Now, I have visible proof that the sign we see in the Zapruder film is bogus. First, here is the result of someone standing on Zapruder's pedestal and filming the way he did. However, it's apparent that Zapruder used the power-zoom on his camera, and this person did not. Compare:
So, he must have used the Zoom, right? He had one. OK, now let's go back and install the freeway sign in the recent picture.
That sign should be perpendicular to the road or the sidewalk. So, it needs to be rotated counter-clockwise probably 20 to 30 degrees to be correct. But, it will have to do. Now obviously, the sign intrudes on the camera field- when you include the whole field. But, Zapruder zoomed in. He used the Power Zoom on his camera. And the best way for me to mimic that is to crop and enlarge because that is the manual way of zooming. Note that that first frame in Zapruder caught only part of the latice-work at the corner in front of the reflecting pond.
I cropped that image out of the one with the sign, and you notice that the sign does not intrude. I can leave a lot more in without the sign intruding.
Still, there is no sign intruding. So, the sign we see in the Zapruder film is fake. There was a sign on Elm Street, and no doubt Zapruder captured it, but it was smaller; it did not come into view high on the hill; and it was angled differently and did provide as much screening (blocking of the view) that there is in the Zapruder film, The real sign was subsumed under the larger phony one, and we never see the real sign in the Zapruder film. It's the phony sign all the way in the Z film.