Muchmore film headshot sequence

[Jack White]

Thank you Ashton, I wouldn't want it to come to that. There's a lot more to be learnt in an open forum than the subject matter. I appreciate all the opportunities to become more tolerant to the sensations that arise in my mind and body when provoked.

Here's the frame pattern of the M film.

The reason for the obvious splice, (the blue line with timing mark) which should be referred to as a correction, rather than a normal splice, is becoming apparent.

The original frames filled a certain area. This area has been reduced by a mask with rounded corners, or jig. This is so that frames can be shifted within that smaller area and still fill the frame. Still, this has shifted some of the frames so that the edges of those frames appear in the new frame.

In fact there are only a small number of oversize frames that delienate the mask.

The cluster of the mix of normal (or median), oversize, undersize and smallest (one) frames around M42 tells us what has happened.

The two frames that have parallel dark joints running across them are composites.

This shifts the contents of the frames, and the other frames around there are shifted within the mask to compensate and give a continuity look. The blue timing splice is a major correction, without which the abrupt shift in content caused by the two composites would draw attention to the composites which are very deceptively good workmanship.

The first composite shifts the contents of all following frames to the right.

The second composite shifts the following frames further to the right.

The blue timing splice brings the frames following it back into the mask frame area.

John...an extremely interesting study, but I do not quite understand what the legend

represents. The color and lettering designation meanings are not quite clear to me

from your explanation. Do the pink frames represent missing frames. Do the plus

and minus frames represent reframing, etc. Please give us more explanation of

what the legend and colors mean. Great work!

Can you post images of the "reframing with rounded corners"?

Thanks.

Jack

[John Dolva]

I'll prepare a set of suggested masks for posting, Jack. (have to take a break for a few hours)

On the legend: The color coding is for different sizes after the masking. There's a large set of what I call 'normal'(green). There's another set that are larger than these. These are the 'normal +', Then there are a set that are smaller (-) and one that is smaller still. And one at the beginning that perhaps tells us the original size.

I'm theorising that the size occurs according to what is masked after the full frames have been shifted about to create continuity.

The grouping of large ones around the headshot is probably because that was the area worked on.

I wonder if you could look at the splice images and the suggestions there and tell what you see, Wet splice, dry splice, scraped out emulsion, bevelling, cuts , calmp marks, glue etc?

The reasoning is just off the top of my head to try to make sense of it. Apart from the (likely) true headshot frame (composite #1), when the alteration are 'reversed' ( to the best of my ability at this point) the frame immediately before and after the composite ones have a discontinuity. Basically the frames there are a mess. Sorting it out is going to take time and probably a group effort.

Bill, I have only this altered version. The B/W one is too poor to make much of.

Ashton, I don't think the aim was to remove any peripheral areas, but rather to compensate for the results of discontinuity that come about as a result of recomposition. So by reducing the frame area with the mask, there is more room for sideways shifting of the frames. The slizing and respacing, and shifting of the timing splice probably came last.

[Bill Miller]

Bill, I have only this altered version. The B/W one is too poor to make much of.

John, someone posted saying that the discovery channel special showed a copy of her film that was in tact .... it can't be that expensive to by the DVD.

Bill

[Chris Davidson]

I'll prepare a set of suggested masks for posting, Jack. (have to take a break for a few hours)

On the legend: The color coding is for different sizes after the masking. There's a large set of what I call 'normal'(green). There's another set that are larger than these. These are the 'normal +', Then there are a set that are smaller (-) and one that is smaller still. And one at the beginning that perhaps tells us the original size.

I'm theorising that the size occurs according to what is masked after the full frames have been shifted about to create continuity.

The grouping of large ones around the headshot is probably because that was the area worked on.

I wonder if you could look at the splice images and the suggestions there and tell what you see, Wet splice, dry splice, scraped out emulsion, bevelling, cuts , calmp marks, glue etc?

The reasoning is just off the top of my head to try to make sense of it. Apart from the (likely) true headshot frame (composite #1), when the alteration are 'reversed' ( to the best of my ability at this point) the frame immediately before and after the composite ones have a discontinuity. Basically the frames there are a mess. Sorting it out is going to take time and probably a group effort.

