Oswald in the doorway: the blog of the Oswald Innocence Campaign, by Ralph Cinque

Part 3: So, why did they do this goofy rendering of the Lovelady figure from Hughes? Sure, they got to claim an open shirt and exposed t-shirt- something they desperately needed. But, what good is it when the corollary from Martin doesn't match it? 

How can those two be the same guy when one is vastly propped open and the other not at all? And look at the difference in the shirt patterns. How can they possibly be the same? They can't!  One is plaid and the other is just plain wacky. And you can't excuse it by citing camera angle or camera settings or some other bull shit. That's just the bloodied talking. 

It would have been much better for them to have two consistent, matching human beings wearing the same clothes. This is a laughing stock. 

So, why did they go with it? Again, it was because of what they started with. And what they started with was this:

I took that directly from the film, as it appears on Youtube.  It may be clearer somewhere else, but this is the best there is online. And it would be essentially the same elsewhere, regardless. They were stuck with that, and they developed it from there.

You see how they were stuck with the black ring around his neck and the white in the middle and on his shoulder? That's what it was, and they just had to work with it as best they could.

Eventually, he recovers, and his clothes start looking comparable to the guy in Martin.

So, it is a hell of a transition. Why does Lovelady go from this to this in the Hughes film? 

On the left is how he looks at first against the east wall, and on the right is how he looks 3 seconds later when he reaches the middle of the entrance. What is that black thing?

Well, it's nothing real. I can assure you he didn't change his clothes. What we are seeing on the left is distortion. And when they photoshopped that picture, they had to work around the distortion and convert it into something sellable, and we know what they wound up- that flashy, weird, cartoon-like figure with the Mohawk. 

It doesn't look photographic. It's pure bull shit. They actually colorized distortion. But, why was it distorted? 

He wasn't dressed like that. And, if you want to say there is a cleaner, clearer image somewhere, so what? It is going to be a cleaner, clearer image of the same thing. It's not going to look plaid. And, the only alternative to the above that anybody has ever offered is this: 

So, he didn't change his clothes. It is distortion; the Lovelady figure got distorted. And in Part 4, I'll explain how he got distorted.