There are 6 films available today in The Dyatlov Pass foundation. There was one more film but it is lost. They have developed it and the pictures are exist but the film itself is missing. Apart from the well known pictures available on the Internet, the films have some rather srange shots which we will discuss below.
The exact number of the cameras in the group is not known. The inventory of the scene lists 3 cameras and there is one tetimony of yet another camera.
The camera № 488797 (Krivonischenko’s) was found with it’s color filter broken and it was attached to a tripod.
We know from the Criminal Case that the tent was pitched at around 5 p.m. At 7:42 pm according to the weather data available there was a Moonless night there. It is interesting that the students still used their cameras after the darkness fell upon the ground. All the cameras were found in the tent like if they were put handy, not in their backpacks. Some say that the last shot of the group (below) was made without using a tripod. I don’t know if we can state this for sure…
Anyway for some reasons Krivonischenko attaches his Zorky camera to the tripod probably already after the tent was set and the darkness felt around. What is possible to shoot in a complete darkness? His camera’s film had 36 frames and 34 of them were already used by that time. Had it been the arragement for morning shooting then Krivonischenko would rather have inserted a new film into his camera for a proper footage. Thus he attached the tripod to his camera in order to take a picture of something right away, trying to catch the moment.
From the inventory (the Criminal case) ─
Zorky № 486963. 27 shots. The case has deep scratches. The belt is broken (supposedly belongs to Slobodin).
Zorky № 55149239. 27 shots. Definitely belongs to Zolotarev because 7 month after the investigation was terminated the camers was given back to his mother and she confirmed it was her son’s item.
There is a testimony of Сaptain Chernyshov (a rescue team part) that yet another camera was found outside the tent, on its edge together with a flash light. But this is the only mentioning the camera outside, not confirmed by other witnesses.
We know by now that there was yet another camera Zorky №55242643 owned by Dyatlov but it was not included into the February inventory.
Zolotarev’s body found in May also had a camera hanging on his neck.
The group was leaving the tent in great heist, so why one would bother to take his camera along? Most likely Zolotarev was not inside the tent at the moment. Unlike the rest of the group, his and Tibo’s bodies were found in May pretty much dressed. It is also logical to assume that at the moment of danger they both started their retreat immediately from the spot where they were at and had no time to go to the tent. The two separate pairs of footprints which joined the others further on the slope support this assumption.
Some speculate it was Dyatlov’s camera on Zolotarev’s neck. Valentin Yakimenko, the fellow student and the member of the rescue team says it was Tibo’s. In any case the film from this camera must be under the snow for 3 month and at least 2 weeks in water (according to the coroner’s account). In fact, no one can confirm today that it was there at all and it was not jast the empty camera case hanging around his neck.
All films available today are cut in pieces. One of these pieces has an inscription ZOLOTAREV scribbled on it. Considering that other films from cameras found in Februaty have no identifying inscriptions on them (like Slobodin, Krivonischenko), it is possible to guess that this piece was from the camera found on Zolotarev’s body and that it was of a particular interest for the investigation. The piece has 10 frames and it matches really well the last frame of another piece called the film №8. This film has pictures of the previous days (17 frames). Both pieces have no visible abrasion marks. 10 frames + 17 frames = 27 frames. The whole film has to be 36 frames, so 9 of them are missing. It might be that these 9 frames are available somewhere in the archives to which we have no access to. There was nothing really significant on these frames. Just some tiny dots and spots on dark background. However Zolotarev kept taking pictures of the dark sky as if there was something interesting for him there. The piece was scanned and supersized 30 times.
See more of them here: https://yadi.sk/i/eb9r3UTgfaMej
The other pieces (not marked as ZOLOTAREV) also have some footage of the kind…
…and interestingly the different cameras probably took the same object at different time because the shots are from two different film pieces (edges don’t match)…
According to the tests, the number of pictures taken suggests that the duration of the whole phenomen was approximately 1,5 – 2 minutes. Zolotarev, probably, took 19 shots. The objects seemed to move in the direction of the Pass because the images get bigger. The biggest ones are discussed here.
If so, these objects were not dangerous for the group because they were around 200-300 kilometers far from them. Had they been closer they would have flown above the students just in seconds and thus there wouldn’t have been so many shots. No rocket could kept falling on the ground for so long because any cosmic body falls at a great speed. I doubt the students had time to find their cameras (somewhere in their backpacks), to jump out of the tent and take some pictures not mentioning being able to attach a camera to a tripod – all in few instances.
They could be dangerous I guess if they were controlled by somebody but this would make a totally dufferent story that doesn’t includes rockets or meteorites, for instance.
We also know that both the investigation and the rescue team used these cameras to take pictures during the search and in the morgue.
It preceeds the photos of dead bodies in the morgue which means the whole film was developed and seen in March. This film today lacks 24 frames. It might be that the investigator Ivanov saw these frames and that is why he went to Moscow at the same period of time for possible consultations. Testimonies exsist that he came back to Sverdlovsk with no previuos enthusiasm for the investiagtion. His reasons for terminating the Criminal Case was “the unknown overwhelming force”. However many years later he has written an article about the event. The full text of it you can read in my book.
The question still remains ─ had Ivanov seen something that we can’t see today why haven’t he mentioned any particular shot in his article as an incontestable evidence?
My answer is also given in Don’t Go There: a solution to the Dyatlov Pass mystery by Svetlana Oss.
─ Share ─
─ Follow ─