The coincidences oh the coincidences.
Last week it was discovered that austin capital might have opened a 120m short options position on Trumps stock (DJT) the day before the assassination...
This has started to make national news and then austin capital comes out to deflect by sayig its a filing error... ok... guess we will have to trust our 3 letter agents to determine truth on that. The anons digging also linked them to the Bush family.
But then there's Doug Mills. Doug also has connections to the Bush family and was the man responsible for photographing Bush in the elementary school the day of the 911 attack. Doug is the photographer who was at the Trump rally and caught the bullet streaked photo.
Any optical engineer or professional photographer, such as Doug Mills knows this photo taken is very suspicious... why would Doug Mills be at a Trump rally and have a camera capturing that many frames per second? First a high speed camera that can capture a bullet traveling at 3000 feet per second is not something you would be usig at a Trump rally. The exposure time of that speed would drown out the light and be useless to capture still photos. It would also fill any memory card up so quickly with over exposed garbage photos.
Maybe Doug is just a stupid photographer... or maybe he knew and was expecting the photo of Trump's head explodig, to seed everywhere and literally start a civil war.
Im sure META had no knowledge of it either, which is why Trumps FB account magically is unbanned the day before so all those who use FB could see the coincidental Doug Mills photo being tagged for DJT to really piss folks off.
Anyways... im sure we just have a big coincidence here and shouldn't look at it as anything but that. ,(Sarcasm)
Shutter speed doesn't fill up your memory card, this isn't video, it's photography. Also this man has been shooting political events for decades, so he's been around lots of politicians, doesn't mean he has as meaningful connection to them. The shutter speed was 1/8000 which doesn't drown out the sunlight with professional lenses that can be set to f2 and lower.
With all that said, the shutter was overkill and shooting with such a small aperture risks blurring critical details so I found his choice of camera settings to be unusual yes, but not out of the realm of reality. Would he have captured the most perfect shot of a head being blown off that day? Yes. Did he have foreknowledge? Honestly his camera settings aren't proof of anything. He simply may have wanted a shallow DoF at that point and cranked up the shutter to compensate. I would not have used those settings myself, but I shoot nikon, he has a different rig and different style. So who knows.
Doubt they would tell him EXACTLY what is up, he is just their trusted GOTO guy. He doesnt ask questions, his works get promoted and he lives a comfortable life as one of their servants.
I mean we are talking about about NYT, as DS mouthpiece.
He doesnt have to be explicitly told details of 9/11 or the Assasination attempt or whatever he is sent to cover, just to be sure to focus on Trump at a certain time.
Just seems odds they send their TOP GUY to this ordinary rally and he is the ONLY camera guy to have a primo spot right in front of Trump, Seems odd they send him to take pictures of Bush reading a book to kids as well ......I might go through and view a history of his more famous picks and see if anything else looks timely.
He wasn't the only photographer. There were lots of photographers there firing off their shots in that moment. He's shots were mostly used because he probably just had the best shots.
I understand being suspicious of things right now but being suspicious of this man being there doing his job that he's been doing for decades is like being suspicious of a wedding photographer being at a wedding.
The only thing I thought was weird was his choice of using 1/8000 shutter speed for a subject who's virtually standing still. But a bunch of other photographers have chimed in here saying that's not unusual for them. It is for me, I would never shoot at 1/8000 unless I was at a sporting event. But photographers are all different and all shoot differently. So even if i find that shutter speed utterly overkill, it's simply not enough to accuse this man of knowing anything.
"I would never shoot at 1/8000 unless I was at a sporting event."
So with an fstop of 1.6 and an ISO of 50 to 100 you're telling me that wouldn't give you a proper exposure? Especially when you are trying to include a fluttering flag in the background?
I often shoot at 1.4 and it never required that high of a shutter speed. And wtf about a fluttering flag, omg you don't need 1/8000 to capture a fluttering flag, are you serious?
Yeah I'm sure you do. The exposure is proper for f1.6. Making the most uncharitable argument still isn't evidence of anything nefarious.
https://files.catbox.moe/jkjrgn.png
I'm not arguing that it's evidence of anything nefarious, all I've ever said in every damn thread about this is that 1/8000 is overkill imo. You can't sit here and say f1.6 with 1/8000 is "proper exposure" when there are still other variables like focal distance, iso, light temperature and the light reading on the subject itself that all effect the final result, and no 2 sunny days are the same ffs. Not to mention the variation between different camera brands and different lenses depending on how many elements they have. I've been shooting professionally for over 20 years but you are going to sit here and argue with me because you found an online calculator, are you even serious rn?
When it comes to exposure
F1.6 is F1.6
50 ISO is 50 ISO
1/8000 of a second is 1/8000 of a second.
the DoF of a 24mm at f1.6 at 20ft is 26.85 ft.
Depth of field in front 6.68 ft (24.90%)
Depth of field behind 20.16 ft (75.10%)
The Dof at 10ft is 5.33 ft
Depth of field in front 2.00 ft (37.50%)
Depth of field behind 3.33 ft (62.50%)
If you're set at 1.6 with aperture priority with an iso of 50 your camera is going to max the mechanical shutter speed when it's exposing for a mostly clear blue sky.
Yes I'm serious right now. You people keep going on and on about the shutter speed when it's a dead horse. Stop beating it.
Didnt say he was the ONLY photog.....he was the ONLY one who had a spot in the front row right in front of Trump....somone posted a photo of his spot and you can see him in the videos as well.
And if the wedding photographer kept taking once in a lifetime type photos during unforseen tragic events at the wedding then suspicion is warranted.
He wasn't the only photog in the front right under Trump. There were several and they all were trying to get shots of a lifetime up there.
