Fantasia / Fantasia 2000 (1940-1999) (Special Edition)

[Lnds500]

Originally Posted by miniroll32

When I was studying the film for University, I took a lot of screencap images for my paper and when I shuffled through the frames, I just saw the writing! Its almost illegible on the DVD version, but quite clear on the Blu-ray.

I did watch a video from a conference in 1990 where a Disney rep, upon discussing the restoration of the film, told the audience of just how common reflections were in the photography phase of production, and that this wasn't isolated to just Fantasia - it was common with all animated features of the period. Consequently they left in such 'gaffs' during that restoration, but i'm not entirely sure how Lowry, who restored the film for its 2010 release, would look upon such features. A colleague was quoted as saying they only remove "glaring mistakes", but this writing on the ghost appears far more glaring than the corrections made to Bambi's hooves, and yet it exists. My guesses are that, because these particular stippled cels were painted in a dry-brush method, removing the text to and matching the surrounding texture may have been too difficult. Or, in good nature, they just left it in!

Ah well, I won't look too much into it

nice find though. could you give us the PDF you were talking about???

[Ernest Rister]

Originally Posted by miniroll32

OK, heres a fun topic!

Everyone go to your Fantasia Blu-Ray and skip forward to the time 1:52:52. You should be at Night on Bald Mountain, and the frame you should be focusing on is of the large ghost that has a 'cape' like appearance, with two circular eyes on the Left of the screen, and the cape stretching off towards the right.

If you use your remote/PS3 pad to skip between each frame (press R2 for the PS3), you'll notice that at some point, lettering appears on the ghosts body. It is quite difficult to read at first, but the writing is present for around 5 frames. To decipher it, you'll need to get a mirror as the writing is backwards.

This is a fascinating find, but i'm stumped as to what the letters spell out! They change for every cel that is present, and appear for about 5 I think. So far, I have the following:

First cel: AGF MENT BOND

Second cel: ANAGEMENT BOND

Third cel: AGEM MEN BOND

Third cel: ALL © D PRODUCTION

I do love a good riddle!

From what i've seen anyway, it appears that the letters in some way spell out 'Management', 'Production' and 'Bond', but how they got there is the funniest aspect. The 'AGF' on the first cel is also very clear, and that rang a bell of something to do with camera equipment. Although a more likely outcome was that a production document was reflected by accident into the camera? Or perhaps the painter had a say in it?

So, go have a snoop anyway and return with more evidence!

I think it's the watermark for the paper from Hammermill Bond, or a similar paper mill, and they also included a watermarkfor Disney productions. We'd have to have a peek at the Shultheiss Notebook to see exactly how those shots were created, but I think those are watermarks from the animation paper (which by definition suggests the original animation drawings were either printed onto the cels for those shots or some other technique required photography of the actual animation drawings for use in those shots).

[Ernest Rister]

By the way, this is why Fantasia is my favorite film of all time...not animated film, but favorite film period. I see something new, every time I watch it, and a year hasn't gone by that someone else hasn't spotted something new. Watermarks captured during Bald Mountain. Amazing.

So glad they didn't correct these for the restoration.

[Ernest Rister]

Bumping for the evening crowd - Miniroll 32 found a new production artifact in Fantasia. See above. I think it's the watermark for the studio's animation paper, captured during a scene where the actual animation drawings must have been used along with other techniques.

I'd do screenshots, but I'm running the crappy HP DVD/Blu-Ray standard software that came with my new computer, and it doesn't have a screenshot function.

[anthonyb]

Oh Fantasia, you never cease to amaze me. It is my favorite film as well.

I'd like to see some screenshots of this at some point. I'd do it myself, but my old computer has no Blu-ray drive.

[Lnds500]

Originally Posted by Ernest Rister

Bumping for the evening crowd - Miniroll 32 found a new production artifact in Fantasia. See above. I think it's the watermark for the studio's animation paper, captured during a scene where the actual animation drawings must have been used along with other techniques.

I'd do screenshots, but I'm running the crappy HP DVD/Blu-Ray standard software that came with my new computer, and it doesn't have a screenshot function.