Bill, I have only this altered version. The B/W one is too poor to make much of.

Ashton, I don't think the aim was to remove any peripheral areas, but rather to compensate for the results of discontinuity that come about as a result of recomposition. So by reducing the frame area with the mask, there is more room for sideways shifting of the frames. The slizing and respacing, and shifting of the timing splice probably came last.

John, thank you.

Here are 2 animated gifs.

One is 4 consecutive frames. 1,2,3,4.

The other is frames (1 and 4) with 2 and 3 droppped out.

When I drop out 2/3, there is a nice movie shown.

Question any frame that shows Vertical Movement or BLURRING.

Also, take a look at Jean Hill in the 4 frame gif. They can't get her feet/legs correct.

A few oddities in the 2 frame gif:

1. A shadow in the shape of head /shoulders appears on the grass, in front of the men on the stairs.

2. A ghost image of the motorcycle tire and back rear limo wheel appear.

3. The wall also has a ghosting image.

Hope this helps,

chris

Edited January 3, 2007 by Chris Davidson

[Frank Agbat]

A few oddities in the 2 frame gif:

1. A shadow in the shape of head /shoulders appears on the grass, in front of the men on the stairs.

2. A ghost image of the motorcycle tire and back rear limo wheel appear.

3. The wall also has a ghosting image.

Hope this helps,

chris

Chris,

It looks to me like you do not have truly progressive frames. The 2/3 frames show signs of interlacing and/or improper de-interlacing. This may be why you are seeing ghost images.

[Jack White]

I'll prepare a set of suggested masks for posting, Jack. (have to take a break for a few hours)

On the legend: The color coding is for different sizes after the masking. There's a large set of what I call 'normal'(green). There's another set that are larger than these. These are the 'normal +', Then there are a set that are smaller (-) and one that is smaller still. And one at the beginning that perhaps tells us the original size.

I'm theorising that the size occurs according to what is masked after the full frames have been shifted about to create continuity.

The grouping of large ones around the headshot is probably because that was the area worked on.

I wonder if you could look at the splice images and the suggestions there and tell what you see, Wet splice, dry splice, scraped out emulsion, bevelling, cuts , calmp marks, glue etc?

The reasoning is just off the top of my head to try to make sense of it. Apart from the (likely) true headshot frame (composite #1), when the alteration are 'reversed' ( to the best of my ability at this point) the frame immediately before and after the composite ones have a discontinuity. Basically the frames there are a mess. Sorting it out is going to take time and probably a group effort.

Bill, I have only this altered version. The B/W one is too poor to make much of.

Ashton, I don't think the aim was to remove any peripheral areas, but rather to compensate for the results of discontinuity that come about as a result of recomposition. So by reducing the frame area with the mask, there is more room for sideways shifting of the frames. The slizing and respacing, and shifting of the timing splice probably came last.

Thanks, John...that makes it much clearer. I look forward to additional on this.

Jack

[John Dolva]

Ok.

The image here shows three different M42's.

The Large one top left matches the fullest frame in the color version M01 (fuzzy one).

The bottom left is the WC 1964 pubished frame, M42, a photograph of a film strip. When comparing it to the top left you can see that the WC version is cropped.

The colored version M42 has a mask around it.

Creating a mask of this outline (top right) and placing it over the full frame twice, but shifting it along, gives two farmes which appear to be the camera panning.

Then this has to be corrected. (correction splice).

What you end up with is a continuity of background within which you can alter the contents (composites 1 and 2).

Edited January 3, 2007 by John Dolva

[Jack White]

Ok.

The image here shows three different M42's.

The Large one top left matches the fullest frame in the color version M01 (fuzzy one).

The bottom left is the WC 1964 pubished frame, M42, a photograph of a film strip. When comparing it to the top left you can see that the WC version is cropped.

The colored version M42 has a mask around it.

Creating a mask of this outline (top right) and placing it over the full frame twice, but shifting it along, gives two farmes which appear to be the camera panning.

Then this has to be corrected. (correction splice).

What you end up with is a continuity of background within which you can alter the contents (composites 1 and 2).

