The blue box represents the field of the camera. You notice that the bottom of the box is not level, but the picture would be. So, in your mind, you have to rotate it.
I don't claim that is exactly level, but you get the idea. And that, he says, is what we see, in essence, in the Moorman photo.
Obviously, the drawing is exaggerated. The angle wasn't as big as it appears on the left. But, that's OK because sometimes a little exaggeration helps to get a point across.
As far as the elevation of the camera goes, the Professor did recognize it as a variable, and he assigned it the designation "h".
So, he has a line going from the ground to the limo and another line going from the elevated camera on the ground to the limo, and he notes it as an angle. Notice that he moved the bottom of the blue box (which represents the physical photograph) up; he duplicated it higher. And he did that just show that there's an angle there between the line of the limo and the bottom of the picture. And in the Moorman photo, it is smaller than what he has depicted there, but no big deal.
So, by designating "h" for height, he acknowledges that as a variable, and he would factor into that any height difference in the ground between where Babushka was standing and where the limo was. But, no matter what the difference was, it doesn't change the big picture, and that's what he's showing here in this diagram: the big picture. It is just noise and distraction to get caught up on that.
And why bring up the slope in the road? The slope of the road was downward in the direction the limo was going, west. So, if the photographer was facing the road squarely, at 90 degrees, and shooting a car, we should see the downward slope.
That obviously was taken from some elevation, but it shows the slope of the road, and the slope of the car matches the slope of the road, as you would expect. The bottom of the picture remains horizontal, as it always is. But, that's the exact same location (give or take) that the Moorman was taken. So, how come the slope of the limo is going the other way in it? Up?
So, if you want to talk about the slope of the road, it's fine with me, but if you were a smarter man, you would know to shut the fuck up about it.
As far as knowing where Mary Moorman was pointing her camera, ALL we can do is go by what's she told us and shown us. That's it. There is no reliable image showing Mary when she took her picture. And since, we know she didn't take the Moorman photo, all we can say is that hers was taken shortly before the Moorman photo. That's all that we can say with certainty.
Here is Z-292. Notice that her coat is closed.
So, she was already damn close to taking her picture, if she wasn't taking it then, she was taking it soon.
Here is 293. Her coat is still closed.
And her coat remains closed for quite a few frames. It stays closed like that all the way until 298 where we see it open.
And from that point on, it stays open all the way until she disappears from the film completely at 316. It looks exactly the same, and she and everything about her look exactly the same from that point on.
So, though I can't say it with certainty, I am going to call Z-298 the frame in which Mary took her photo. I don't mean the Moorman photo of fame, but rather, the photo that she actually took. And that's because she doesn't change after that. She is frozen from that point on.
I'll continue with the Trigonometry in the next blog, but you be sure to tell your bosses that there is nothing that you, or they, can throw me that will prevail. In all the years I've been doing this, I have NEVER once had to remove anything from the OIC website because of something you said. Everything is still there. I have never had to delete a thing because of you.