MJK1 & MJK3 don't tally!

[Stephen Thomas]

So either my maths and perspective set up is crap... OR MJK, the bed, table or all three were moved between MJK1 and MJK3 being taken.

I suspect the former but let's see what you've got.

[Tecs]

Thanks for the replies. It looks likely that the bed was moved BUT the thing that struck me while faffing with my 3D toy is that MJK herself looks to have been moved. Like I said, my maths (especially trigonometry) is laughable so I need to take some time to check and recheck what I've done. But I'll ask this: The left knee in MJK1, is it low to the mattress? because in MJK3 it is certainly higher in the air (to me).

It's as if the photographer has pushed down the right leg to get a better camera angle and thus the left leg/knee has risen (she must have been a bit stiff!).

more soon

Hi Richard,

If you can prove through analysing the photography that her body moved in such a way as you describe, then that might give us a clue as to how far rigor mortis had progressed and therefore time of death.

Another example of where we can still get clues from something we think we have wrung every possible clue out of?

Do we know the exact time the photographs were taken?

regards,

[richardh]

Thanks for the replies. It looks likely that the bed was moved BUT the thing that struck me while faffing with my 3D toy is that MJK herself looks to have been moved. Like I said, my maths (especially trigonometry) is laughable so I need to take some time to check and recheck what I've done. But I'll ask this: The left knee in MJK1, is it low to the mattress? because in MJK3 it is certainly higher in the air (to me).

It's as if the photographer has pushed down the right leg to get a better camera angle and thus the left leg/knee has risen (she must have been a bit stiff!).

more soon

[Monty]

Hi Richard,

This was debated around 2000, dunno if its archived.

Rob McLaughlin was involved, I recall that, and I believe the general concensus was that the benn was indeed moved in order for the photographer to position himself for the shot.

As I said, may be worth an archive trawl on this one.

Monty

[lynn cates]

math

Hello Richard. I look forward to your video.

If you have a math problem, perhaps I can help? Also, Chris Philips does math.

Cheers.
LC

[richardh]

I've been messing with my 3d program and have created a model which is accurately photo/perspective matched for MJK1. That's to say I have brought MJK1 image into the program and created a camera and perspective setup so that I can build the 3D scene over the photo and it should accurately depict all the things in the scene. So i created just the table, the bed-base/mattress/headboard AND MJK in almost the exact position. After I was satisfied it looked as accurate as I could make it. I saved the result and then tried to tally the model up to MJK3. I've tried every way to make it fit. If I get the table matched then MJK and the bed are way up in the air. If I superimpose MJK so her legs line up with the MJK3 photo then the table is miles off the horizon.

So either my maths and perspective set up is crap... OR MJK, the bed, table or all three were moved between MJK1 and MJK3 being taken.


Tomorrow I will upload both the still images as well as a YouTube video to demonstrate. I admit that my calculations might be off but I can see no way to get MJK's left leg (which to me is very close to the mattress in MJK1, to locate to the position it is in MJK3 (that's to say quite raised off the mattress).

More tomorrow.