You can press the PrtScrn (Print Screen) button on your PC and then "paste" in Paint. There is your screenshot

[Ernest Rister]

Originally Posted by Lnds500

You can press the PrtScrn (Print Screen) button on your PC and then "paste" in Paint. There is your screenshot

Okay - will do.

UPDATE

Pasting it into paint, image stays until I try to save as a JPEG at which point the image turns pitch black. I can only figure it's some sort of copy protection. That, and the MediaSmart player is really a piece of crap - can't frame advance, you just have to be lucky with the pause button. Someone else will have to give it a shot, or I'll have to resort to taking a picture of my tv screen.

[Pyoko]

Here's probably the clearest frame where the whole text is visible (already mirrored):


Looks like it says:
MANAGEMENT BOND
A HAMMERMILL PRODUCT

This seems to be a common watermark on the paper used for Disney production art, but is probably rare to see in a movie, for the reason Ernest mentioned. In this case they must have transferred the drawings from actual paper rather than repaint them on cels (I guess it may have been a method to create the ghostly texture and look.)

[Ernest Rister]

How cool is that - the three of us just confirmed a new production artifact in Fantasia, and its likely cause. Going to write Culhane, Maltin, Canemaker and Sibley tonight to let them know.

[miniroll32]

Originally Posted by Ernest Rister

"...the three of us"

Yeah, and don't forget who found it

Lnds500 - I've checked with University and i'm not entitled to send out the Dissertation to others, but I should be OK to upload on some sort of online PDF viewer... Do you know of any free ones I could possibly use? Thanks!

[miniroll32]

Pyoko - Thats a good shout! My guess at the moment is quite simple... As we know, when someone has a stack or pad of paper and they press down hard on the top sheet with a pen or pencil, several layers below that top sheet will have an indentation of what was drawn/written. A bit like back at school, you could reveal those indentations by placing some tracing paper over the surface and gently waving the tip of a pencil over the paper. As such, the indentations come out white, while the rest of the paper is just lead from the pencil.

Same thing obviously happened with these few frames from Fantasia. The 'Hammerhill' production document[s] was, at some point, made on a sheet of paper that was layered on top of the employers animation paper, which was also on their desk. Once they started a bit of animation drawing, the indentation was left and with it, the lettering exposed.

I'm still very curious though, and think the procedure may have actually been a bit more complex than this. Fantasia required a great amount of 'Special Effects' animators - artists that specialised in rendering images that were more complex than just character animation, such as Cy Young. Therefore, I think a more genuine explanation for this 'text' would be appropriate for a lot of the ghost scenes on Night on Bald Mountain.

The ghosts were originally rendered by standard character animators who, as normal, drew the outlines of these creatures. With the animation in place, those drawings were then sent to the Special Effects artists who used pencil to shade in the texture and light/shadow of the creatures. From this, it was the shading that caused the 'text' to appear, but because the animation was complete, they obviously didn't want to go back and render it again.

As for the transfer to celluloid, I would guess one of two things. The first was that, even back in 1940, the studio was already experimenting with Xerography, and as such the texture of the pencil shading can be seen on screen so clearly because its a direct transfer to a cel. The second guess would be photographic, and that somehow, they took a negative and transferred it to cel.

Like I said before though, its best not to look into it too much really, even if it is a nice find Many original artefacts of the production - such as camera reflections, painting mistakes and cel dust/dirt - have been eliminated during the 'restoration'.



This is the frame inverted (positive to negative) and there is no mistaking that it was originally rendered with pencil, and that each frame required multiple exposures for the characters underneath. Its a quite wonderful process - the technicians were able to figure out what weight of pencil lead to use so that it may come out on the camera correctly once inverted. And as I said before, they also had to figure out a way of putting it on a cel. At a large stretch, there is also a possibility they didn't even transfer the drawings the cel, but rather, the exposures of the background and background characters were done first, and then the top 'ghost' layer was simply photographed at a lower exposure to create a lower opacity. But thats pushing it!

