Discussion:
FILM GRAIN
(too old to reply)
BOZ
2018-03-06 19:58:41 UTC
Permalink
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Film_grain
Anthony Marsh
2018-03-07 22:38:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by BOZ
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Film_grain
I love film grain when it is used properly. Great for science fiction
movies.

But it has nothing to with anything we were talking about here. SOme moron
here did not realize that the Hughes film had been digitized so he thought
they were looking at film grain.
John McAdams
2018-03-07 22:39:07 UTC
Permalink
On 7 Mar 2018 17:38:02 -0500, Anthony Marsh
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by BOZ
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Film_grain
I love film grain when it is used properly. Great for science fiction
movies.
But it has nothing to with anything we were talking about here. SOme moron
here did not realize that the Hughes film had been digitized so he thought
they were looking at film grain.
There is grain noise in that clip.

If you digitize film at high resolution, you get everything in the
original, including grain.

.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Anthony Marsh
2018-03-09 15:13:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by John McAdams
On 7 Mar 2018 17:38:02 -0500, Anthony Marsh
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by BOZ
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Film_grain
I love film grain when it is used properly. Great for science fiction
movies.
But it has nothing to with anything we were talking about here. SOme moron
here did not realize that the Hughes film had been digitized so he thought
they were looking at film grain.
There is grain noise in that clip.
If you digitize film at high resolution, you get everything in the
original, including grain.
Yes. How high a resolution?
My point stands and he admitted that he was wrong and that the analysis
was done on a digitized copy.
You have it on 8mm, right, because you're a real researcher?
Post by John McAdams
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
BOZ
2018-03-09 02:02:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by BOZ
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Film_grain
I love film grain when it is used properly. Great for science fiction
movies.
But it has nothing to with anything we were talking about here. SOme moron
here did not realize that the Hughes film had been digitized so he thought
they were looking at film grain.
GREAT FOR SCIENCE FICTION? YOU WERE REFERRING TO THE ACOUSTICAL EVIDENCE.
Jason Burke
2018-03-09 21:26:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by BOZ
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by BOZ
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Film_grain
I love film grain when it is used properly. Great for science fiction
movies.
But it has nothing to with anything we were talking about here. SOme moron
here did not realize that the Hughes film had been digitized so he thought
they were looking at film grain.
GREAT FOR SCIENCE FICTION? YOU WERE REFERRING TO THE ACOUSTICAL EVIDENCE.
Nah. That acoustic "evidence" is total fiction. No science anywhere near
it.
OHLeeRedux
2018-03-10 14:26:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jason Burke
Post by BOZ
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by BOZ
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Film_grain
I love film grain when it is used properly. Great for science fiction
movies.
But it has nothing to with anything we were talking about here. SOme moron
here did not realize that the Hughes film had been digitized so he thought
they were looking at film grain.
GREAT FOR SCIENCE FICTION? YOU WERE REFERRING TO THE ACOUSTICAL EVIDENCE.
Nah. That acoustic "evidence" is total fiction. No science anywhere near
it.
Isn't it fun to say things that make the veins pop out on Marsh's
forehead?
Anthony Marsh
2018-03-10 14:29:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jason Burke
Post by BOZ
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by BOZ
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Film_grain
I love film grain when it is used properly. Great for science fiction
movies.
But it has nothing to with anything we were talking about here. SOme moron
here did not realize that the Hughes film had been digitized so he thought
they were looking at film grain.
GREAT FOR SCIENCE FICTION? YOU WERE REFERRING TO THE ACOUSTICAL EVIDENCE.
Nah. That acoustic "evidence" is total fiction. No science anywhere near
it.
The science of detection of gunshots by measuring echo patterns is used
by the military and civilian authorities every day to identify the
source of gunfire. Developed by BBN to study the JFK assassination and
developed into a commercial product known as Boomerang. If it had been
installed in ALL schools it might have saved lives in several of these
mass shooting cases. But let's spend that money on arming every teacher
instead. What could possible go wrong?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boomerang_(mobile_shooter_detection_system)
Jason Burke
2018-03-11 00:54:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Jason Burke
Post by BOZ
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by BOZ
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Film_grain
I love film grain when it is used properly. Great for science fiction
movies.
But it has nothing to with anything we were talking about here. SOme moron
here did not realize that the Hughes film had been digitized so he thought
they were looking at film grain.
GREAT FOR SCIENCE FICTION? YOU WERE REFERRING TO THE ACOUSTICAL EVIDENCE.
Nah. That acoustic "evidence" is total fiction. No science anywhere
near it.
The science of detection of gunshots by measuring echo patterns is used
by the military and civilian authorities every day to identify the
source of gunfire. Developed by BBN to study the JFK assassination and
developed into a commercial product known as Boomerang. If it had been
installed in ALL schools it might have saved lives in several of these
mass shooting cases. But let's spend that money on arming every teacher
instead. What could possible go wrong?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boomerang_(mobile_shooter_detection_system)
Fascinating, Anthony Anthony.
Nice to know that you can cut and paste.
You still have the problem that the acoustic "evidence" was neither in
Dealey nor at the time of the assassination, though.