Also a wedding photographer's job is to shoot the wedding, a photojournalists job is to shoot the story, no matter what happens. That's not cause for suspicion. That's his literal job. These are the photographers who shoot wars.
look at the picture pal , I cant find it but it was posted a couple days ago and you will see other wise..he was the ONLY guy taking photos right in front of Trump
There was no shot of a lifetime, it was just Trump at a Rally ...unless you had some kind of heads up of course.
Anyway whatever.....
the picture doesn't show everything, watch the video.
With a 24mm wide angle, assuming he was using a full frame camera, depth of field wouldn't be as critical as say a 85mm @F1.6. Still, an odd setting to use at 1/8000 unless he wanted to stop the bullet in mid flight or capture the head exploding. No other movement was happening (or supposed to happen) that would have called for such an extreme setting. Hand gestures, flag waving, facial expressions could have be stopped at 1/1000. IMHO, he was expecting something very fast to happen.
As stated and seen in uncropped photos, he was capturing the flag in the sky. Which was moving. He was also shooting at f1.6.
Also when I was shooting sports events, I would set toe A Priority for DOF and let the camera choose the shutter speed. If he set the A too open it would automatically shoot at a higher speed. My Mark IV had a max of 8000 sec.
Can't imagine he'd shoot with anything other than fully manual. When I shot weddings I only shot in manual, can't trust the cameras built in light meter to correctly expose a subject. But I shot nikon and I find it notoriously underexposed.
"a small aperture risks blurring critical details"
Even wide open a 24mm lens has a large focal plane unless you're on top of your subject. It's enough to blur the audience but barely blurred the podium. And face tracking nails focus 99% of the time on flagship camera's now regardless of aperture.
I saw someone else saying that 1/8000 is not accurate, and it's more likely 1/4000. Sounds reasonable.
I do think he was probably "filling up his memory card" with rapid fire photos. I would like to see his camera and memory card made into evidence, and that would be the first thing I would look at (what do the photos before and after the famous one look like?). I suspect he was shooting in "Continuous Shooting" mode, which is the Canon setting for capturing many photos in rapid succession with one shutter press. One does this when one is trying to capture something very fast and hard to predict, like a hummingbird moving, etc.
The "exposure triangle" is Aperture, Shutter, ISO. I say this for the others on this link, as it appears you understand this. Anyways... it is unlikely that a professional photographer would want a shutter speed that high for a semi-stationary object/person. The photos would not be "over-exposed" because one would manage the aperture and ISO to ensure good exposure.
This smells. I am not sure if it stinks. But it sure does smell.
Not an expert to know the professional or technical aspects of it, but I wouldn't put it past Miills' superiors to suggest/guide/direct him to reinforce a narrative with his shots that conveniently coincided with the timing of the attempt.
"First a high speed camera that can capture a bullet traveling at 3000 feet per second is not something you would be usig at a Trump rally"
Nearly every professional photographer uses a flagship camera, why wouldn't he?
"Trump rally and have a camera capturing that many frames per second?"
because technology allows it. It gives photographers the ability to pick the best image without a subjects eyes closed, mouth open like an "o-face" which is unflattering outside of pornography.
"It would also fill any memory card up so quickly with over exposed garbage photos."
What is this, 2004? You can fit over 2000 raw uncompressed sony a1 images on this card. Also the photos were properly exposed. You don't know what you're talking about.
https://archive.ph/feGn2
https://archive.ph/U0mDX
Mills has taken memorable photographs of presidents going back to Ronald Reagan. But he has found a new, perhaps surprising, admirer in Trump, who, for all of his cries of “fake news,” has repeatedly singled out one photojournalist above all others for his omnipresence and talent. Aboard Air Force One last fall, the president peered through a tangle of arms holding voice recorders to find his favorite journalist peering at him: “There’s my genius photographer,” he said, gesturing toward Mills. At a round table during the G-7 conference in Quebec that year, Trump squeezed in between Prime Minister Justin Trudeau of Canada and German Chancellor Angela Merkel, chitchatting. Before the assembled press pool was shooed out, Mills caught Trump’s eye and, turning to Trudeau, crowed: “He’s the No. 1 photographer in the world,” adding, “Unfortunately, he works for the New York Times.” Trudeau and Merkel chuckled.
Compare photo's of George W Bush's mother with Aleister Crowley, and how the occult has infiltrated the Presidency of the United States of American. Always wondered as so many, at the Bush funeral, why the shock on Jeb Bush's face when that piece paper was shown to him, was it a photo of their 'real' grandfather, and President Trump informing the Globlist elite satanic pedophiles, nothing will stop him, from the ending the sexual crimes against children. He showed that defiance, when he raise his fist, projecting his will too Fight, Fight, Fight. God showed the world He saved Trump, "for such a time as this". God bless America, God bless President Trump. God always Wins! Note: Barbara's mother was the nanny on summer break from school, of the couple living next door to Aleister Crowley
THIS !!!
My blood boils.
Fight! Fight! Fight! In the name of God and all that is good and holy in this world we live in.
How many coincidences does it take until it’s mathematically impossible? - Q
https://www.grunge.com/1100365/the-bizarre-connection-between-john-hinckley-jr-and-the-bush-family/
Is it possible the photographer was trying to capture Trump as he was turning towards his illegal immigration chart?
It is a thought I had as to why he was taking pictures around that second or so.
Yeah let's make the most uncharitable assumption he didn't take any other pictures at the event...
Don't strawman, steelman and then argue your points.
I didn't mean to suggest he took no other pictures.
Ewwwwwwwwwwwwe! Stinky deep state media minion! He wanted a Pulitzer.