26-08-2013, 06:12 PM
In the article proposing the feasibility of creating a travelling matte, the following frame is offered to assist the reader in imagining the elements of a proposed composite shot.
[URL="https://deeppoliticsforum.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=5168&stc=1&d=1377535731"]Picture2_3.jpg
[/URL]PROBLEM #2 - the background. The lawn looks nice here, and it is easy to imagine the limousine gliding past it. Unfortunately, you cannot allow moving images to run across a still frame and have it look like anything but a crude animation. Therefore, any proposal of a travelling matte would necessarily have to commit to a matching background (i.e from exact same frame as limousine at any given moment. It is tempting to think that some sort of clean plate from Dealey Plaza could be introduced (although I would like to hear someone try to explain how that could be accomplished in any way that could possibly realistic replace what is already there). Still, it is easy to achieve an enlargement of the background. However, and any optical technician would point this out right away: there are people in the background! They also would be enlarged, and so one would have to account for this size difference. At what point would they become too large to be believed? 10%? 6%? Maybe it would have to be smaller than that. But the lower that number goes, the more I wonder why any enlargement would be needed at all. Because the larger background figures are just a portion of the issue. The lawn in the example above has a straight horizontal line at its bottom to serve as a join point. But there is no way, in the extant Z-film, to establish such a line, because the background is always changing its size in the lens as the camera pans. Therefore, the join point between the foreground (limousine) and the background of this proposed composite shot is the matte outline of the limousine. Any enlargement of the background also increases the size of the matte outline of the background frames and now suddenly one is faced with a shadow outline over the figures in the foreground. And, equally important, one must also consider the sprocket holes visible on the left side of the frame. The sprocket holes are also part of the composite because the information below them must end up on the final product. An enlargement of the background would also enlarge the holes as seen in the frame and therefore they could never be properly matched at the end of the day. (In fact, considering alteration, an optical technician would likely recommend getting rid of the sprocket holes and the information below them so as to simplify the ultimate re-transfer back to 8mm. But there they are.)
So an enlargement of the background is very unlikely to have been considered. In fact, in practical terms, any travelling matte scenario for the Z-film is highly unlikely.
[URL="https://deeppoliticsforum.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=5168&stc=1&d=1377535731"]Picture2_3.jpg
[/URL]PROBLEM #2 - the background. The lawn looks nice here, and it is easy to imagine the limousine gliding past it. Unfortunately, you cannot allow moving images to run across a still frame and have it look like anything but a crude animation. Therefore, any proposal of a travelling matte would necessarily have to commit to a matching background (i.e from exact same frame as limousine at any given moment. It is tempting to think that some sort of clean plate from Dealey Plaza could be introduced (although I would like to hear someone try to explain how that could be accomplished in any way that could possibly realistic replace what is already there). Still, it is easy to achieve an enlargement of the background. However, and any optical technician would point this out right away: there are people in the background! They also would be enlarged, and so one would have to account for this size difference. At what point would they become too large to be believed? 10%? 6%? Maybe it would have to be smaller than that. But the lower that number goes, the more I wonder why any enlargement would be needed at all. Because the larger background figures are just a portion of the issue. The lawn in the example above has a straight horizontal line at its bottom to serve as a join point. But there is no way, in the extant Z-film, to establish such a line, because the background is always changing its size in the lens as the camera pans. Therefore, the join point between the foreground (limousine) and the background of this proposed composite shot is the matte outline of the limousine. Any enlargement of the background also increases the size of the matte outline of the background frames and now suddenly one is faced with a shadow outline over the figures in the foreground. And, equally important, one must also consider the sprocket holes visible on the left side of the frame. The sprocket holes are also part of the composite because the information below them must end up on the final product. An enlargement of the background would also enlarge the holes as seen in the frame and therefore they could never be properly matched at the end of the day. (In fact, considering alteration, an optical technician would likely recommend getting rid of the sprocket holes and the information below them so as to simplify the ultimate re-transfer back to 8mm. But there they are.)
So an enlargement of the background is very unlikely to have been considered. In fact, in practical terms, any travelling matte scenario for the Z-film is highly unlikely.