A few words about...™ West Side Story -- in Blu-ray - Page 3

Quote:

Originally Posted by Michael1 

Excuse my ignorance, but I don't understand how the dissolve at the beginning could possibly have been turned into a fade-out/fade-in. In the original version, there is a pullback on the abstract vertical-lines image, then there is a sort of snapshot-with-flash effect as the title of the movie appears before the abstract image, and then that dissolves directly into the Manhattan skyline. Can someone explain exactly where the fade-out/fade-in occurs in the Blu-Ray?

Very simple.  What you see on screen is not what the original negative looks like.

Many negatives are conformed in multiple reels.  WSS happens to be two.  An A roll and a B roll.

The Prologue and Main Title sequence are made up as below:

000-0             11‑15             22‑12       1          Head Leader

12-0               66‑11             54‑12       2          FI  Abstract Skyline‑Dissolve

66‑12            138‑3             71‑8         3                Skyline ‑ Dissolve

138‑4            148‑6             10‑3         4                Skyline ‑ Dissolve

148‑7            178‑11           30‑5         5                Skyline ‑ Dissolve

178‑12          186‑11           8‑0           6                Skyline ‑ Dissolve

186-12           194‑11           8‑0           7                Skyline ‑ Dissolve

194‑12          321‑11           127‑0       8                Skyline ‑ Dissolve

321‑12          414‑3             92‑8         9                Skyline ‑ Dissolve

414‑4            441‑15           27‑12       10              Skyline ‑ Maint Title - West Side Story ‑ Dissolve

442‑0            452‑14           10‑15       11              New York City - production footage

452‑15          459‑8             6‑10         12              ELS Bridge ‑ traffic ‑ water ‑ Dissolve

459‑9            466‑0             6‑8           13              MLDS ‑ bridge and highway

Generally the film would be cut as follows:

The A roll would have shots 1, 2, 4, 6, 8,10, 12 and 14 (not shown)

The B roll would have shots 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13

The numbers in the three columns represent the actual footage (as if 35mm).  The first column is the beginning of a shot, the second the end, the third the actual length of each shot.

This is where it will get a bit more complex.  The physical negative has longer cuts for each of the shots because of the dissolves.  As an example going from shot 9 to 10 -- the actual piece of negative represented for 9 is probably closer to 100 feet in length, and here's why.  In addition rolls that do not have printable footage are filled with 65mm black opaque leader.  

The A and B rolls are printed separately, one double exposed over the other, however...

Shot 9 might have a 6 foot fade out, and 10 a 6 foot fade in.  These are performed as printer functions during the exposure of the print.  And again, the print stock is run a second time.  With the tail of 9 being far longer and the head of 10 equal in length, one ends up with, rather than a fade out and fade in, a dissolve.

Dissolves and fades are generally scribed into the edge of negative outboard of the perforations, and along with a continuity (or a reference print fifty years hence) one would read "Start 8' FO"  "Start 8' FI" which tells the lab technician that this is a dissolve when examining the A and B rolls.  This can get a bit more complex, but I'm not going there.

It appears that either someone mis-read the scribed notes, hit the wrong buttons in digital conform...  It really doesn't matter.

All that matters is that no one noticed throughout the entire QC line.

It's a very simple error, but not one that you'll see made very often by film professionals.

And it is precisely what happens fifty years later, that creates an absolute need for a reference print contemporary to the original release.  As films are put through post production, things change.  An 8 foot dissolve might be changed to a 6,  or might be eliminated entirely.  Because of that a negative may have multiple scribes.

As with many creative things in live.  "Measure twice, cut once" absolutely comes into play here.

BTW, after viewing the opening again, I do have another problem with the release, and that is the MGM logo placed before Mr. Bass' graphics.  In this case, it is his work that should be the first thing on screen, precisely as it was in theatrical runs.  The MGM distribution credit at the end of the Blu-ray should tell the proper story, and there is one in place.

RAH

Quote:

Originally Posted by Felix Martinez 

 

You know, I tried to explain to someone how this can happen "digitally" using the following screenshots from a Final Cut Pro project.  Would this be a similar (albeit crude) example?

 

A-B dissolve...

 

 

 

vs. A-B fade out/in...

 

Yes.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marc Martin 

Here is what this fade out/fade in looks like in the 2007 HDNET MOVIES
broadcast -- I assume this is the same thing that's being reported on the Blu-rays?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o4oAcAOWF_A
Marc

Very interesting.  I was unaware of this, as I don't view HDNet.

I would presume, then, that this is the c. 2007 transfer, and there's nothing wrong with that, as it's a quality job.

What this error may come down to is a simple case of encoding the digital dissolve, but encoding for an incorrect length.  Ie, encode for a 4 footer, when the actual dissolve should have been a 6 or an 8.  Keep in mind that in scanning, the A and B rolls are scanned as individual units.

What we have is an unfortunate series of events, that ended with improper QC four or more years ago, and addition to whomever viewed the final check disc, apparently not knowing the film or its history.  Hardly the end of the world, and, with the other problems, very fixable.

RAH