Zolotaryov's photos in a new light

[sarapuk]

Here is something written about it

https://www.dyatlov-pass-incident.com/valentin-yakimenkos-study-groups-negatives/

Well its useful I suppose although it doesnt really shed any new light on the matter as such.

[sarapuk]

The alleged photo of the 3 heads was found to be the  holes for the sprocket in the corner of the film.

Ziljoe, I recall reading somewhere, as you apparently did, the "conclusion" about the three heads being sprockets on the film, and my response was astonishment and disbelief. Do you believe it? Do you know of any proof?

Below are three of the photos. The first two show actual sprockets along the edges of the negatives, and the third is "the heads" that someone somewhere claimed to be sprockets.

I was thinking the same. Nothing like sprockets really. But could easily be the tops of peoples heads.

[sarapuk]

I, on the other hand, think that it is a real branch, which is being consumed by the flame, from which the light emanates. There are several intertwined branches in the photo, which are characteristic of cedar.

Suri, the difficulty with seeing this bright orb as a torch, or a branch on fire, is that the orb is smoothly outlined, like an orb. If you google something like "pictures of fire at night" you will see how fire looks at night on film. It is wild and twisted and constantly in motion. I don't think it is ever smooth and contained and evenly outlined like the orb in these photos.

It doesn't look anything like flames to me. It needs a vivid imagination to see flames in those photos.



I'll try to show you this photo I found somewhere. It's a shame it's not in color.

Near the branch, brighter spots of the same intensity as the "eagle" are visible, these are flames. They are also slightly visible on the right side under the branch. The rest is the light they give off, and because it was taken in the dark with an old camera, it looks like this.

[sarapuk]

The alleged photo of the 3 heads was found to be the  holes for the sprocket in the corner of the film.

Ziljoe, I recall reading somewhere, as you apparently did, the "conclusion" about the three heads being sprockets on the film, and my response was astonishment and disbelief. Do you believe it? Do you know of any proof?

Below are three of the photos. The first two show actual sprockets along the edges of the negatives, and the third is "the heads" that someone somewhere claimed to be sprockets.


If I had to make a decision based on that one photo and taking into consideration all we know about the circumstance's I would say heads not sprockets. Or a damaged film / photo ?

I'm sure it's on this forum and one of the forum members did a lot of work regarding this group of photos. If I remember correctly he did a reversal on what he thought he was seeing.

I think he found the original frames or at least more of the edge extending where the film gaps / sprockets are.( As they are photos of photos) . Also, I think the 3 heads photo ( someone also claimed they were rocks ) is just the changed contrast on the very last alleged photo of the blurred light( frame 34).

The Photo called 3 Heads is photo called, frame 34 . In frame 34 you can see the same 3 dark spots and the horizontal lines match up .

https://dyatlovpass.com/camera-krivonischenko

[sarapuk]

I do believe that these photos have ploughed through several times but sometimes a refresh can bring interest and something new may pop up.

Before I jump into what I want to jump into, I want to respond to this statement you made a little bit ago. You have made similar statements before, which taken altogether, kind of sound like you are exhausted with people going over the same old territory again and again. I want you to be okay with this process, since this is how advances are made. You get to a dead end, and you patiently start at the beginning and go over everything again. With all the people reading this forum and studying the documents, who knows what will happen if we stay open to all possibilities and new ideas.

Okay, regarding the photos -- you mention that the 3 Heads photo was actually created from a brightening of Krivonischenko's frame 34, the famous descending meteor-like thing:



So I loaded frame 34 into Photoshop, and tried several different methods until finally the "heads" showed up, through a combination of levels, brightening, and contrast:



I still don't think those bumps are sprockets. If they were, where are the rest of them? And they are not evenly spaced, as sprockets would always be.

But more interesting than that is -- now, this photo appears to show the same bright orb as the others photos, with what Teddy calls a "dead tree trunk" beneath it, except said tree trunk is now 90 degrees sideways. This means that the camera-person turned the camera 90 degrees counter-clockwise. This puts the heads, or sprockets, along the left side. I guess that means they aren't heads. Do you agree?