No matter how spiffy your BASIC program is.
Anthony Marsh
2018-03-12 01:19:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jason Burke
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Jason Burke
Post by BOZ
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by BOZ
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Film_grain
I love film grain when it is used properly. Great for science fiction
movies.
But it has nothing to with anything we were talking about here. SOme moron
here did not realize that the Hughes film had been digitized so he thought
they were looking at film grain.
GREAT FOR SCIENCE FICTION? YOU WERE REFERRING TO THE ACOUSTICAL EVIDENCE.
Nah. That acoustic "evidence" is total fiction. No science anywhere
near it.
The science of detection of gunshots by measuring echo patterns is
used by the military and civilian authorities every day to identify
the source of gunfire. Developed by BBN to study the JFK assassination
and developed into a commercial product known as Boomerang. If it had
been installed in ALL schools it might have saved lives in several of
these mass shooting cases. But let's spend that money on arming every
teacher instead. What could possible go wrong?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boomerang_(mobile_shooter_detection_system)
Fascinating, Anthony Anthony.
Nice to know that you can cut and paste.
I use cut and paste to post links which prove my point, because some
Goober here accused me of simply making up a quote because he wasn't smart
enough to look it up on Google. I hope YOU were smart enough to click on
the link and read it. It proves my point that acoustics is a real science
and it can detect the source of a gunshot. Can you finally admit that
simple fact of science? Yes or no?
Post by Jason Burke
You still have the problem that the acoustic "evidence" was neither in
Dealey nor at the time of the assassination, though.
No, I don't because the people who made that claim are liars.
Post by Jason Burke
No matter how spiffy your BASIC program is.
Spiffy? So you admit that it works.
It is not as spiffy as I wanted it to be.
I did not have the data for the 5th shot.
I also wonder if there is a way to detect the echoes from the shock wave
and PROVE where each bullet went.
W&A thought the grassy knoll shot hit. But they did not have a way to
prove what it hit.

Loading Image...

Naturally you are too afraid to click on the link and read what W&A said
about the grassy knoll shot. And McAdams will not allow links to be
displayed inline so that's how you WC defenders can claim that you never
saw the evidence.
Even though I've posted it hundreds of times.
McAdams gag rule. He does not believe in Free Speech and an open and
honest debate. He slants the evidence to fit his prejudices.
Jason Burke
2018-03-12 20:05:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Jason Burke
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Jason Burke
Post by BOZ
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by BOZ
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Film_grain
I love film grain when it is used properly. Great for science fiction
movies.
But it has nothing to with anything we were talking about here. SOme moron
here did not realize that the Hughes film had been digitized so he thought
they were looking at film grain.
GREAT FOR SCIENCE FICTION? YOU WERE REFERRING TO THE ACOUSTICAL EVIDENCE.
Nah. That acoustic "evidence" is total fiction. No science anywhere
near it.
The science of detection of gunshots by measuring echo patterns is
used by the military and civilian authorities every day to identify
the source of gunfire. Developed by BBN to study the JFK
assassination and developed into a commercial product known as
Boomerang. If it had been installed in ALL schools it might have
saved lives in several of these mass shooting cases. But let's spend
that money on arming every teacher instead. What could possible go
wrong?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boomerang_(mobile_shooter_detection_system)
Fascinating, Anthony Anthony.
Nice to know that you can cut and paste.
I use cut and paste to post links which prove my point, because some
Goober here accused me of simply making up a quote because he wasn't
smart enough to look it up on Google. I hope YOU were smart enough to
click on the link and read it. It proves my point that acoustics is a
real science and it can detect the source of a gunshot. Can you finally
admit that simple fact of science? Yes or no?
Sure, acoustics is a valid science, Anthony Anthony.
'm sure you picked it up by osmosis when driving the Mass Ave route.

