iirc when he said they were sequential he was saying that's what the guy at the Record told him about the originals (but I really should double check on that).
i just listened through. god that was long and boring and mind numbing. i dont recall him saying anything about order that i could follow anyway...his accent was making the rambling even more brutal for me, sorry.
The way I understood it was that the "strip of six" would have been cut from the full set (no need to hand over personal photos)
yea i rewound that bit 3x and still not sure what he was saying. the thing is if you get them developed you dont get a full sheet of negatives, at least i never did. im thinking maybe he meant they took the 4x5 copies, made negatives and that is what they stuck to the back in the sleeve..although then they wouldnt be in strip form. as it looks like that machine would do one pic at a time, no?
very confusing.
and a far as his craft look memory, i have no faith in his recollection. there is no way Nick Pope could have guessed all the same details stu is telling from the pic we are looking at. i think stu saw Popes pic and it got jumbled in his mind. which is fair and it happens.
also i could swear in beginning of interview stu said he just got a chance to briefly look at the negatives but now at the end (well when the american guy is signing off, i scrolled through all the boring stealth talk stuff) stu says he had maybe 10-15 mins with them.
i'm not knocking stu or suggesting he is being deliberately deceitful, i just don't trust his memory as much as you seem to be. he did though adequately pause and look upward and struggle to retrieve memories, so your description was a bit misleading and i now dont see the "red flag" i mentioned earlier.
either way, we have a pic sent to paper. maybe the paper asks the photographer for negatives (or did the Record just send their crappy negative copies to MOD...since that is what Lindsay has) or not, but either way they are photos of a photo and then blown up?
Stus story about how the daily Record would take negatives because you never get the negatives back is fine, except why on earth would a paper of that caliber take crappy negative copies? that part makes no sense. and stu doesnt (i didnt catch anyway) say whether the ripped photo on the wall at the Record was the crappy pic we see or if the pic on the wall also showed panels on the craft. he seems to only talk about panels on the negatives.
questions, questions.... smh.
(and im sorry but Americans testing a new anti-grav tech machine in the MIDDLE of England... i'm not buying it. unless it used some illegal fuel that we dont allow in America...like how we have the chinese do our gain-of-function work because it's illegal here... there's no way. We have thousands of miles of empty desert, why fly over scotland. i find that implausible.)