REOPEN KENNEDY CASE

BECAUSE JUSTICE IS NEVER TOO LATE

Oswald Add Video

Posted by Lee Farley on November 17, 2014 at 7:43 AM 2000 Views

Post a Comment

Oops!

Oops, you forgot something.

Oops!

The words you entered did not match the given text. Please try again.

Already a member? Sign In

14 Comments

Reply Barto
5:47 AM on January 19, 2015 
Oner more thing, I remember Shane O'Sullivan being forbidden showing the Z film in 'Killing Oswald', as the 6th fl museum (if that is what you have to call it these days) run by turncoat Gary Mack, holds the rights to it, so the question is......... are you able to?
Reply Barto
5:44 AM on January 19, 2015 
Nice costume design Hasan :-)
Reply Stan Dane
3:10 PM on November 24, 2014 
You bring up a good point, Frankie. I asked my wife (who visibly winces when see she sees the headshot sequence) what she thought, and she said she'd leave it out of any short clips or trailers promoting the video (or tone down any gruesomeness), but in a longer video, we may want to keep it in if it dramatically adds to the emotional power of the presentation (perhaps with a warning first). When the public first saw the 1975 Geraldo Rivera showing of the Z-film, they were shocked at what they saw. It led people to action, so it could be a good thing. But I'm sure whatever direction the team decides to go, it will be the correct one. I have full confidence in your abilities and instincts!
Reply Frankie Vegas
6:55 AM on November 24, 2014 
Hey, these are beautiful and look really professional! The hidden talents of people you know aye?
I just wanted to throw my two cents in here and they might not be relevant since you guys are all talking about ratio aspects and stuff. But I think the Z frame 313 and the autopsy pic are too gruesome. You probably won't be keeping them in but I still feel like I have to say it so here goes... I've noticed that in all the docos I watch they will leave out the head shot (which I don't mind seeing actually) and/or put in a warning type deal if something gruesome is going to come on... it's just that I have seen other people freak out about seeing the head shot easpecially in youtube vids or if it has been posted as a picture without some sort of warning first and just thinking of who we are aiming this at. General public or hardened researchers like ourselves. Anyway, I realise these are just mock ups (pretty damn swish ones!) and it's not the final cut or anything so forgive me if I have spoken out of turn...
I bet you could get a good word from Jim D and he might well pass it on to Oliver Stone! (if we don't pass it on first that is).
Reply Lee Farley
3:21 PM on November 18, 2014 
Paul McGurkenfarklein says...
Thanks Lee and sorry if I appear too narky too early. I only mentioned it because when a 4:3 is stretched to a 16:9 without zooming, it doesn't look right. I regard film as a document and it should be presented in its original format so we can be faithful to it. For example the Oswald shooting and the Zapruder film IMO should be left unenhanced. However, I don't see anything wrong with using a good quality 16:9 zoomed conversion for artistic purposes. I recently downloaded a PBS Kennedy doco and the 16:9 conversion on some original footage was amazing. I know we are no PBS but I believe in being contemporary and personally I find the 16:9 format more pleasing aesthetically speaking.
Another issue we might face is fucking copyright. But that really is raining it early doors (had to look that up Lee. First time I have heard it)


Just a quick one before I respond to your post in greater detail.

My auto-fill on my iPad has obviously filled in the word 'raining' because what I was actually wanting to type was 'raising'.

Fuck auto-correct...
Reply Paul Francisco Paso
2:47 PM on November 18, 2014 
Lee Farley says...
Hi Paul

Something I haven't really been considering at this stage but will check later. I'm sure there is. There will be ups and downs to this in so far as using the original aspect ratio on some clips versus using 16:9 on others will have an effect of black bars running down the sides on some footage and not on others. For some, cinema aficionados like myself, this is what they would want because you will be seeing the original aspect ratio of the film as shot. For others, they'll be sat wondering why the picture keeps changing format.

An additional issue is that some of the original footage that I currently have has already had the 16:9 conversion applied to it. I'm sure the original aspect ratio footage exists out there but finding it in every case, should I require a particular shot, would become even more time consuming.

Let me try answering your question tonight when I get home and then we'll make a decision on what format we are all happy with?

