mlanoue wrote:
>So, why did Chaplin complain about it?
>Was it just too much of a pain to try to
>frame for 1.85 without the masking?
Yes. It is a pain to frame for 2 different
ratios at the same time. With the
masking in place, he didn't have to worry
about that.
I have seen movies which were framed
for 1:85 but without hard masking. TORN CURTAIN, for example. When
they
were projected without a mask in the
projector, you could see the edge of
the studio cyclorama and the lights
above. A hard mask in the camera
elmiinates that.
I also saw FAHRENHEIR 451 in a theatre which was showing it without
projector
masking. You could see which scenes
were shot post and prior to to the decision to allow the hard masks.
(Incidentally, the ratio/mask issue was
sourced in Truffaut;s FAHRENEIT 451
diaries, published n Cahiers du Cinema
in English in the 60s. That's where I
read it)
FAQ
Profile
Private Messages
Log in