Thanks, John...much clearer. I have a thought which may or may not be relevant. Back when

I used to show the Z film to audiences, I noticed that the movie projector apparently has an

aperture mask with rounded corners. The mask slightly crops the image so that the frame

edges or septum lines are never projected; otherwise the edges of the image on the screen

might jiggle around and be distracting. Your frames with rounded corners remind me of a

projected frame image through a movie PROJECTOR.

Maybe this observation will be useful in your study.

Keep up the fascinating work. It may lead to an important finding.

Jack

[Frank Agbat]

Thanks, John...much clearer. I have a thought which may or may not be relevant. Back when

I used to show the Z film to audiences, I noticed that the movie projector apparently has an

aperture mask with rounded corners. The mask slightly crops the image so that the frame

edges or septum lines are never projected; otherwise the edges of the image on the screen

might jiggle around and be distracting. Your frames with rounded corners remind me of a

projected frame image through a movie PROJECTOR.

Maybe this observation will be useful in your study.

Keep up the fascinating work. It may lead to an important finding.

Jack

Jack,

You're right about the framing of the projector; I meant to comment on this previously, but got distracted with other things. The rounded corners of the images *could* be a result of the telecine process used. Unlike taking photographs of individual frames (e.g. MPI's method), the telecine process actually "plays" the film.

However, while we're on the subject of frames, etc.

Jack -- how difficult would it be, in your opinion/experience, to intentionally utilize motion blur to add or substitute frames in a short movie sequence? For example -- what if one did something like this:

ORIGINAL:

Frame 1 (Clear)

Frame 2 (Clear)

Frame 3 (Some motion blur)

Frame 4 (Clear)

REPLACED WITH:

Frame 1 (Original frame - Clear)

Frame 2 (Replace with motion-blurred frame 1)

Frame 3 (Original frame - Some motion blur)

Frame 4 (Replace with motion-blurred frame 4)

Frame 5 (Original frame 4 - clear)

What has been accomplished here is that the original frame 2 is gone completely, replaced with a blurred version of frame 1 (it could even be slightly panned depending on available frame space). The original frame 4 is moved one frame later, with a blurred version of itself replacing it. I've removed the data from frame 2, yet managed to add time to the film. The question is -- how possible is it using optical technology to intentionally create motion blur?

[John Dolva]

Earlier in the Nix topic I posed a question about the image below, hoping someone could tell me how this blur occurred. No one gave the correct answer which is : by me placing a two transparencies over each other.

So I'd imagine that is one way to do it.

[Jack White]

Thanks, John...much clearer. I have a thought which may or may not be relevant. Back when

I used to show the Z film to audiences, I noticed that the movie projector apparently has an

aperture mask with rounded corners. The mask slightly crops the image so that the frame

edges or septum lines are never projected; otherwise the edges of the image on the screen

might jiggle around and be distracting. Your frames with rounded corners remind me of a

projected frame image through a movie PROJECTOR.

Maybe this observation will be useful in your study.

Keep up the fascinating work. It may lead to an important finding.

Jack

Jack,

You're right about the framing of the projector; I meant to comment on this previously, but got distracted with other things. The rounded corners of the images *could* be a result of the telecine process used. Unlike taking photographs of individual frames (e.g. MPI's method), the telecine process actually "plays" the film.

However, while we're on the subject of frames, etc.

Jack -- how difficult would it be, in your opinion/experience, to intentionally utilize motion blur to add or substitute frames in a short movie sequence? For example -- what if one did something like this:

ORIGINAL:

Frame 1 (Clear)

Frame 2 (Clear)

Frame 3 (Some motion blur)

Frame 4 (Clear)

REPLACED WITH:

Frame 1 (Original frame - Clear)

Frame 2 (Replace with motion-blurred frame 1)

Frame 3 (Original frame - Some motion blur)

Frame 4 (Replace with motion-blurred frame 4)

Frame 5 (Original frame 4 - clear)

What has been accomplished here is that the original frame 2 is gone completely, replaced with a blurred version of frame 1 (it could even be slightly panned depending on available frame space). The original frame 4 is moved one frame later, with a blurred version of itself replacing it. I've removed the data from frame 2, yet managed to add time to the film. The question is -- how possible is it using optical technology to intentionally create motion blur?

