March 28, 2024, 02:58:39 PM
Dyatlov Pass Forum

Author Topic: The Cameras  (Read 9601 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

October 12, 2018, 06:22:38 PM
Read 9601 times
Offline

sarapuk

Case-Files Achievement Recipient
I think we need a Topic to deal specifically with the case of THE CAMERAS that the Dyatlov Group took with them and what became of them and any ROLLS OF FILM.
So, just how many cameras did the Dyatlov Group take with them on the hike. And how many rolls of film ! ? 
« Last Edit: December 28, 2018, 08:01:41 AM by Teddy »
DB
 

December 07, 2018, 09:56:39 AM
Reply #1
Offline

Star man

Case-Files Achievement Recipient
Yes.  The cemeras could hold vital information about the events on 1st Feb 1959. 

A key question that I am interested in is why did some of the group have the cameras with them?  They didn't take their essential clothing, but they took some cameras.  Or, is it possible the cameras were positioned after they had died?

How many pictures did they take after frame 33 of Krovonishenko's camera? 

« Last Edit: December 28, 2018, 08:01:51 AM by Teddy »
 

December 07, 2018, 11:15:52 AM
Reply #2
Offline

Nigel Evans


Afaik Rustem's mystery shot isn't included on this site - https://www.svetlanaoss.com/blog/dyatlov-pass/cameras-and-the-night-sky-shooting/
Imo this and Yuri K's 33rd frame are of Ivanov's fire orbs but couldn't be removed from circulation (like Semyon's missing frames because they were immediately developed by the rescue team and became public knowledge.
« Last Edit: December 28, 2018, 08:02:02 AM by Teddy »
 

December 07, 2018, 11:47:48 AM
Reply #3
Offline

Username:330


The cameras do hold valuable information. I found some of the photos very interesting.
« Last Edit: December 28, 2018, 08:02:10 AM by Teddy »
- 330
 

December 07, 2018, 12:22:13 PM
Reply #4
Offline

Star man

Case-Files Achievement Recipient
If the hikers were attacked and murdered for instance wouldnt they have tried to take some pictures of their attackers?

 Unless their attackers didn't know what a camera was, why would they have left the cameras with the bodies?

Was there any film left on their cameras or was shot 33 of YK His last shot?
« Last Edit: December 28, 2018, 08:02:19 AM by Teddy »
 

December 07, 2018, 09:10:35 PM
Reply #5
Offline

WAB


I think we need a Topic to deal specifically with the case of THE CAMERAS that the Dyatlov Group took with them and what became of them and any ROLLS OF FILM.
So, just how many cameras did the Dyatlov Group take with them on the hike. And how many rolls of film ! ?

I knew that without this theme even here the arguing will not manage .  grin1
Well, let's come nearer to true from outside only facts and that is known from the very first sources of the information?
« Last Edit: December 28, 2018, 08:02:27 AM by Teddy »
 

December 07, 2018, 09:12:45 PM
Reply #6
Offline

WAB


Yes.  The cemeras could hold vital information about the events on 1st Feb 1959. 

A key question that I am interested in is why did some of the group have the cameras with them?  They didn't take their essential clothing, but they took some cameras.  Or, is it possible the cameras were positioned after they had died?

It is very correct question. It is the most probable that Simeon Zolotaryov not so “would take the chamber with itself” but only has not removed it from itself after they have come on stop. He has been dressed better others, therefore for certain it was one of two man on duty.
After all have begun these events he did not remove camera, because it did not create inconveniences.

How many pictures did they take after frame 33 of Krovonishenko's camera?

After that the shot (it is 34th) on this film is not present any pictures. I saw films in 2009 after when as daughter of Lev Ivanov has contributed these films to fund “Memories of Dyatlov group”.
« Last Edit: December 28, 2018, 08:02:35 AM by Teddy »
 

December 07, 2018, 09:19:11 PM
Reply #7
Offline

WAB


Afaik Rustem's mystery shot isn't included on this site - https://www.svetlanaoss.com/blog/dyatlov-pass/cameras-and-the-night-sky-shooting/
Imo this and Yuri K's 33rd frame are of Ivanov's fire orbs but couldn't be removed from circulation (like Semyon's missing frames because they were immediately developed by the rescue team and became public knowledge.