[Ernest Rister]

Same thing obviously happened with these few frames from Fantasia. The 'Hammerhill' production document[s] was, at some point, made on a sheet of paper that was layered on top of the employers animation paper, which was also on their desk. Once they started a bit of animation drawing, the indentation was left and with it, the lettering exposed.

It's the watermark from the animation paper, man. The light from the photography setup exposed the watermark in the paper. No "indentation" from "Hammermill Production Documents". It's the watermark in the paper. The paper was never intended to be used for on-camera photgrpahy, the light from the camera stand exposed the watermark.

You have to think your "guess" through...don't you think that the very first artist to start working on the sequence "shading" the ghosts wouldn't suddenly see the letters, and then stop? Far easier at that point to send the drawings back, and have someone simply re-trace their work on "non-indented" paper.
That's not what happened.

The camera lighting on the paper when the sequence went to photography exposed the watermark in the paper. That's typically how you see a watermark - you hold the paper up to a light source. It's just one of those things no one thought about when deciding to go with a more graphic look for the ghosts, and printing the original shaded drawings. The light from the camera setup exposed the watermark in the paper.

It's not a reflection onto the camera platen, it isn't an indentation from "Hammermill Production Documents", it's the watermark for Hammermill's Management Bond paper, revealed due to the lighting during photography.

And yes, when I wrote Maltin, Sibley, Culhane and Canemaker to report this, I did state that I was alerted to the frames, which is how I became involved (sorry, Miniroll32, I don't know your real name, or I'd have used it). And yes, it took three people to nail this down. One to find it and not know what he or she was looking at, a second to make an educated supposition, and a third to confirm that supposition.

As for the transfer to celluloid, I would guess one of two things. The first was that, even back in 1940, the studio was already experimenting with Xerography, and as such the texture of the pencil shading can be seen on screen so clearly because its a direct transfer to a cel. The second guess would be photographic, and that somehow, they took a negative and transferred it to cel.

Here's a third option, which I raised a few posts back - it wasn't transferred to cells at all, and instead, was composited into the frame using the same optical printing techniques seen throughout the film, notably in the Rite of Spring and in other shots of the Bald Mountain sequence.

[Ernest Rister]

Originally Posted by Pyoko

In this case they must have transferred the drawings from actual paper rather than repaint them on cels (I guess it may have been a method to create the ghostly texture and look.)

I concur.

Maybe I should also write to Diane and the Disney Family Museum and let them know...they have "the notebook" after all, they can probably give us much better information that our educated guesses.

[miniroll32]

Originally Posted by Ernest Rister

I concur.

Maybe I should also write to Diane and the Disney Family Museum and let them know...they have "the notebook" after all, they can probably give us much better information that our educated guesses.

I really doubt its worth it. As I said before, production errors are in abundance with animated films this old - this is just a case where one was left in during restoration.

[Edword]

I really need to get this before it's out of stock on amazon and skyrockets in price!

[Ernest Rister]

Originally Posted by miniroll32

I really doubt its worth it.

It may not be worth it you, but it's worth it to me, Bro. And can you please PM me because I'm getting responses from very cool people, and I want to cite you correctly.

Best,

ER3

[djkest]

So they pulled this movie out of the Vault for only 1 year? That's kind of ridiculous. I'd like to add this to my collection, but I am going to have to be creative it seems if I want a mint condition copy for a reasonable price.

[Donat96]

Originally Posted by djkest

So they pulled this movie out of the Vault for only 1 year? That's kind of ridiculous. I'd like to add this to my collection, but I am going to have to be creative it seems if I want a mint condition copy for a reasonable price.

Have you looked around for it? My Best Buys and Wal-Marts and Targets still have like 10 copies each.

[BouCoupDinkyDau]

Originally Posted by Donat96

Have you looked around for it? My Best Buys and Wal-Marts and Targets still have like 10 copies each.

My local outlets still have it too, but most places want $30 for it.

[punkguy03]

Originally Posted by BouCoupDinkyDau

My local outlets still have it too, but most places want $30 for it.

Same here. I know this is blasphemy, but I am not a huge fan of the movie.