Much ground is constantly gone over and over again. Its inevitable with an open forum that has been running for years. Not a bad thing so long as its kept intelligible. The more these topics are resurrected so to speak the more it makes us rethink past thoughts. I now think that what we are seeing are photos taken outside the tent or even inside the tent during the escape. In other words photos taken at the tent site.

[sarapuk]

A more technical explanation is here.

https://dyatlovpass.com/frame-34

But I'm sure the negative of frame 34 exists where it is connected to another 3-5 frames where all the sprocket holes can be seen across the 5 or so frames. I'm sure they lined up. I will need to try and find it. I think the reason that they are not shown is they are cropped photos of the negatives and modern photos of old photos along with some of the photos we have  actually being photos of a photo from a monitor, possibly an old CRT monster which also adds to the confusion. They only way to see any proper detail would mean having the original film and a microscope.

Yes its an interesting technical article. But having been on this Dyatlov trail for many years now its interesting to rethink old ground so to speak. Iam now of the opinion that what we are seeing in those vague photos are actual photos that were taken during the incident itself. And probably taken in or and at the tent site on the slope.

[sarapuk]

You might be looking for this thread.

https://forum.dyatlovpass.com/index.php?topic=648.0

Yes but those thingy's are covered in snow, the so called heads are black ! Interesting though. It could still have been taken on the slope where the Dyatlov tent was sited.

[sarapuk]

Someone wants to see balls everywhere. I also think that frame 34 is not related to the other "balls".

Actually its ball shapes that we are seeing. Balls of light ! What are those balls of light ?

[Ziljoe]

I do believe that these photos have ploughed through several times but sometimes a refresh can bring interest and something new may pop up.

The alleged photo of the 3 heads was found to be the  holes for the sprocket in the corner of the film. The white marks by all accounts are just that, marks on the film. however , the two eagle photos do seem to show something because of the tone reacting with the bright part. I think the branch like, or cluster of branches part in the image is some kind of damage on the lense but for me the light object suggests a torch beam and the alleged eagle is actually the antler of a moose /elk  as the curves that are repeated do seem to share the fractal like properties of moose antlers.

It would be great to have the full size photos of this set. The fact that these photos exist without the full negative suggests to me that it's done by design , to add mystery,

Well I'm stretched to find anything that looks like antlers or such like ! Sprocket in the corner of the film !  We need to see the camera itself.

Let me stretch you some more sarapuk.

We are talking about eagle 2 .

 


If we note the shape and fractals of elks antlers .











We can see an antler on the Mansi construction with the curves more in the rotation of the eagle 2 picture . The curves are the semi circles.( Sarapuk please note the dark stripes projecting down from this Mansi photo we will come to this later)



A photo of a torch beam at night with the hotspot.

[Ziljoe]

You might be looking for this thread.

https://forum.dyatlovpass.com/index.php?topic=648.0

Yes but those thingy's are covered in snow, the so called heads are black ! Interesting though. It could still have been taken on the slope where the Dyatlov tent was sited.

Sarapuk , everything that is in the foreground with a bright light behind will show up dark as a silhouette.

If you were to read the full thread , you would get to the point of where the author evolves his theory to the heads being the sprockets .The dyatlov photos are full of development errors .

In frame 34 , the dark spots correspond with bleed from the spockets. There are things called sprocket bleed and bromide drag when developing film although in the instance of frame 34 it seems to be the photo was agitated to aggressively . Below are a few close ups of frame 34 followed by other photos from the hikers and some search photos that show bromide drag at different grades .

This a close up of frame 34, I have given a dark border at the edge of the physical sprocket hole so it helps seeing the tone difference which is the actual dark areas that are seen.








Sometimes the actual sprockets are in the frame and can be uneven along the frame . When the bleeds are greater , the shadow or stripes can be seen across the whole frame. A few examples below.