Frank...I have absolutely no experince with movie cameras and film; all my photo exprience

is with still cameras. However, what you postulate seems entirely possible. I have often wondered

with the Z film why there are blurred frames interspersed with clear frames. It never made sense

to me. My theory was that several EXCISED frames were combined into a single blurred frame

and interspersed with clear frames. But I have absolutely NO idea how this would have been

done back then with film. Nowadays, it would be relatively simple for someone like you or Dolva

to do this with computer programs. Using only film, it probably would have been trickier.

Of course introducing blur would be relatively simple with regular photocopying (I have accidentally

done this by mistake many times). All you have to do is use a slow shutter speed and jiggle the

the camera slightly. However, a copy blur like this would be one dimensional, as opposed to

shooting a moving object in a landscape, which would show two-dimensional differing blurs within

the image.

Jack

[John Dolva]

Thank's for the idea. It gave me the idea of accepting the frames as they are.

When doing so and mapping the distance between a step and the centre of the front wheel.

Tthe inage shows a sharp discontinuity at the first 'double brown splice' which continues to the blue line.

Without the blue line some continuity returns, but then all the following frames are shifted out of frame to some extent. Except for the second 'double brown splice' which is way off.

On the other hand if one accepts the frames on the either side of this discontinuity then by spacing out the frames with two missing ones caused by the composition (frames aren't strictly deleted, but rather two become one.) the discontinuity is resolved, except to some extent which may be put down to the impossibility of doing this alteration perfectly. Of course there is also speed changes, but not like that in a split second.

The regularly spaced oversize frames in the film are possibly then other correction steps allowing in between shifts to preserve continuity.

What this all means is that this may be taken as a proof of alteration (if the reasoning, measurements etc are all correct.) Either way I imagine this is one way it could be done, which largely has gone undetected and thus has served its purpose in a general acceptance of M42 as the headshot frame. However, as shown in the Nix topic it can't be.

Edited January 3, 2007 by John Dolva

[John Dolva]

A suggested frame pattern with a correction in orientation. (I mistakenly flipped the image so the decription was in reverse. Here it's flipped correctly, same size pattern, right image-description)

(FWIW::Two FBI mail-opening programs were suspended for security reasons involving changes in local postal personnel and never reinstituted, on the theory that the value of the programs did not justify the risk involved. (Memorandum from San Francisco Field Office to FBI Headquarters, 5/19/66.) Harry D Holmes retired in 1966)

Edited January 3, 2007 by John Dolva

[David G. Healy]

Earlier in the Nix topic I posed a question about the image below, hoping someone could tell me how this blur occurred. No one gave the correct answer which is : by me placing a two transparencies over each other.

So I'd imagine that is one way to do it.

inter frame displacement of two composed images creating additional motion blur? Sure its possible via 1963 aerial image and/or optical film printing -- certainly would change the final frame film density, where applied.

[Chris Davidson]

Thank's for the idea. It gave me the idea of accepting the frames as they are.

When doing so and mapping the distance between a step and the centre of the front wheel.

Tthe inage shows a sharp discontinuity at the first 'double brown splice' which continues to the blue line.

Without the blue line some continuity returns, but then all the following frames are shifted out of frame to some extent. Except for the second 'double brown splice' which is way off.

On the other hand if one accepts the frames on the either side of this discontinuity then by spacing out the frames with two missing ones caused by the composition (frames aren't strictly deleted, but rather two become one.) the discontinuity is resolved, except to some extent which may be put down to the impossibility of doing this alteration perfectly. Of course there is also speed changes, but not like that in a split second.

The regularly spaced oversize frames in the film are possibly then other correction steps allowing in between shifts to preserve continuity.

What this all means is that this may be taken as a proof of alteration (if the reasoning, measurements etc are all correct.) Either way I imagine this is one way it could be done, which largely has gone undetected and thus has served its purpose in a general acceptance of M42 as the headshot frame. However, as shown in the Nix topic it can't be.

John/Frank,

Would this have been to replicate the interlacing/deinterlacing method/effect?

thanks

chris