dr. Hunt, would you identify these exhibits?
Dr. HUNT. Yes. F-155 is an enlargement from a slide taken by a
gentleman by the name of Willis. It is looking down towards the
caravan from the back as the caravan proceeded down the street. It
is a 35 millimeter color slide.
The next exhibit, F-129, shows an enlargement from a black-and-
white Polaroid print, usually referred to as the Moorman film. The
third exhibit F-161, shows a segment, one print if you wish, from 8
film made by a gentleman named Nix. You are showing an en-
larged piece of that film cropped out from the original 8 millimeter
408
film in the lower half, and in the upper half an even greater
enlargement centering on the region that you are seeing here on
the left.
Mr. GOLDSMITH. What issues did these photographic items raise
the panel?
Dr. HUNT. Using the label, "the retaining wall," we are looking
at the Dealey Plaza wall structure which comes out on the Willis
film, and right here at the edge of the retaining wall there is a
dark object, which I am pointing to right here. It has been alleged
or asserted the dark object represents a gunman standing at or
behind the retaining wall. That is the main issue which is being
addressed in all these, because each of these images shows the
retaining wall at some point in time.
Mr. GOLDSMITH. Is this retaining wall in the grassy knoll area
of Dealey Plaza?
Dr. HUNT. Yes. This is usually referred to as the grassy knoll.
You can see the rise of the slope of land coming up where the
retaining wall sits.
Mr. GOLDSMITH. I would ask that JFK F-160 be brought to Dr.
Hunt's attention.
Dr. Hunt, what type of enhancement method was applied to the
Willis photograph?
Dr. HUNT. What was done is the following. The computer was
asked to scan this region around the retaining wall, and then an
enlargement was made by the computer. The result of the enlarge-
ment process is what we see in this exhibit F-160. You see the
retaining wall. Here is the dark feature itself, and this is an
enlargement of the dark feature sitting right at the area of the
retaining wall.
Mr. GOLDSMITH. Mr. Chairman, I move to admit JFK F-160.
Chairman STOKES. Without objection, it may be entered.
Mr. GOLDSMITH. Thank you.
[Whereupon, exhibit JFK F-160 was received.]
409
JFK EXHIBIT F-160
Mr. GOLDSMITH. Dr. Hunt, in attempting to identify this image,
what analytical work, if any, was done?
Dr. HUNT. We did two things. The first thing we did was to
attempt to remove some of the evident blur in the image. If you
look at the original and concentrate upon the freeway sign, you see
a blur. We hoped to remove that blur. That attempt was carried
out at the University of Southern California. [t was not successful.
Mr. GOLDSMITH. Are you able to say why it was not successful?
Dr. HUNT. Yes. The picture was just simply not that good. There
is quite a bit of blurring when you look at this gross enlargement
410
of the kind we have here. There was, in addition, when the picture
was received by the panel, a grayish coating of some kind on it.
This was probably another thing that was detrimental to the effort.
Mr. GOLDSMITH. What analytical work was done to determine
whether that image is a human object?
Dr. HUNT. When we look at this image upon a soft-copy display,
we display it on a color CRT. This is where the soft copy is superior
to the hard copy I have here on the exhibit. The perception is quite
dramatic and distinct, that there are flesh tones within the region
of what appears to be the head of this object at the wall, and that
there are more flesh tones in what appears to be the hands of this
object at the mall. What we tried to do was to make analytical and
numerical measurements of those flesh tones and compare those
with the flesh tones of another individual in the photograph.
What we did for comparison purposes was measure flesh tones
upon the legs and face of this woman standing next to Mr. Za-
pruder, his secretary.
Mr. GOLDSMITH. What was the panel's conclusion?
Dr. HUNT. Based upon the flesh-tone measurements which we
took off of the object at the wall, and comparing those to similar
measurements on the flesh tones on Zapruder's secretary, we con-
cluded this was a person standing at the wall.
Mr. GOLDSMITH. Did the panel make any effort to determine
whether that person was holding a rifle?
Dr. HUNT. Yes. We tried to examine the nature of this linear
feature which you see right here. If you look at this object you
perceive something like a head or face with flesh tones, shoulders
and arms, with flesh tones in the region I am pointing to here, and
then you perceive this linear object which runs out of the hands
roughly at a 45-degree angle. We would have liked to deblur the
image. Since we couldn't, the only thing we could do was to ask
ourselves: what is the probability of this being a rifle? We could
not make a conclusion on that because there is another evident
blur at the 45-degree line throughout this image. This linear object
we perceive runs at the same direction as the blur which is appar-
ent in the image. It is equally likely, therefore, that this is either a
real object of some kind, or simply a small dark object in the image
which was stretched out by the motion blur of the camera during
the period in which the picture was taken.