Thanks for raining this early doors

Thanks Lee and sorry if I appear too narky too early. I only mentioned it because when a 4:3 is stretched to a 16:9 without zooming, it doesn't look right. I regard film as a document and it should be presented in its original format so we can be faithful to it. For example the Oswald shooting and the Zapruder film IMO should be left unenhanced. However, I don't see anything wrong with using a good quality 16:9 zoomed conversion for artistic purposes. I recently downloaded a PBS Kennedy doco and the 16:9 conversion on some original footage was amazing. I know we are no PBS but I believe in being contemporary and personally I find the 16:9 format more pleasing aesthetically speaking.
Another issue we might face is fucking copyright. But that really is raining it early doors (had to look that up Lee. First time I have heard it)
Reply Lee Farley
5:22 AM on November 18, 2014 
Paul McGurkenfarklein says...
Lee, is there a provision to adapt the screen ratio so it doesn't appear too stretched on some of the 4:3 clips? I know zooming them to 16:9 can sometimes fix it but it can lead to loss of resolution.


Hi Paul

Something I haven't really been considering at this stage but will check later. I'm sure there is. There will be ups and downs to this in so far as using the original aspect ratio on some clips versus using 16:9 on others will have an effect of black bars running down the sides on some footage and not on others. For some, cinema aficionados like myself, this is what they would want because you will be seeing the original aspect ratio of the film as shot. For others, they'll be sat wondering why the picture keeps changing format.

An additional issue is that some of the original footage that I currently have has already had the 16:9 conversion applied to it. I'm sure the original aspect ratio footage exists out there but finding it in every case, should I require a particular shot, would become even more time consuming.

Let me try answering your question tonight when I get home and then we'll make a decision on what format we are all happy with?

Thanks for raining this early doors
Reply Lee Farley
4:36 AM on November 18, 2014 
Thanks for the feedback everyone. Fills me with a bit of confidence that I can hit the right emotional chords putting this stuff together. I find the editing process the most satisfying part. Very similar to playing music it is all about timing and beats.

Just a quick disclaimer here: NEITHER OLIVER STONE nor JIM DIEUGENIO have endorsed anything concerning the content of the video. And nobody listed in the Credits has had anything to do with putting these videos together.

These videos have been put here as test footage for your attention and feedback. Soon they will be removed before work on the real material starts.

However, I am hopeful that we can get direct quotes from Jim and I think I'd faint if we ever got Ollie to positively comment on our final production.
Reply Goban Saor
1:32 AM on November 18, 2014 
That's terrific, Lee.
As Stan said, you've got the knack for this.
Reply Paul Francisco Paso
4:27 PM on November 17, 2014 
Lee, is there a provision to adapt the screen ratio so it doesn't appear too stretched on some of the 4:3 clips? I know zooming them to 16:9 can sometimes fix it but it can lead to loss of resolution.
Reply Greg
3:24 PM on November 17, 2014 
Lee Farley says...
Okay. Test number two. Been playing with multi-layering of sound (music and effects) and also how easy it is to cut down video and insert. The edit points can be a bit frustrating and I'm not happy with a few of the dissolves.
The software can be a little bit time intensive the more you add complexity to what you are doing but speed with come with experience. Feedback again would be welcome. Likes, dislikes, ideas, or questions.
After playing around again with it I'm more confident that we can produce something of pretty decent quality.


Lee,

I will upgrade in a day or two. Almost have enough in the kitty. Hopefully after that, you'll be able to upload anything without hassle.

If it continues to be an issue though, Stan's suggestion on youtube might be a good one. I think (but could be wrong) that if you don't want to share with public on youtube immediately, you can make them private. Having them on there (private or public) would make it easier to put them here via link or embedding.
Reply Stan Dane
12:26 PM on November 17, 2014 
You got the knack for this, Lee! ROKC on!
Reply Lee Farley
8:03 AM on November 17, 2014 
And just to reiterate again, the quality on this version is not very good so as to save on space here at the forum. These are, after all just test videos. The quality of the originals of these videos is quite stunning as they have been encoded at a very high bitrate and very high resolution. If anybody would like a copy of the original then send me you email address to my PM here and I'll get you access to them from the iCloud.
Reply Lee Farley
7:49 AM on November 17, 2014 
Okay. Test number two. Been playing with multi-layering of sound (music and effects) and also how easy it is to cut down video and insert. The edit points can be a bit frustrating and I'm not happy with a few of the dissolves.
The software can be a little bit time intensive the more you add complexity to what you are doing but speed with come with experience. Feedback again would be welcome. Likes, dislikes, ideas, or questions.
After playing around again with it I'm more confident that we can produce something of pretty decent quality.

Oops! This site has expired.

If you are the site owner, please renew your premium subscription or contact support.