7 ms·
Do you think the video is edited or where was the body guard that you think shot him?
by sneeds 5y ago
Do you think the video is edited or where was the body guard that you think shot him?
- vanusa 5y agoIt wasn't a "video", back then they only had ... never mind.
- sneeds 5y agoI dont even know what you are trying to say.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- vanusa 5y agoThe commenter thinks the Zapruder film was a "video" is what I'm saying.
- jstanley 5y agoIn what way is it not a video?
- shard 5y agoAs a generalization: Video, going back to before the digital era, refers to images recorded on magnetic videotapes, such as VHS or Betamax. This is in contrast with film, which is images recorded using light sensitive silver halide crystals. Video tapes are viewed by scanning the magnetic strips and displaying on a monitor with scan lines. Films are viewed by shining a light through the developed film and displaying the whole image on a reflective screen.
- BrazzVuvuzela 5y agoNot quite. Video is generally an electronic medium for moving pictures and can be sent over cables or radio waves from the camera to the TV, without touching a tape. A video signal can be recorded on a tape, but isn't necessarily.
- shard 5y agoYes, you are right. Looks like you squeezed in your comment before I was able to put the "as a generalization" disclaimer on it! :) I was thinking more of the situation where some people might be confused with the Zapruder recording, that it could be on videotape instead of film, which is why I didn't try to cover all the corner cases.
- mongol 5y agoIt was film. Video is an electronic signal stored on tape (originally)
- wavefunction 5y agoI assume all the times I've watched it, it's been from video format. I really doubt they were playing the 8mm every time live and broadcasting. So... I guess it's now a video and not film.
- sneeds 5y agoYeah, the commenter is me and that is what I am saying. Video can refer to non-digital media, see: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/video https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/video And even if it didn't, what did you think I meant? Do you think I believe that someone shot that on a smartphone? And how is that even relevant to the question? The question was if the OP thinks, that what we see was edited. Are you mentally disabled or something? Then please keep out of my responses until you have taken your meds.
- vanusa 5y agoVideo can refer to non-digital media, see: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/video https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/video It still doesn't say that video includes "film". You can make a video recording of a film of course, but that's different. And even if it didn't, what did you think I meant? And how is that even relevant to the question? It seems you were confused about something that used to be a very obvious distinction, that not too long ago no one would trip up on (the difference between "video" and "film"). It's not especially relevant of course, it was just weird.
- floor2 5y agoYour stance on this is intriguing to me. I'm treating this thread as a neat little obscure, pedantic fact that I learned today- that historically the word "video" had a distinct meaning from "film". Because never once in my 40-some years as an English speaking American have I ever seen this distinction. The two words are functionally synonyms in common usage, or perhaps the common usage would be something like "film" is a subset of "video". Perhaps it varies with geography or industry? Maybe Americans use the terms interchangeably but Brits don't? Or maybe within the entertainment or photography industries experts use the terms with more precision than the average citizen?
- AnimalMuppet 5y agoI think you're just not old enough. Back in the 1960s, film and video were distinct mediums. For one thing, film had a lot higher resolution. For another, they ran at different frame rates. There were tricks to convert film to video (3:2 pulldown), but nobody went from video to film - the resolution was so limited, it would look terrible.
- ladberg 5y agoAre you trying to say they didn't have video in 1963?
- bryanrasmussen 5y agoyes, he's saying they only had film in 1963
- tantalor 5y agoWhat do you think TV is?
- the-dude 5y agoTV is a video you can't rewind. Not the real thing.
- khazhoux 5y agoA quick search (wikipedia) shows videotape existed in 1956, at $300/hr.
- vanusa 5y agoRight - something for studios, not the man on the street.
- bryanrasmussen 5y agothanks, I wasn't aware, although whether or not they had what vanusa was saying seemed obvious.
- BuildTheRobots 5y agoJust as an fyi, that's pretty massive tape used in a broadcast studio. The first consumer video camera (camera that recorded to tape rather than film) wasn't until the BetaMovie in 1983 with VHS coming months later. Heck, _home_ video recorders were still 15-20 years off at the time.
- 5y ago
- kritiko 5y agoIn the car behind him - there's a 1992 book about this theory if you are curious: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mortal_Error https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mortal_Error