[sarapuk]

I do believe that these photos have ploughed through several times but sometimes a refresh can bring interest and something new may pop up.

The alleged photo of the 3 heads was found to be the  holes for the sprocket in the corner of the film. The white marks by all accounts are just that, marks on the film. however , the two eagle photos do seem to show something because of the tone reacting with the bright part. I think the branch like, or cluster of branches part in the image is some kind of damage on the lense but for me the light object suggests a torch beam and the alleged eagle is actually the antler of a moose /elk  as the curves that are repeated do seem to share the fractal like properties of moose antlers.

It would be great to have the full size photos of this set. The fact that these photos exist without the full negative suggests to me that it's done by design , to add mystery,

Well I'm stretched to find anything that looks like antlers or such like ! Sprocket in the corner of the film !  We need to see the camera itself.

Let me stretch you some more sarapuk.

We are talking about eagle 2 .

 


If we note the shape and fractals of elks antlers .











We can see an antler on the Mansi construction with the curves more in the rotation of the eagle 2 picture . The curves are the semi circles.( Sarapuk please note the dark stripes projecting down from this Mansi photo we will come to this later)



A photo of a torch beam at night with the hotspot.

In that case it could be any kind of antler. I still cant say I see an antler. And an antler would have to be fixed to the animal and no evidence of animal tracks etc.

[sarapuk]

You might be looking for this thread.

https://forum.dyatlovpass.com/index.php?topic=648.0

Yes but those thingy's are covered in snow, the so called heads are black ! Interesting though. It could still have been taken on the slope where the Dyatlov tent was sited.

Sarapuk , everything that is in the foreground with a bright light behind will show up dark as a silhouette.

If you were to read the full thread , you would get to the point of where the author evolves his theory to the heads being the sprockets .The dyatlov photos are full of development errors .

In frame 34 , the dark spots correspond with bleed from the spockets. There are things called sprocket bleed and bromide drag when developing film although in the instance of frame 34 it seems to be the photo was agitated to aggressively . Below are a few close ups of frame 34 followed by other photos from the hikers and some search photos that show bromide drag at different grades .

This a close up of frame 34, I have given a dark border at the edge of the physical sprocket hole so it helps seeing the tone difference which is the actual dark areas that are seen.








Sometimes the actual sprockets are in the frame and can be uneven along the frame . When the bleeds are greater , the shadow or stripes can be seen across the whole frame. A few examples below.

Yes that may well be the case. Its not a certainty but what is in this case. I used to do photography developing in the old days of film. And it was common to have the film come out with faults. 

[Ziljoe]

]


Yes that may well be the case. Its not a certainty but what is in this case. I used to do photography developing in the old days of film. And it was common to have the film come out with faults. 

There is nothing to be had from these photos and we only have the negative of frame 34.

[Ziljoe]

In that case it could be any kind of antler. I still cant say I see an antler. And an antler would have to be fixed to the animal and no evidence of animal tracks etc.

Yes, it is most likely nothing but the concept was to show what we might think we see . It is much the torch light shining on an antler than an eagle?.

This small number of film pictures has no evidence of being anything or even belonging to the DPI. We don't have negatives and they are so enlarged that the defects wouldn't represent anything on an old film camera. I think the source of these photos are from a book that followed the route of someone said these were from Zolos camera. The whole thing is becoming a nonsense as to whether he was even found with a camera in the ravine .

the camera with frame 34 was found in the tent. The camera was most likely stored in the tent on frame 33 leaving one more shot to be taken. To take night shots , or low level light shots with cameras from the 1950's is on a completely different level compared to modern cameras..for one you would need the correct high speed film , the camera would need to be mounted to stop camera shake , basically everything needs to be still as the aperture needs to stay open.

If they had time to mess about with cameras and the settings in the cold , then they would have time to put their clothes and boots on. Unfortunately these photos don't seem to relate to the technology at the time to get sharp outlines in the dark .

Without verification , these photos should be separate from the case files in my opinion.