I already wrote that Svetlana is the journalist and not so well understands about what she writes. For example, in the given text there are many erroneous opinion and conclusions from this as she understands this situation.
For example: It took time of approach of twilight from my early record on the Internet (in September 2006 г on a site of my friend Sergey Berlin http://sb-l.msk.ru/  ) when I have specified 19:42 (it writes 7:42PM - but it is the English standard of a writing of time). Literally there appears: “I.e. moonless night 1.02.59 has come at 19:42.” (c)
But it concerns “astronomical twilight” when already it is completely dark, as well as at night. In the same place it has been specified and in “civil twilight” which have come at 17:52 (5:52 PM) which it simply ignored because she does not know that this such. This time when it is already enough dark, but even night has not come. That is, this latest time when the group should start to establish tent. After that time it is already almost dark.
Not understand such features the person far that it describes can only. Especially if to consider the following phrase: “it is interesting that pupils still used the chambers after darkness fell upon to the ground” (с) that definitely says that it does not understand possibilities of a photo absolutely.
Therefore it is not necessary to concern those conclusions by which it does concerning a photo seriously. She refers to article Valentine Yakimenko who writes about fine details on films which it accepts for UFO and rockets. But I wrote about it in article which is published on this site https://dyatlovpass.com/frame-34?rbid=18461 . There all is in detail described. Those details about which Valentin Yakimenko speaks, are defects on a film. We in detail discuss it with it by e-mail now.
Therefore the reference to Svetlana Osadchuk not argument which is strong. It badly understands a photo.
PS. It is interesting that in this article has reference on Slobodin’s shot. (to the end of article). It shot not has relation neither to Slobodin, nor to its film. This shot is made in a mortuary when Slobodin there already was there. It was on film Lev Ivanov. Valentin Yakimenko was mistaken, when wrote about it. But the most interesting that it has given the reference to …. me?! I never no spoke about it. I have resulted this shot as an illustration to that rectangular windows at wrong focusing start to come nearer to the circle form.
« Last Edit: December 28, 2018, 08:02:46 AM by Teddy »
 

December 08, 2018, 03:22:38 AM
Reply #8
Offline

Nigel Evans



It shot not has relation neither to Slobodin, nor to its film. This shot is made in a mortuary when Slobodin there already was there. It was on film Lev Ivanov. Valentin Yakimenko was mistaken, when wrote about it. But the most interesting that it has given the reference to ….
Hi, how do you know this? Are you stating a belief or have proof?
« Last Edit: December 28, 2018, 08:02:56 AM by Teddy »
 

December 08, 2018, 12:26:02 PM
Reply #9
Offline

Monika


Yes.  The cemeras could hold vital information about the events on 1st Feb 1959. 

A key question that I am interested in is why did some of the group have the cameras with them?  They didn't take their essential clothing, but they took some cameras.  Or, is it possible the cameras were positioned after they had died?

How many pictures did they take after frame 33 of Krovonishenko's camera?

The only possible explanation why Zolotarev had a camera and none of the others was well-dressed is that when the thing happened, he was just out of the tent and something was photographed. There is no other option.
« Last Edit: December 28, 2018, 08:03:07 AM by Teddy »
 

December 08, 2018, 12:52:51 PM
Reply #10
Offline

Star man

Case-Files Achievement Recipient
Yes.  Zoloterov being outside when it all kicked off.  That was one of my conclusions when I read the case files. 

So another question I had is if they were murdered, why did the murderers leave them with the camera and potential photographic evidence that could implicate them?
« Last Edit: December 28, 2018, 08:03:16 AM by Teddy »
 

December 08, 2018, 02:13:47 PM
Reply #11
Offline

WAB



It shot not has relation neither to Slobodin, nor to its film. This shot is made in a mortuary when Slobodin there already was there. It was on film Lev Ivanov. Valentin Yakimenko was mistaken, when wrote about it. But the most interesting that it has given the reference to ….
Hi, how do you know this? Are you stating a belief or have proof?

I know it precisely because in 2009 looked through all films which daughter Lev Ivanov has contributed to fund. On this site there are films from travel, but there were two more films on which there are pictures are photographed in a mortuary. On the very first a shot from the first such film it is represented https://dyatlovpass.com/resources/340/Dyatlov-pass-frame-34-21.jpg other pictures represent bodies of Dyatlov group into mortuary. Any picture from rout there is not present.
Therefrom I also have shown it in article and on a site  http://russia-paranormal.org/index.php?topic=3718.0  in 2011. Then Valentine Yakimenko has referred to it by mistake.
« Last Edit: December 28, 2018, 08:03:26 AM by Teddy »
 

December 08, 2018, 02:16:00 PM
Reply #12
Offline

WAB


Yes.  The cemeras could hold vital information about the events on 1st Feb 1959. 

A key question that I am interested in is why did some of the group have the cameras with them?  They didn't take their essential clothing, but they took some cameras.  Or, is it possible the cameras were positioned after they had died?

How many pictures did they take after frame 33 of Krovonishenko's camera?

The only possible explanation why Zolotarev had a camera and none of the others was well-dressed is that when the thing happened, he was just out of the tent and something was photographed. There is no other option.

