Mr. Shaneyfelt. The actual photograph is painted.
Mr. Eisenberg. The photograph is painted. Now, would there be any conceivable reason for eliminating in a retouching the telescopic sight?
Mr. Shaneyfelt. The only reason again would be to enhance the detail. I cannot determine from Commission Exhibit 754 whether there was retouching around the stock. There are indications that there is some retouching—I mean around the telescopic sight. It appears to me they did do some retouching around the telescopic sight which we have marked as point E on Commission Exhibit 754.
Mr. Eisenberg. Without specific reference to 754, might an individual without experience in rifles have thought that the detail corresponding to the telescopic sight was extraneous detail, and blocked it out?
Mr. Shaneyfelt. Yes; it could be done.
Mr. Eisenberg. I have no further questions, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. McCloy. Do you have anything?
Representative Ford. No further questions.
Mr. McCloy. It may be because I am, and I am sure it is, because of my ignorance in regard to this composition of photographs, but the negative of which we have a copy is that from which this photograph was taken; isn't that right? [Referring to Exhibit 133A.]
Mr. Shaneyfelt. We do not have the negative of this photograph.