Mr. GOLDSMITH. Dr. Hunt, I would ask you to refer now to JFK
F-129 which was the Moorman enlargement at the far left. I would
ask what type of enhancement method was applied to this photo-
graph.
Dr. HUNT. This photograph in its original form was a black and
white Polaroid print. As such, it was not well suited to being
scanned by computer. There is in the region of the retaining wall a
great amount of dark area. What we did, therefore, was to use
contrast enhancement techniques of the photo-optic kind.
We tried to bring out, through photo enhancement, details
against the retaining wall.
Mr. GOLDSMITH. What conclusion, if any, did the panel reach
concerning this photograph?
Dr. HUNT. We found no evidence of the person that is visible in
the Willis photograph in the Moormon photograph.
411
Mr. GOLDSMITH. What is the time sequence among these three
photographs?
Dr. HUNT. Willis came first, approximately 5 seconds later came
the Moormon photograph, and the Nix photograph spans most of
those times plus some time later.
Mr. GOLDSMITH. Why is that?
Dr. HUNT. Because the Nix picture is a motion picture film. The
picture started running prior to the fatal shot and kept running
during and after.
Mr. GOLDSMITH. Drawing your attention to JFK F-129 in the
upper left-hand region of that exhibit, there is a stockade fence.
Perhaps you could point to it for the committee. Was any effort
made to study that area to see if there was any evidence of a
gunman there?
Dr. HUNT. No. No effort was applied to it. First of all, the results
carried out in this region were negative.
Mr. GOLDSMITH. You are pointing now to the retaining wall?
Dr. HUNT. Yes. The print was of quite poor quality. As I said,
this is a black and white Polaroid print and it had been manhan-
dled quite a bit during the years. We concluded the results over
here would be probably the same. When we look at the quality of
the image in this region it seems even poorer than the quality
where we already had negative results.
Mr. GOLDSMITH. The region you were just referring to is the
region of the stockade fence?
Dr. HUNT. That is correct.
Mr. GOLDSMITH. Referring your attention to JFK F-161, what
type of enhancement work was applied to the Nix film?
Dr. HUNT. This particular frame out of the Nix film was subject-
ed to an enhancement operation at Aerospace Corp. in Los Angeles
in which the nature of the enhancement was to bring the image
more into focus. We know there is a slight blur in it, from the
nature of the camera's image system. We tried to remove that blur.
Mr. GOLDSMITH. Was the panel able to reach any conclusion as to
the presence of a gunman by the retaining wall?
Dr. HUNT. Over here at the retaining wall area we see some
pattern of light and dark, shaped roughly like a triangle. You see
that better in the enlargement, which we have shown here. The
panel could not conclude this was a person. We see no flesh tones
associated with that region of the sort we find over here on Za-
pruder and his secretary.
Mr. GOLDSMITH. Was this particular photograph subjected to digi-
tal image processing?
Dr. HUNT. Yes.
Mr. GOLDSMITH. Was the panel able to discern any sign of a flash
or puff of smoke?
Dr. HUNT. No. They found no flash or puff of smoke in that
retaining wall area of this film.
Mr. GOLDSMITH. The retaining wall area in this particular frame
seems to be on the periphery of the frame. What effect, if any, does
that have on the quality of the image?
Dr. HUNT. Well, it is in fact on the periphery of the frame. If you
look on the frame itself it cuts off a little to the right where the
photograph was printed.
412
By and large, the edge of a frame is the region of greatest
degradation in the photo, a region where you are likely to find
ragged edges of the frame, a region where you will find misfocusing
of different colors, a region where you will find the greatest
amount of blurring.
Mr. GOLDSMITH. Might that account for claims made by some
that in that area of the photograph a flash or puff of smoke was
perceived?
Dr. HUNT. Certainly it could. For example, an object in the
background which might have been perceived as something easily
recognizable in the center might be out of focus at the edge and
simply not properly perceived.
Post by Alex FoylePost by Anthony MarshPost by Alex FoyleCan you give us a source for your claim that Black Dog Man was wearing a
black suit and a black hat?
HSCA. Read it sometime.
I did, several times, and as I said before, the HSCA does not say that
Black Dog Man was wearing a black hat and a black suit. Kindly provide the
HSCA source for that claim.
Do you know what object we are debating? It is called Black Dog Man. Do
you know why it is called Black Dog Man? Because some conspiracy authors
thought it looks liked a black dog sitting on the retaining wall. Martin
and I debated this and he came up with the woman and baby so I made fun of
his theory by calling it the Black Dog-Faced Woman. Her clothes and skin
tone are not compatible with the image behind the retaining wall.
Post by Alex FoylePost by Anthony MarshRobin almost never posted here so you'll have to read all the thread on
the other forum.
Which other forum?
The research forum.