It is present. There is still a minimum two explanations.
1.It did not remove the chamber because it to it did not prevent to spend the necessary actions.
2.It has given the chamber to tent, but has left an empty case on the clothes.
To photograph after they have put tent of anything it is impossible if to film sensitivity 64 ASA (or 19 DIN) because there it is dark. Judging by two shots, https://dyatlovpass.com/resources/340/thumbs/Krivonischenko-camera-film1-32.jpg  and  https://dyatlovpass.com/resources/340/thumbs/Krivonischenko-camera-film1-33.jpg  they had a low overcast for 1 hour before they have established tent. It did not allow do shooting because it was not visible even stars, and the moon should ascend rise in 4 AM on February, 2nd, 1959
« Last Edit: December 28, 2018, 08:03:37 AM by Teddy »
 

December 09, 2018, 03:08:15 PM
Reply #13
Offline

sarapuk

Case-Files Achievement Recipient
Good to see that this TOPIC as got going.  Like so many other aspects of the Dyatlov Case there is plenty of room for SPECULATION. There does appear to be uncertainty regarding the exact number of CAMERAS that the Dyatlov Group took with them  !  ?  Also there does appear to be uncertainty regarding the exact number of FILMS that were taken with them !  ?  And of course that brings us to the question of the exact number of FILMS / PHOTOS  that have actually survived  !  ? 
« Last Edit: December 28, 2018, 08:03:48 AM by Teddy »
DB
 

December 17, 2018, 04:57:21 AM
Reply #14
Offline

Star man

Case-Files Achievement Recipient
I have read that Yidin said there were more cameras?  Also that Semyon didn’t take any photos during the trek. If true why did he have his camera with him?
« Last Edit: December 28, 2018, 08:03:59 AM by Teddy »
 

December 17, 2018, 05:42:08 AM
Reply #15
Offline

Monika


I have read that Yidin said there were more cameras?  Also that Semyon didn’t take any photos during the trek. If true why did he have his camera with him?

Zolotarev was total new in the team. The others shared an equivalent load in their backpacks, but they probably did not include him in this agreement (the diary does not mention it). Yudin spent only a few days with them, and he did not have the chance to get to know Zolotarev or the contents of his backpack. Probably Zolotarev did not use his camera during the skiing. I would not look something negative about it, Zolotarev could be just a poor man who wanted to get the highest third degree of trekking as ski instructor.
The fact that he was a former soldier does not mean he went to this trek with a secret mission. Neither is the alleged "mysterious" tattoo. In my opinion, it was an ordinary guy. Yudin had to be very angry and hearth-broken person, he never even married, and people in such a state are looking for someone to turn their anger and frustration into. In his case it could have been the army, Zolotarev, some government conspiracy, etc. Sensitive souls often respond in this way to blame someone (I was use to do the same).
« Last Edit: December 28, 2018, 08:04:09 AM by Teddy »
 

December 17, 2018, 08:14:49 AM
Reply #16
Offline

Kopyrda


I have read that Yidin said there were more cameras?
Well, informations on this seems to be conflicting with each other. Copied from this site:

How many cameras did Yudin say there were
more than 4
Aleksei Rakitin in his book "Dyatlov Pass" says:
Yuri Yudin (the only surviving member who felt sick and turned back on January 28 from North-2) kept saying that the cameras were more than 4, nearly everybody in the group had camera. The investigation didn't seem to care.

only 4
The following is copied throughout the net in the context of the camera found on Semyon Zolotaryov:
We should add that this camera became a complete surprise to Yuri Yudin. He assumed the group had only four cameras that were found in the tent. And all of a sudden a fifth camera turned out on the body.

https://dyatlovpass.com/controversy
« Last Edit: December 28, 2018, 08:04:19 AM by Teddy »
 

December 17, 2018, 03:35:09 PM
Reply #17
Offline

Star man

Case-Files Achievement Recipient
I have read that Yidin said there were more cameras?  Also that Semyon didn’t take any photos during the trek. If true why did he have his camera with him?

Zolotarev was total new in the team. The others shared an equivalent load in their backpacks, but they probably did not include him in this agreement (the diary does not mention it). Yudin spent only a few days with them, and he did not have the chance to get to know Zolotarev or the contents of his backpack. Probably Zolotarev did not use his camera during the skiing. I would not look something negative about it, Zolotarev could be just a poor man who wanted to get the highest third degree of trekking as ski instructor.
The fact that he was a former soldier does not mean he went to this trek with a secret mission. Neither is the alleged "mysterious" tattoo. In my opinion, it was an ordinary guy. Yudin had to be very angry and hearth-broken person, he never even married, and people in such a state are looking for someone to turn their anger and frustration into. In his case it could have been the army, Zolotarev, some government conspiracy, etc. Sensitive souls often respond in this way to blame someone (I was use to do the same).