Your acoustic "evidence" was neither in Dealey Plaza nor at the time of
the assassination.

Soooo... What's your point?
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Jason Burke
You still have the problem that the acoustic "evidence" was neither in
Dealey nor at the time of the assassination, though.
No, I don't because the people who made that claim are liars.
Sure they are, Anthony Anthony.
Sure they are.
They have to be for your rainbow and unicorn fantasy.
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Jason Burke
No matter how spiffy your BASIC program is.
Spiffy? So you admit that it works.
Ah, the Cinque method!

If A, then Z.

Don't worry about all those annoying intervening letters.
Post by Anthony Marsh
It is not as spiffy as I wanted it to be.
I did not have the data for the 5th shot.
There was no fifth shot, Anthony Anthony.
Heck, there was no fourth shot, Anthony Anthony.
Post by Anthony Marsh
I also wonder if there is a way to detect the echoes from the shock wave
and PROVE where each bullet went.
W&A thought the grassy knoll shot hit. But they did not have a way to
prove what it hit.
http://www.the-puzzle-palace.com/WH12_22_78p1.jpg
Naturally you are too afraid to click on the link and read what W&A said
about the grassy knoll shot. And McAdams will not allow links to be
Yawn.
Post by Anthony Marsh
displayed inline so that's how you WC defenders can claim that you never
saw the evidence.
Even though I've posted it hundreds of times.
McAdams gag rule. He does not believe in Free Speech and an open and
honest debate. He slants the evidence to fit his prejudices.
A new interpretation of the Marsh Rule:

Whatever Marsh says is true. No matter how easily and quickly it goes
down in flames.
Now I'm gonna go cry in my beer about the Gaels and that NCAA tourney
thingie.
OHLeeRedux
2018-03-12 20:06:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Jason Burke
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Jason Burke
Post by BOZ
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by BOZ
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Film_grain
I love film grain when it is used properly. Great for science fiction
movies.
But it has nothing to with anything we were talking about here. SOme moron
here did not realize that the Hughes film had been digitized so he thought
they were looking at film grain.
GREAT FOR SCIENCE FICTION? YOU WERE REFERRING TO THE ACOUSTICAL EVIDENCE.
Nah. That acoustic "evidence" is total fiction. No science anywhere
near it.
The science of detection of gunshots by measuring echo patterns is
used by the military and civilian authorities every day to identify
the source of gunfire. Developed by BBN to study the JFK assassination
and developed into a commercial product known as Boomerang. If it had
been installed in ALL schools it might have saved lives in several of
these mass shooting cases. But let's spend that money on arming every
teacher instead. What could possible go wrong?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boomerang_(mobile_shooter_detection_system)
Fascinating, Anthony Anthony.
Nice to know that you can cut and paste.
I use cut and paste to post links which prove my point, because some
Goober here accused me of simply making up a quote because he wasn't smart
enough to look it up on Google. I hope YOU were smart enough to click on
the link and read it. It proves my point that acoustics is a real science
and it can detect the source of a gunshot. Can you finally admit that
simple fact of science? Yes or no?
Post by Jason Burke
You still have the problem that the acoustic "evidence" was neither in
Dealey nor at the time of the assassination, though.
No, I don't because the people who made that claim are liars.
Pot, meet kettle.

Anthony Marsh
2018-03-10 14:26:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by BOZ
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by BOZ
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Film_grain
I love film grain when it is used properly. Great for science fiction
movies.
But it has nothing to with anything we were talking about here. SOme moron
here did not realize that the Hughes film had been digitized so he thought
they were looking at film grain.
GREAT FOR SCIENCE FICTION? YOU WERE REFERRING TO THE ACOUSTICAL EVIDENCE.
English here please.
Loading...