MJK1 & MJK3 camera positions - plan view. (Warning - graphic images)

[smezenen]

Not that it matters much but the right limit you have drawn for the "blue camera is off a bit. in your drawing the line clearly is on the left side of the righthand table leg. If that where the true limit then you would not see the table leg in the picture. As the leg is visible in the picture then the line is wrong and should be on the right side of the leg. other than that it is a beautiful job worthy of much praise and very usefull in studying the crime scene.

[Suzi]

Hi sgh,

I echo Chris' comment there - that it's looking good and I am looking forward to seeing it fine tuned. I've never used autocad, but it looks like a bit of a bugger!

Hugs

Jane

xxxxx

I echo Chris too and as to the 'program' Janey...........

Aaaagh it does!!! (Although "Autocad" sounds rather amusing!- wonder if I could get one!! (LOL)

[Simon Wood]

Oh Good,

Little thought. Situation the same. That's all right then.

How reassuring.

Regards,

Simon

[Suzi]

Hi Guys (and Janey!) OK have been having a think here- I reckon that camera position is a tad too far up the partition wall....and that I'd imagine that the bed was around 5'8" to 5' 10" long..Must do some research into that though--lazily I can't remember MJK's height in life....That may help re length of bed.

Suz x

Janey You're NOT crackers!!!!....well not any more crackers than me!! xxxxxxxx

More afterthoughts here too.....OK just checked 5'7" in life- I reckon that bed has to be 5' 10" to 6' in that case bearing in mind the leg positioning...Probably around 5' 10" ...ish...was there a 'foot board' at the bottom of the bed....I imagine there was- that probably matched the head board -only lower.

As to MJK3- the crack or whatever showing the 'line of light' at the side of the door, would also put that angle slightly more to the right in your great image there sgh...otherwise what is it?....nothing to do with things hanging from the ceiling I'm sure Looking forward to seeing the next update! Steve!

[sgh]

Sorry, afterthought, as usual....

The reason I said I thought the camera might be a fraction to far up the bed, is not just because of the bed length, but it seems to be the general concensus now, that the line of light that can be seen running through the middle of MJK3 is the hinge of the door, rather than the window. Adding together the length of the bed and that probably being the door hinge, then it could be that the pink camera is a fraction too high up the bed.

I'm sure there will be plenty to let me know if they think I'm crackers. Lol.

Hugs

Jane

xxxxx

Many thanks for your input Jane, it's greatly appreciated, same too for Chris.
I'm working on your advice and will upload a revision as soon as it's ready.
The line of light - well, I hope to shed more light on that one! :-)

Best, Steve

[Jane Coram]

Hi sgh,

I echo Chris' comment there - that it's looking good and I am looking forward to seeing it fine tuned. I've never used autocad, but it looks like a bit of a bugger!

Hugs

Jane

xxxxx

[Simon Wood]

Around about here—



Regards,

Simon

[ChrisGeorge]

Sorry, afterthought, as usual....

The reason I said I thought the camera might be a fraction to far up the bed, is not just because of the bed length, but it seems to be the general concensus now, that the line of light that can be seen running through the middle of MJK3 is the hinge of the door, rather than the window.

Hi Jane and sgh

I agree with your statement, Jane. So sgh, I suggest you redraw your diagram. So far so good. I am looking forward to seeing where you take it.

Chris

[Jane Coram]

Sorry, afterthought, as usual....

The reason I said I thought the camera might be a fraction to far up the bed, is not just because of the bed length, but it seems to be the general concensus now, that the line of light that can be seen running through the middle of MJK3 is the hinge of the door, rather than the window. Adding together the length of the bed and that probably being the door hinge, then it could be that the pink camera is a fraction too high up the bed.

I'm sure there will be plenty to let me know if they think I'm crackers. Lol.

Hugs

Jane

xxxxx

[Jane Coram]

Hi,

Interesting stuff, you've obviously put a great deal of work into them. I'll wait until you get some comments on the diagrams and will gladly try and put an outline sketch of Mary on the bed, once your happy with the work, just in case you need to do any twiddling.

The only thing that strikes me as a possible point of discussion is whether or not the position of the camera, by the wall, is a little too high up the bed, but that could well be right and I'm just having a mad half hour! (Of course it would depend how long the bed was, but I'm sure there will be lots of offers as to bed dimensions over the next few posts. Lol.)

Well done for tackling a very daunting task anyway!

Hugs

Jane

xxxx

[sgh]

Using photos, sketches and text descriptions of 13 Miller's Court to obtain physical dimensions of the building, it's possible to produce a fairly accurate scaled plan view reproduction of the crime scene of Mary Jane Kelly as seen within the two well known and published photographs known as
MJK1 and MJK3.

The field of view (FOV) of those two photos, MJK1 and MJK3, are used to place the positions of where the camera was likely to be to capture each photograph.
This is achieved by using landmarks in each photograph then locating those marks on the scaled drawing and developing the FOV parameters as lines back to a point.
After a fairly exhaustive set of trial and error layouts of object dimension and positioning within the confines of each of the FOV's, this layout appears to be about as near as possible to how the scene may have looked.

I've used Autocad to draw this plan so that accuracy is ensured and also added a scale so that readers can make a printout and confirm dimensional configurations themselves.
I decided to use this 'screengrab' in the actual CAD window because it reproduces with clarity, whereas a print and scan would loose the finer details and dimensions become confusing to read.

I apologise for the dimensioning in millimetres. I still use feet and inches but prefer to draw in mm's, so I'm sure some of you will be doing the conversions.

I hope this drawing helps to resolve some of the misunderstandings that have arisen between the interpretation of the two photographs in the past, eg, moving the table or bed or both to suit the photographer.
I think that careful study of the drawing in conjunction with the two photos should quickly dissolve those conclusions as false !

If the layout is agreed to be fairly accurate then let it follow that more information can be extracted for the enquiring mind to explore further in the case of Mary Jane Kelly.
Knowing the exact camera, lens and format would give greater accuracy,
but that is something I have not been able to locate.

I didn't include the full figure of MJK on the bed as hand drawing is not my thing, perhaps artist Jane Coram could intervene and draw MJK to scale.

Best, Steve