Yeah I realise that a lot of the information in the case files and witness statements appears to be opinion.  I still find it odd that SZ had the camera around his next when he was found.  If he hadn't taken any photos of the trek why suddenly put on the camera?  Also, there is speculation that SZ had stepped outside for a pee just before it all kicked off and that is why he was better dressed, but if this is the case then why take your camera.  Of course he may have grabbed his camera from the tent after he had seen something. 

There are some photos that are suppose to be from his camera of strange things going on in the sky.
« Last Edit: December 28, 2018, 08:04:30 AM by Teddy »
 

December 17, 2018, 03:39:32 PM
Reply #18
Offline

Star man

Case-Files Achievement Recipient
I have read that Yidin said there were more cameras?
Well, informations on this seems to be conflicting with each other. Copied from this site:

How many cameras did Yudin say there were
more than 4
Aleksei Rakitin in his book "Dyatlov Pass" says:
Yuri Yudin (the only surviving member who felt sick and turned back on January 28 from North-2) kept saying that the cameras were more than 4, nearly everybody in the group had camera. The investigation didn't seem to care.

only 4
The following is copied throughout the net in the context of the camera found on Semyon Zolotaryov:
We should add that this camera became a complete surprise to Yuri Yudin. He assumed the group had only four cameras that were found in the tent. And all of a sudden a fifth camera turned out on the body.

https://dyatlovpass.com/controversy

It's difficult filter out fact from personal thoughts with respect to witness statements.  The brain is very good at filling in missing bits of information with its own ideas and this has been proven in psychological tests of people's observational skills.  That's why there are several different accounts of the activities around the cedar tree.  Although there is a general alignment there is also speculation around the reason behind the actions.
« Last Edit: December 28, 2018, 08:04:41 AM by Teddy »
 

December 18, 2018, 01:50:26 AM
Reply #19
Offline

Nigel Evans


There are some photos that are suppose to be from his camera of strange things going on in the sky.
Yes and there are apparently 8 (from memory) missing frames. Better shots that got confiscated?
« Last Edit: December 28, 2018, 08:04:52 AM by Teddy »
 

December 18, 2018, 04:29:08 AM
Reply #20
Offline

Star man

Case-Files Achievement Recipient
There are some photos that are suppose to be from his camera of strange things going on in the sky.
Yes and there are apparently 8 (from memory) missing frames. Better shots that got confiscated?

Yes I think there were 9 missing photos, but even the case files are confused as to if they really existed
« Last Edit: December 28, 2018, 08:05:01 AM by Teddy »
 

December 18, 2018, 05:18:57 AM
Reply #21
Offline

Nigel Evans


Yes I think there were 9 missing photos, but even the case files are confused as to if they really existed
The official case files being a partial record.
I guess we'll just have to rely on Ivanov's opinion, the man who saw everything before the good stuff was confiscated...
« Last Edit: December 28, 2018, 08:05:10 AM by Teddy »
 

December 29, 2018, 05:17:31 PM
Reply #22
Offline

Star man

Case-Files Achievement Recipient
Of all the cameras found I think it is Semyon's that holds some important clues to what happened that night. 

First of all why did he have it around his neck when he was found?  The only reasonable explanation is that he was already wearing it around his neck when he left the camp site and before whatever events started.   It's unlikely that in whatever panic stricken state they decided to leave without their shoes, that Semyon thought, oh I better get my camera from the tent.

Why was he wearing it around his neck when he left the camp site.  It's unlikely that he was taking pictures in the tent.  Or that he slept with his camera around his neck.  Also given he was one of the better dressed of the group it is likely that he was outside with his camera when it all started.

So why was he outside with his camera?

There must have been something going on.  Something worth grabbing your camera from inside the tent to take some photographs.

Shot 1 of his camera shows three heads toward the bottom of the shot.  So there were at least 3 others outside when he took the shot.  The shot shows something round and bright in the sky filling the top left of the shot.  From what I can tell this is the only shot that shows the full photo.  The others are just magnified parts of other shots.

Why was Semyon still wearing his camera in the ravine?  Maybe he thought there was important information on it.  Maybe he wasn't able to remove it himself because he was already incapacitated.



 

January 11, 2019, 03:39:42 PM
Reply #23
Offline

sarapuk

Case-Files Achievement Recipient
The cameras do hold valuable information. I found some of the photos very interesting.

Yes the Cameras are a very important part of the real evidence of which we dont have much. Obviously the Film also is very important. So where are the Cameras today  !  ? I believe that the Film is kept safely locked away.
DB